Rechercher

“Many suppliers and users of social research are dissatisfied, the former because they are not listened to, the latter because they do not hear much they want to listen to” (Lindblom & Cohen, 1979: 1). As mentioned in Chapter 1 of this book, the recent events of global financial crisis and a series of Occupy Wall Street protests have raised reflections of business management education on MBA trainings. The question of whether management research and education can be a facilitator toward events that would eventually destroy the world economy or a facilitator toward achieving social value and human glory has been raised with those reflections. MBA graduates should not be used as profiting tools for big corporations anymore. Moreover, the separation between management theory and industry practice has, for a long time, caused a dilemma with regard to the difficulties inherent in dialogue between academia and industry. There have been urgent calls to embody management research into applicable industry knowledge in order to minimize the gap in between the two (Anderson, Herriot, & Hodgkinson, 2001; Rynes, Bartunek, & Daft, 2001; Van de Yen & Johnson, 2006).

Social entrepreneurship is commonly used to qualify all economic initiatives that serve social and/or environmental mission and that reinvest a large part of their surpluses in support of their mission. Although this definition is not yet stabilized and its boundaries remain unclear, it focuses on the aim to achieve both economic efficiency and social innovation. It takes place within a context of great uncertainty about the future of welfare states and their capacity to meet new societal needs, of financial and budgetary constraints that force public authorities to develop new forms of interaction between public and private sectors, and therefore, of need to build new responses to societal challenges that are sustainable socially, economically, and environmentally. Within this context, all sorts of initiatives that can be qualified as social innovations are gaining interest.

This paper reports on a long-term collaboration with a self-organised social clinic, within solidarity movements in Greece. The collaboration focused on the co-creation of an oral history group within the social clinic, aiming to record and make sense of a collection of digital oral histories from its volunteers and volunteers-doctors. The process aimed to support reflection and shape the future of the clinic's ongoing social innovation and to transform institutional public health services. Positioning the work of solidarity movement as designing social innovation, the work contributes to CSCW and 'infrastructuring' in Participatory Design aspiring to support social activism and social transformation processes. More specifically, through our empirical insights on the process of infrastructuring an oral history group within a social movement; and related insights about their ongoing participatory health service provision-we provide implications for CSCW concerned with its role in institutional healthcare service transformation.

Here are entered works on fundamental technological improvements or changes in materials, production methods, processes, organization, or management which increase efficiency and production. Works on original devices or processes are entered under "Inventions."

This book explores how the State can play a role as an enabler of citizens-led social innovations, to accelerate the shift to sustainable and socially just lifestyles. To meet the twin challenges of environmental degradation and the rise of inequalities, societal transformation is urgent. Most theories of social change focus either on the role of the State, on the magic of the market, or on the power of technological innovation. This book explores instead how local communities, given the freedom to experiment, can design solutions that can have a transformative impact. Change cannot rely only on central ordering by government, nor on corporations suddenly acting as responsible citizens. Societal transformation, at the speed and scope required, also should be based on the reconstitution of social capital, and on new forms of democracy emerging from collective action at the local level. The State matters of course, for the provision of both public services and of social protection, and to discipline the market, but it should also act as an enabler of citizen-led experimentation, and it should set up an institutional apparatus to ensure that collective learning spreads across jurisdictions. Corporations themselves can ensure that society taps the full potential of citizens-led social innovations: they can put their know-how, their access to finance, and their control of logistical chains in the service of such innovations, rather than focusing on shaping consumers’ tastes or even adapting to consumers’ shifting expectations. With this aim in mind, this book provides empirical evidence of how social innovations, typically developed within "niches", initially at a relatively small scale, can have society-wide impacts. It also examines the nature of the activism deployed by social innovators, and the emergence of a "do-it-yourself" form of democracy. This book will appeal to all those interested in driving societal change and social innovation to ensure a sustainable and socially just future for all.

