verandrecaj@yahoo.co.uk
1. Introduction
The paper will critically evaluate different views associated to the concept of social innovation. Analyze aspects that can influence it, and also highlight some of social actors that create both sides of the debate by taking an issue-based approach. This study intend to advance, enhance, and contribute to better understanding of the topic. The knowledge and capacity to address the ability to resolve and deal with the problem, issues, challenging and difficulties of meeting social needs (Mulgan et al., 2007) within social innovation agenda by addressing the questions; What, why, how, when, where, and who?
2. Literature Review:
The literature review will critically reflect on the relevant sources represented through peer read academic journals, articles, press release, books, professional magazines, newspapers, government reports, and historical records. The innovation theory of the economy (Schumpeter, 1934, 1939, 1943) developed by Dose et al., (1988), fiscal policy theories, financial theories, management theories, organization theories will be used to support arguments put forward for this discussion. Gill and Johnson (1997) highlighted the importance of theory implementation as a formulation regarding the cause and effect relationships between two or more variables, which may or may not have been tested.
Formulation and clarification of the research topic is a starting point (Smith and Dainty, 1991; Ghaun and Ghonhaug, 2005; Saunders et al., (2009). However, Saunders and Lewis (1997) argue that, the formulation and clarification of the topic is time consuming and will probably take researchers up the blind alleys. Although, Raimond (1993) clarified that, without spending time on this stage researchers are less likely to achieve a successful research project. In these contexts, researchers have been encouraged to generate research ideas and eventually turn these ideas into potential research questions and objectives (Easterby-Smith et al., 2006; Saunders et al., 2008). However, Raimond (1993) argued that, the attributes of a business management research topic do not vary a great deal between universities. Although, Saunders et al (2009) suggested that, if research project is part of a course it is important to meet the examining body’s requirement but unlike in other fields such as; science and business where extensive research has been done; there is little research conducted on social innovation and hence the increased global interest in this new and complex field.
According to Yunus, (2002); Mulgan, (2007); and Couillard, (2011), Social innovation entails many economical, technological, social and political drivers which are shared by business and societies alike. Rapid changes in global business environment, unstable political and economical situation, climate change, diseases, can only persuade business entities and government to seek creation of new models to introduce sustainability in meeting the demands exerted by societal needs (Mulgan et al., 2006). The development in this field is evident (Couillard, 2011), since the business concept is evolving from traditional models of (profit-maximisation focus); to serve or include the social context (values) in operating businesses for the future (Porter, 2001).
However, the social innovation is a wide broad concept (Murray, 2010) and does not have any fixed-clear boundaries: it happens in all sectors private, public, and non-profit organisation (Mulgan et al., 2006). The author identifies some area for concern, since the lack of this proper delineation or clear boundaries and as such social innovation can go out of hand. For instance social networking like Twitter, Facebook unlike Linkedin cannot be controlled by the generator as envisioned, since there is no proper/direct communication between the generator and final reader. This allows for a subjective interpretation or imagination of the reader. For this reason, social innovation must find ways to manage them effectively to bring the desired benefits as aspire by the participants.
Hockerts and Morsin (2002); and Mulgan et al (2006), Ashford (2010); declares that very little is known of social innovation and that this may breed confusion as the term is not systematically defined due to confusing interest (viewing with different angles) by big foundations or academics researchers (Mulgan et al., (2006). However, the topic contains issues that have a ‘connected difference’ theory of social innovation. Social innovation is extrapolated from a combination and or hybrid of existing theories (Mulgan et al. 2007); and none of well known theorists in business field are engaged seriously with the subject (Hockerts and Morsin, 2010). It is relatively new (Ashford, 2010), while social innovation itself has existed since 19th century with great focus in broad processes of social change (Owen, Marx, 1867-1894; Weber, 1952; and Durkheim, 1915).There are many examples but establishing a “field” of social innovation is certainly necessary and needed to get a broader momentum behind multiple initiatives. Any new ‘field’ needs debate. It needs common terminology, clearer definitions of what it covers a growing understanding of the different tools, techniques, methods and establishing a knowledge base to draw down from. Social innovation has no given geographical boundaries; it happens across society that involves all sectors of a community: public, private and non-profit. Actually one of the real challenges is managing across the boundaries between sectors (Nahapiet and Ghoshal 1998; and Mulgan et al., 2007).