Here are entered works on the mobilization of public and private resources to develop and support promising, innovative community-based solutions that impact social issues such as economic opportunity, healthy futures, and youth development. Broader Terms SOCIAL change Related Terms : INNOVATION management SOCIAL entrepreneurship

This study explored how social housing communities can contribute to the transition to a circular economy (CE) in cities. The CE promotes ways for rethinking and reshaping current practices of producing and consuming to enhance resource efficiency while satisfying our needs to enable us to prosper sustainably. Resource efficiency in cities relies on production and consumption patterns that are connected to people behaviours. Up to now, the CE has mainly concentrated on different levels of technological system innovations with limited attention to social practices and behavioural change. On the other side, communities and groups of interest show playing a crucial role in the promotion of sustainable practices through initiatives of social innovation (SI). Through case study analysis and comparison, the project investigated contemporary SI initiatives implemented by urban communities and groups of interest aiming at promoting alternative production-consumption practices. Seven types of SI for resource circularity have been identified. Based on this typology, the study defined potential opportunities, benefits and challenges for social housing communities. These findings also highlighted a complementary role that SI can play in the CE implementation in cities. Therefore, the project suggested the introduction of emerging SI concepts into the current CE approach to support development.

• Use Evolutionary Game to clarify the applicability of various resource allocations. • Expose the different key factors affecting the roles of resource allocations. • Breadth resource allocations have advantage when alliance environment is ambiguous. • Targeted resource allocations enhance the benefits if commercial prospects are clear. A lack of understanding regarding the roles and applicability of different resource allocations has become the underlying reason for the failure of resource efforts. Therefore, it is of important practical significance to examine the effects of different resource allocations and their impacts on the development of strategic alliances. Based on the development intentions of technological innovation cooperation and social capital accumulation, our study distinguished four patterns of resource allocation and viewed them as dynamic processes instead of unchanging decision results, using simulation from evolutionary game theory to explore the roles and applicability of various resource allocations by exposing their stability under different constraint situations. Our results indicate that, first, the randomly-oriented resource allocation has the highest probability of being unstable, while the knowledge-embedded resource allocation has the lowest probability. Second, randomly-oriented resource allocation can lead an alliance to become a pure technology or social alliance; relationship-oriented resource allocation is sensitive to opportunistic behavior, but more favorable to innovation diffusion; cooperation-oriented resource allocation is mainly affected by resource cost, and more suitable for firms with strong innovation intentions; and knowledge-embedded resource allocation is conducive to reducing the uncertainty and enhancing the configuration success rates. Third, the breadth of the resource allocation increases the probability of successfully configuring resources, and the strategic decision to switch from broad resource allocation to a targeted one may increase the extraneous benefits of firms when the development prospects are clear.

The formation of social entrepreneurial intention (SEI) is a topic that attracts scholars’ attention recently. Previous studies in the literature mention the importance of personal background on the formation of such intentions (Mair and Noboa, in: Social entrepreneurship: How intentions to create a social venture are formed. In “social entrepreneurship” (pp. 121–135). Palgrave Macmillan, London, 2006); Dorado in Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship 11:1–24, 2006; Scheiber in VOLUNTAS International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations. 27:1694–1717, 2016; Bacq and Alt in Journal of Business Venturing 33:333–350, 2018; Hockerts in Journal of Social Entrepreneurship 9:234–256, 2018). However, these studies often use samples from a limited number of countries and/or regions. The aim of this study is twofold. First, this study aims to examine whether the main antecedents of SEI (major hardship, radical change, encountering others’ hardship, and role model) offered in our previous study (Asarkaya and Keles Taysir in Nonprofit Management and Leadership 30:155–166, 2019) based on a sample from a specific country, is applicable within a global context and across different fields. Second, various functions of the main antecedents that lead to the formation of SEI are explored. The list of Ashoka fellows is utilized, and the personal details of 255 social entrepreneurs are analyzed. There are some common patterns in these narratives, supporting the potential influence of the main antecedents. In addition, the weights of these antecedents vary across different fields; and they have distinct functions through which SEI is formed.