Porter and Kramel (2011) argued that, globe’s new challenging required companies to pursue ‘share value’ which mean that organisations must innovate and create economic value in the way that also address society’s needs. Social entrepreneurship should be measured by its ability to create shared value not only meet social needs (ibid). But in macro-level the focus of debate is yet in problems which still remain sensitive and have impact in whole society such as, difficulties faced by existing political, social, and economic structure (Yunus,2002), high competition in global market (Porter, 2002), environment issues, climate change, conflicts, change in customers test, the end of Mass-production era, change in supply and demand (Matins and Terblanch, 2003; Simms, 2006; Mulgan et al., 2007; Couillard, 2011). However, in micro-level context Ashford, (2010) gives a broad explanation regarding to social innovation intention to mean both changes in the preferences of consumers, citizens, and workers for the types of products, services, environmental quality, leisure activities, and work they want and changes in the processes by which they influence those changes. Social innovation can alter both the demand for and the supply of what the industrial state might offer (ibid).
Confusion can occur at time the term social innovation is often used interchangeable with “social engineering” or “technical innovation” (Edquist, 1997). , since the former rests on information, education, communication, and progressive self-interest, rather than values and conditioning imposed from outside the individual. A valid interface between social and organisational/institutional innovation is the increasingly important role of both labour and public participation in both private-sector and governmental decisions. (Ashford, 2010) Looking at international literature as a whole, the study has found a variety of views of the process of social innovation and the factors that influence this term.
However, Sundbo (2001) argues this, the development in this field has started with theory evaluation by addressing the process of innovation directly with the theory of creative distraction (Schumpeter, 1934), but, certain elements of innovation are even older (Frisch, 1981). Since then, social innovation are rarely examined in their own right (Hảmảlảinen, and Heiskala, 2007) and also does not have its own theory Mulgan et al., 2007) but different theories of other field has been adapted. Therefore, the notion links economic theories with fiscal policy theories and also develops combined financial and innovation theory with social innovation itself (Kirby, 1998). However, centres of social theoretical literature are 1) traditional action or habits 2) forced corporation or violence 3) charismatic leadership 4) economic action or market calculation 5) Political regulation or formation of coalition (Weber, 1968; Giddens, 1984; Mann, 1986; Bourdieu, 1990; Durkhein, 1995; and Joans, 1996).
A variety of definition has since emerged for social innovation each with their own emphasise and possible meaning, vary according to the level of analyses which will be used. The more macro the approach the more varied the definition seems to be (West and Farr, 1990). However, Zollschan and Hirsch, (1964).argue that, the concept cannot be approached only at the macro-level, social, non-industrial activities which will involved social change, but, it also, can be approached at the micro level, but some of definition have ignored this aspect. Greenhalgh et al (2004) have put emphases on “...behaviours, routines, and ways of working that are directed and improving health outcomes, administrative efficiency, cost effectiveness or users’ experience and that are implemented by planned and coordinated actions..." (2004, p. 1).
The European Union (2010) definition identified “...social innovation as a new combination of social practice...” by highlighting the importance of “...certain actors or constellation of actors with the goals of better satisfying needs of society”... (2010:26). Definitions of social innovation are both analytic and normative (Moulaert et al., 2005). The researcher specifically stresses three following dimensions, preferably occurring in interaction with each- other; 1) Satisfaction of human needs that are not currently meet, either because ‘not yet’ or because ‘no longer’ perceived as important by either the market or the state (2.) Chances in social relations, especially with regard to governance, that enable the above satisfaction, but also increase the level of participation of all but especially deprived groups in society. (3) Increasing the socio-political capability and access to resources needed to enhance rights to satisfaction of human needs and participation (empowerment dimension).