Studies on public sector innovation often treat this type of innovation as something that emerges within public sector organizations. However, innovation theory argues that external sources of innovation are more fruitful sources of ideas. We claim that universities must be treated as a mandatory element in public sector innovation. This paper is aimed at clarifying the place of public sector innovation in the classification of innovations currently used in the literature. It also seeks to conceptualize an approach for future research on the topic. Our primary goal is to identify the role of different actors in the development of public sector innovation. We analyze the advantages and disadvantages of different forms of university involvement in public sector innovation. The paper consists of two parts. The first defines concepts of innovation in general and public sector innovation viewed as a variation on social innovation. The second is dedicated to an analysis of the experience of Russian universities in enhancing collaboration between actors in the public innovation system.

The growing presence of new players – beside those belonging to the institutional and third sectors – committed to supporting social and environmental causes through innovative approaches and tools leads to the profile of a for-profit enterprise increasingly committed to the pursuit of social goals. In the paper, the authors focus their attention on the existence of relationships between innovation and a company's social role in order to assess how innovation affects the social conduct of profit-making enterprises and to determine the birth of a new "hybrid" business model. In order to achieve this goal, research was carried out on a sample of 4,000 Italian Small and Medium-sized Enterprises that claim to operate according to a corporate social commitment, in order to investigate the existence of a relationship between innovative behavior and social and business purposes of companies having different Corporate Social Innovation policies. The data were analyzed using the conditional inference tree, a non-parametric class of tree regression model, which overcomes different regression problems involving ordinal and nominal variables. The results achieved make it possible to fill some gaps in the existing literature, to detect a relationship between technological and social commitment in a company and to open a debate on future research developments.

University intellectual property policies, and the accompanying strategies for incubation of IP via licensing and spin outs, have not received much analysis from academic lawyers. Moreover, despite the success of universities in the UK at generating income from IP, not much is known about how transferable this success is when considered in the light of a rapidly growing middle-income developing economy such as Mexico’s. In this article we analyse critically some of the key tenets of IP policies at universities in the UK to identify what the key legal principles underpinning university innovation are. We further consider the potential application of these principles in Mexico, where so far only a limited number of universities have developed IP policies and strategies in line with the incubator model. We explain how universities in Mexico could implement these research findings in their own IP policies. We further note that the mere provision of an IP policy is not a panacea – on its own it is insufficient for ensuring technology transfer and it may even encourage unnecessary patenting. Further investment in infrastructure and in establishing a culture of incubation and entrepreneurship is also required.

The recent surge of investment in Civic Technologies represents a unique opportunity to realize the potential of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) for improving democratic participation. In this review, we study what technologies are proposed and evaluated in the academic literature for such goal. We focus our exploration on how civic technology is used in the collaborative creation of solutions for social issues and innovations for public services (i.e., social innovation). Our goal is to provide researchers, designers, and practitioners a starting point to understand both the academic state of the art and the existing opportunities for ICT in a democracy.

Technological innovation is the new backbone for companies. Exploiting and exploring new knowledge increase the chance of survival in the current dynamic market. Alongside, there are countries were be an innovative need to face up social and political challenges. This has transformed their economy, spreading an entrepreneurial mindset mingled with the willing to help a local community. This phenomenon is called social entrepreneurship which is leveraging new economies and building wealth, environmental system. In this vein, the present research seeks to offer qualitative research on 142 social entrepreneurs in an emerging country. The scope is to analyse if social entrepreneurship, entrepreneurial characteristics, and entrepreneurial ecosystem influence innovation. As emerged, technological innovation is affected by the first two factors but the entrepreneurial ecosystem is still not supportive. New, several activities should be organised by the government to assist entrepreneurs, whereas, the entrepreneurs are socially motivated to build up his enterprise.

The United States wastes approximately 40% of its food supply. This article will examine the implications of this waste for food insecurity and climate change. It will also explore how the law and social entrepreneurship can be used to confront this public health challenge.