Innovation is often associated with changes (Drucker 1985; Robbins 1996; and Hellriegel et al., 1998; Gillwald 2000,), but, change cannot be always regarded as an innovation since it does not always involved new idea (West and Farr, 1990; and CIMA, 1996). Differences between social innovation and social change rest in the later being associated with “planed and coordinated actions” The material difference between social change and social innovation rests in (Greenhalgh et al. 2004: 1).
Whereas, social change is described as "the process of change in the social structure of a society in its underlying institutions, cultural patterns, corresponding social actions and conscious awareness" (Zapf 2003, p. 427), social innovations are the results of intentional and goal-oriented action to establish new social practices in certain areas (cf. Kesselring and Leitner 2008; Hochgerner 2009); or, to put it differently, of "collective actions in pursuit of a goal" to "rearrange how things are accomplished" or permanently establish a new "default practice" by "user acceptance" (Gerber 2006: 12.). The "systemization of trend-setting innovations" (Ibid., p. 5) as well as "path-enhancing social changes" (Ibid., p. 13) is, however, an extremely difficult process with many requirements (Ibid., p. 5).
Innovations are interventions design to begin and create future development concerning technology, economics and social practices (Howaldt and Schwarz, 2010). Alternatively, Kanter, (1983); Martins, (2000) described innovation as implementation of a new and possible problem-solving idea, ‘new idea that work’ (Mulgan et al., 2007). The term can be study from the point of view of both economists and sociology (Sundbo, 1998). Kirzner, (1973), Casson, (1982). Kent et al., (1988) argue that, social innovation can be studied not only by implementing systems of innovation technology, institutions, and organisations theories (Woodman and Schoenieldt, 1989) but, also it could be consider as the boundary between sociological reflection and social action because it requires reflection on societal problems and targeted action (Howaldt and Schwarz, 2010).. This holds opportunity for social science which is not acting as a supporter of social innovation so far (Kesselring and Leitner, 2008,).
From the economics perspective innovation is an activity that creates an economic growth (Schumpeter, 1934; Edquist, 1997) which could have a positive impacts in society wealth (Mulgan et al., 2007). Although from sociological point of view it is an activity that means a renewal of social behaviour (McClelland, 1961, and LaPiere, 1965). However, innovation concept is principals of macro-phenomenon (Sundbo, 1998), this view is criticised by Kesselring and Leitner (2008) the judgment of social innovation cannot be made based of economic criteria. Unlike technical innovations, they are based much more on values and are not oriented primarily towards economic utility (Ibid., p. 22).
Social innovation has evolved recently from the margins to the mainstream to tackle a range of various society challenges. It will inevitably need more structural support; it needs more coordination and alignment by all the stakeholders involved, it needs organizing and being recognized in its own right. Martins and Terblanche (2003) indentified following determinants of the culture that can influence social innovation: ‘Strategy’, vision, mission and purposefulness (Cover, 1993; Robbins, 1996). ‘Flexibility structure’, autonomy, empowerment, decision making, and group interaction (Armstrong, 1995; Arad et al., 1997; Mumford et al., 1997). Support mechanism, ability of resources; information technology and creative people (Kanter 1983 cited in Arad et al., 1997; Amabile and Gryskiewicz, 1987; Shattow, 1996). Behaviors that encourage innovation, idea generation, continue learning culture, competitiveness, support for change and conflict handing (Amabile, 1995; Ryan, 1996; Brodtrick, 1997; O’Reilly, 1997; Filipczak, 1997). Open communication and trust are also key elements of social innovation (Frohman and Pascarella, 1990; Samaha, 1996; Filipczak, 1997). However, the importance of the above determinants of social innovation is still debatable due to evolving social-human complexity.
3. Conclusion:
3. Conclusion:
The literature review have some limitation in supporting the discourse well enough due to lack of empirical data. Unfortunately, interest in social innovation has only come into light recently and for that reason there are limited researches focusing within specified area. The multi-dimension interpretation and definition are constructed by differing social constructivists as experienced by the various socialist around the world. Although the views predominantly suggest that social innovation is suppose to solve the existent problems within the society, the author feels that it has not added value to society in full as yet since the social interactions between the actors are localized (differs according to community instead of society).
The areas that Social Innovation can address are as a following;
|
· Resolving the problems around our growing physical needs and limited resources (age, health, education)
|
· The increasing need for a different type of skill and capability set that innovation seems to require and often we are not taught- in school, business or society
|
· A major shift in care and service- serving the needs of others, communities and those actually close to us
|
· Psychic needs- the recognition, increased understanding and care that cuts across our societies in so many different, often in bewildering ways
|
The author also suggests that the term social innovation is not fully understood and is loosely being used by the business communities as tools to create some degree of competitive advantages (social-capital).The lack of proper exchange of knowledge capital between the various actors impedes social innovation to be the crux of the most hyped ‘Big Society’ aspiration of UK.
References
Armstrong, S., Brodie, R. J. and Parsons, A. G. (2001) Hypotheses in Marketing Science: Literature Review and Publication Audit. Marketing Letters, 12(2), 171-187.
Arad et al., (1997) A framework of study of relationship between organisational characteristics and organisation innovation. The journal to create behaviours. 31:1. Pp 42-58.
Amable. T. M (1995) Discovering the unknowable managing unmanageable. Sage. London.
Branscomb, H. E. (1998) Casting Your Net: A Student's Guide to Research on the Internet. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.British Standards Institution. (1990) BS5605:1990. Recommendations for citing and referencing published material. Milton Keynes, BSI.
Chambon et al., (1982) Les Innovations Socials. Presses Universities de France. Paris
Couillard. F (2011) Leadership and social innovation: 5 essential requisites. Available from: http://www.strategies-direction.com/?p=144 [Accessed, 013/03/2011]
Day, A. and Peters, J. (1994) Quality Indicators in Academic Publishing, Library Review. 43. 7, pp.6-11
Dees. G (2007) Growing Social Innovations. NESTA. London
Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R. and Lowe, A. (1991) Management Research: An Introduction. London: Sage.
Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R. and Lowe, A. (2002) Management Research: An Introduction. 2d ed. London: Sage.
Edquist. C (1997) Systems of Innovation: Technology, Institutions, and organisations. York House Typographic LTD. London.
Elsner. W and Hanappi. G (2008) Varieties of Capitalism and new Dnstitutional deals: Regulations, Wealfare and the New Economy. Available from:http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=AWOeKHljrjQC&pg=PA266&dq=critical+literature+review+in+the+role [Accessed, 04/03/2011]
European Union (2010) This is European Social Innovation Available from: http://www.vitaever.com/downloads/This-is-European-Social-Innovation.pdf [Accessed, 14/03/2011]
Fisher, C. (2004) Researching and Writing a Dissertation for Business Students. Pearson Education, Chapter 2.
Fletcher, G. and Greenhill, A. (1995) Academic Referencing of Internet-based Resources. Aslib Proceedings 47. 11/12 November/December, p. 245-52.
Gash. S (1999) Effective Literature Searching for Research. Aldershot, Gower
Goldsmith. S (2010). The Power of Social Innovation: How Civic Entrepreneurs Ignite Community Networks for Good. Jossey-Bass.
Hӓmӓlӓinen.T.J and Heiskala (2007) Social innovation, institutional change, and Economic Performance: Making Sense of Structural Adjustment Processes in Industrial Sectors, Regions and Society. http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=7SURhykuVvAC&pg=PA53&dq=theories+related+to+social+innovation&hl=en&ei=S0KLTYGxI4OAhQf4v9WoDg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CDQQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false [Accessed, 20/03/2011]
Hogg. A. M (2010) A Social Identity Theory of Leadership. Available from: http://psr.sagepub.com/content/5/3/184.short [Accessed, 09/03/2011]
Howaldt. J and Schwarz. M (2010) Social innovation: concepts, research fields, and international trends. Available from:http://www.internationalmonitoring.com/fileadmin/Downloads/Trendstudien/Trendstudie_Howaldt_englisch.pdf [Accessed, 14/03/2011]
James et al., (2008) "Rediscovering Social Innovation", Stanford Social Innovation Review Fall 2008.