Innovation is perhaps the buzzword in local economic development policy. Associated narrowly with neoliberal ideas, conventional notions of innovation—like its capitalocentric counterparts, enterprise and entrepreneurialism—may promise higher productivity, global competitiveness and technological progress but do not fundamentally change the ‘rules of the game’. In contrast, an emerging field reimagines social innovation as disruptive change in social relations and institutional configurations. This article explores the conceptual and political differences within this pre‐paradigmatic field, and argues for a more transformative understanding of social innovation. Building on the work of David Graeber, I mobilize the novel constructs of ‘play’ and ‘games’ to advance our understanding of the contradictory process of institutionalizing social innovation for urban transformation. This is illustrated through a case study of Liverpool, where diverse approaches to innovation are employed in attempts to resolve longstanding socio‐economic problems. Dominant market‐ and state‐led economic development policies—likened to a ‘regeneration game’—are contrasted with more experimental, creative, democratic and potentially more effective forms of social innovation, seeking urban change through playing with the rules of the game. I conclude by considering how the play–game dialectic illuminates and reframes the way transformative social innovation might be cultivated by urban policy, the contradictions this entails, and possible ways forward.

The Syrian refugee crisis has been termed “the greatest humanitarian crisis of the last century” and countries around the world have stepped up to provide safe haven to millions of Syrians fleeing violence. Canada's unique private sponsorship policy coupled with government sponsorship of refugees saw more than 40,000 welcomed to Canada in a matter of months prompting the need for new processes and solutions. Grassroots organizations emerged, with new partnerships, processes and approaches enabled with new applications of simple technologies and revealed opportunities to leverage and amplify government resources. While fragmented and sometimes primitive these efforts signaled new opportunities to create an innovative “sharing economy” approach. This paper will review the relations between these new initiatives, actors and networks and the opportunities to drive systems change through a social innovation lens.

Some of the most important resources are intangible, such as knowledge and access to networks. In the developing world, technology can facilitate these resources and address basic human needs in a variety of ways: from provision of farmer training and cloud-controlled clean water systems to health information and mobile money services. Some of these services expand access to resources in ways that particularly benefit women. In environments where women are disadvantaged socially and economically, information and communications technologies (ICT) can enable women to access valuable information, consider a broader range of business opportunities, access wider markets, partake in educational programs, and share experiences with and gain mentorship from other women. However, there are large gender gaps in the access to technology, particularly in rural areas. To begin, I briefly discuss the role of technology in development, and consider the extent and significance of technology gender gaps. Next, I review key barriers to reducing these gaps, and discuss the concept of social innovation as it applies to technology interventions. Examples from five social innovations in India — a country with large technology gender gaps — illustrate the range of possibilities for innovative access to and use of ICT for diverse target groups. I conclude with some suggestions for further improvement in this area.

The rapid pace of technological developments played a key role in the previous industrial revolutions. However, the fourth industrial revolution (Industry 4.0) and its embedded technology diffusion progress is expected to grow exponentially in terms of technical change and socioeconomic impact. Therefore, coping with such transformation require a holistic approach that encompasses innovative and sustainable system solutions and not just technological ones. In this article, we propose a framework that can facilitate the interaction between technological and social innovation to continuously come up with proactive, and hence timely, sustainable strategies. These strategies can leverage economic rewards, enrich society at large, and protect the environment. The new forthcoming opportunities that will be generated through the next industrial wave are gigantic at all levels. However, the readiness for such revolutionary conversion require coupling the forces of technological innovation and social innovation under the sustainability umbrella.

La relation entre l’innovation sociale et la gouvernance n’est pas suffisamment explorée dans la littérature scientifique. Les analyses que l’on trouve sur ce sujet se rapportent principalement à la relation entre l’administration publique, la participation citoyenne, le changement social et les nouvelles formes de gouvernance (Lévesque, 2012 ; Moulaert<em>et al</em>., 2007 ; Novy, Hamme et Leubolt, 2009). Dans ces approches, l’innovation sociale est abordée comme le rapport entre les relations sociales et la gouvernance. Ainsi, cette perspective cherche plutôt à comprendre comment certains groupes sociaux développent leurs capacités sociopolitiques pour garantir leur accès aux ressources qui permettent de répondre