Kohli, J. and Mulgan. G (2007) Capital Ideas. How to Generate Innovation in the Public Sector. The Young Foundation and Center for American Progress. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/research/innovation-union/index_en.cfm [Accessed, 13/03/2011]
Lagace. M (2006) Innovation in Open Source; A New Model for Innovation. Available from: http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/5544.html [Accessed, 05/03/2011]
Lankshear. C and Knobel. M (2004) A handbook for teaching research from design to implementation. London. Open University Press.
Martins. C. E and Terblanch. F (2003) Building organizational culture that stimulates creativity and innovation. 6:1. Pp64-74.
McClelland. D (1961) The Achieving Society. Princeton.London.
McGivern, Y. (2003) The Practice of Market and Social Research. Prentice Hall.
Moulaert, F. and Sekia, F. (2003) Territorial Innovation Models: a Critical Survey, Regional Studies, Vol. 37. No 3. pp 289-302.
Mulgan et al (2007) Social Innovation: What Is It, Why it Matters And How It Can Be Accelerated. The Young Foundation. University of Oxford.
Mumford et al., (2000) Leadership skills for a changing world: Solving complex social problems. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6W5N-3YSY14P-3&_user=477543&_coverDate=06%2F30%2F2000&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=gateway&_origin=gateway&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1671776662&_rerunOrigin=scholar.google&_acct=C000022838&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=477543&md5=6b2d112fc1721cd977438eb23f0f0676&searchtype=a#toc1 [Accessed, 09/03/2011]
Mumford, M.D. (2002) Social Innovation: Ten Cases from Benjamin Franklin, Creativity Research Journal, 14(2), 253-266. Available from: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~content=a790767951~db=all [Accessed, 02/03/2011]
Murray et al., (2010) The open book of social innovation. The young foundation. Available from: http://www.nesta.org.uk/library/documents/Social_Innovator_020310.pdf [Accessed, 13/03/2011]
Nambisan. S (2009) "Platforms for Collaboration", Stanford Social Innovation Review. Available from: http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/platforms_for_collaboration[Accessed, 02/03/2011]
Prajogo. I. D and Sohal. S. A (2001) TQM and innovation: a literature review and research framework. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V8B-436W007-1&_user=477543&_coverDate=09%2F30%2F2001&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=gateway&_origin=gateway&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1684105901&_rerunOrigin=scholar.google&_acct=C000022838&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=477543&md5=6469720a6de3318356cd0e36730dd508&searchtype=a [Accessed, 18/03/2011]
Raimond. P (1993) Management Projects. London. Chapman Hall.
Renz. D and Herman. D (2010) The Joseey-Bass Handbook of Nonprofit Leadership and Management. Available from: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=q7S9ky7LFyoC&pg=PA267&dq=the+role+of+leadership+in+social+innovation&hl=en&ei=EIl9TYTdK8GbhQf_xon3Bg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&sqi=2&ved=0CEMQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=the%20role%20of%20leadership%20in%20social%20innovation&f=false [Accessed, 012/03/2011]
Saul. J (2011) Social Innovation Inc: 5 Strategies for Driving Business Growth Thought. to Available from:http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=8bmDq3tPFLwC&pg=PA162&dq=how+to+identify+the+topic+are+of++social+innovation&hl=en&ei=Xtd4TfOPO4aChQfkotXvBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CDkQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false [Accessed, 09/03/2011]
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., and Thornhill, A. (2007) Research Methods for Business Students. Chapter 2
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., Thornhill, A. (2008) Research Methods for Business Students. Prentice Hall, Chapter 2.
Sharp, J. A., Peters, J. and Howard, K. (2002) The Management of a Student Research Project. 3d ed. Aldershot, Gower.
The Financial Time (2010) Let’s Hear Those Ideas. Available from: http://www.economist.com/node/16789766?story_id=16789766 [Accessed, 16/03/2011]
Zollschan. G and Hirsch. W (eds) (1964) Explorations in Social Change. Boston. Mass
No comments:
Post a Comment