Search results

Industry 4.0 defines the application of digital technologies on business infrastructure and processes. With the increasing need to take into account the social and environmental impact of technologies, the concept of Society 5.0 has been proposed to restore the centrality of humans in the proper utilization of technology for the exploitation of innovation opportunities. Despite the identification of humans, resilience and sustainability as the key dimensions of Society 5.0, the definition of the key factors that can enable Innovation in the light of 5.0 principles has not been yet assessed.

An SLR, followed by a content analysis of results and a clustering of the main topics, is performed to (1) identify the key domains and dimensions of the Industry 5.0 paradigm; (2) understand their impact on Innovation 5.0; (3) discuss and reflect on the resulting implications for research, managerial practices and the policy-making process.

The findings allow the elaboration of a multileveled framework to redefine Innovation through the 5.0 paradigm by advancing the need to integrate ICT and technology (Industry 5.0) with the human-centric, social and knowledge-based dimensions (Society 5.0).

The study detects guidelines for managers, entrepreneurs and policy-makers in the adoption of effective strategies to promote human resources and knowledge management for the attainment of multiple innovation outcomes (from technological to data-driven and societal innovation).

The purpose of this article is to show (1) how social innovations are created through co-production in social enterprises in Finland and (2) how enabling ecosystems for the creation of social innovations can be enhanced by the government.

This study is a descriptive case study. The data comprises focus group interviews that were conducted during a research project in Finland in 2022. The interviewees represented different social enterprises, other non-profit organisations and national funding institutions.

Social enterprises create social innovations in Finland through co-production, where service innovation processes, activism and networking are central. Also, to build an enabling ecosystem, government must base the system upon certain elements: enabling characteristics of the stakeholders, co-production methods and tools and initiatives by the government.

The authors address an important challenge that social enterprises struggle with: The position of social enterprises in Finland is weak and entrepreneurs experience prejudice from both the direction of “traditional” businesses and the government which often does not recognise social enterprise as a potential partner for public service delivery. Nonetheless, social enterprises create public value by contributing to the co-production of public services. They work in interorganisational networks by nature and can succeed where the traditional public organisations and private businesses fail.

The last two decades have witnessed a surge of interest in social entrepreneurship organizations (SEOs). Understanding their business models is crucial for sustaining their long-term growth. This paper analyses how SEOs that use the approach of social bricolage adapt their business model to develop social innovation.

This study used in-depth multiple comparative case studies and narrative analysis to focus on the South of Italy, where these ventures play a crucial role in the entrepreneurial process of minor and abandoned cultural heritage sites, generating economic and social value and employment opportunities.

By developing a conceptual framework, this paper enhances current understanding of the social dimensions of SEOs’ business model. These ventures using the approach of social bricolage can produce social innovation, reinventing and innovating their business model. The business model innovation of the cases revealed a strong social mark and identified peculiar strategies that both respond to social needs and long-term sustainability in complex contexts.

This study connects previous knowledge on social bricolage with the business model innovation, highlighting routines and processes used by ventures, and provides a starting point for social entrepreneurs and innovators in the complex and often uncertain cultural domain of the Third Sector in Italy.

The paper aims to contribute to the literature on SEOs by exploring their main features and social dimensions. By combining social bricolage and business model innovation, it offers a novel conceptual framework for developing social innovation and for the study of SEOs.

This paper aims to analyse how social entrepreneurship organizations that use approach of social bricolage adapt their business model to develop social innovation. The past decade has witnessed a surge of research interest in social entrepreneurship organizations (SEOs). This has resulted in important insights concerning their role in fostering social challenges. The crisis of both public and private profit-driven models meet the arising of new initiatives designed to meet the minor and often abandoned cultural heritage consumption need. Drawing on the domain of SEOs and social bricolage framework, these initiatives are able to pursue the social and the economic mission together and to produce social innovation.

This paper aims to analyze how SEOs that use strategies of social bricolage can improve the development and diffusion of social innovation. Employing in-depth multiple comparative case studies of 15 cultural SEOs in the South of Italy, through the analysis of semi-structured interview, the study enhance current understanding of the social dimension of SEOs.

First results show that SEOs in the domain of minor cultural heritage adopt an innovative business model and in particular a social business model unraveling organizational dimensions falling into the social bricolage. The relation between social bricolage dimensions and social business model criteria produces outcomes in which social innovation can be expressed.

This study enhances current understanding of the social dimensions of business model involved in social innovation production of cultural SEOs. This research aims to be a benchmark of the social innovation initiatives in the field of minor cultural heritage management.

The aim of this article is to contribute to the field of social businesses, particularly considering the dimension of social innovation.

The authors adopted a qualitative approach, whose purpose is to gather in-depth insights into a problem to understand its contextual elements and interrelations. The authors used an exploratory descriptive design and a multiple case study, which allows the identification of similarities and differences in the research subjects. They developed a scale that enables the classification of the operation logic of the social businesses analyzed.

It became evident that social businesses present a few differences in their modus operandi: those based on a social logic are more concerned with the generation of socio-environmental value, however with small-scale innovation; in contrast, social business guided by a market logic do not intend to generate socio-environmental value in different dimensions and are more concerned with the wider range of their innovations.

This research analyzed social businesses from a founder and manager perspective and did not comprise all stakeholders. The purpose of this study was not to measure the effective impact generated by innovation, but to understand its potential to generate socio-environmental value.

The generation of socio-environmental value and the strategies to expand practices of social innovation are associated with the operation logic of social business.

The created scale allowed the classification of social businesses in terms of operation logic (greater emphasis on market or social aspects) and proposes a few dimensions to evaluate a socio-environmental innovation.

The purpose of this study is to propose a multidimensional view of social innovation.

It offers a detailed analysis of the activities performed by ADEL (Agência de Desenvolvimento Econômico Local) – a regional non-governmental organization located in one of the poorest regions of Brazil – which is succeeding in engaging young people in the promotion of local development. The case was analysed drawing on the dimensions structured by researchers of one of the main centres of social innovation in the world, the Centre de Recherche sur Les Innovations Sociales (CRISES) based in Canada.

The results found characterize ADEL as a social innovation based on the dimensions of social innovation described in the CRISES’ conceptual encyclopaedia (Tardif and Harrison, 2005). The results highlight the singularities of the case studied, which allowed the elaboration of a revisited table of dimensions proposed by the CRISES’ researchers.

For future studies, using the CRISES’ table as reference of analysis for other social innovations, the possibility suggested is the quantitative exploration of these dimensions.

The originality of this article lies in the fact that it presents a representative social innovation for the Brazilian semiarid.

This paper aims to unpack the sets of policy ideas underpinning the use of social innovation, thus permeating the allegedly politically neutral language of the concept.

Drawing on Daigneualt (2014), this paper adapts a four-dimensional approach to investigate the sets of ideas underpinning different conceptualisations of social innovation, particularly in relation to who the actors driving social change are, the nature of the problems addressed, the objectives pursued and the means used to achieve these objectives.

Applying the four-dimensional approach to a corpus of literature, this paper found evidence of two different perspectives along each dimension, namely, a radical empowerment approach and an incremental market-oriented one.

A limitation of the study is the focus on academic literature, whereas a broader focus on policy discourse may give further insights. However, this paper argues that this study can be the ground for future research to investigate whether and how the two approaches identified have been adopted in different institutional and policy contexts.

The paper contributes to the development of social innovation research by boosting and encouraging further investigation on how different sets of ideas underpin social innovation discourse and its use as a policy concept.

This paper aims to analyze unexplored connections between economic, environmental and social dimensions of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and knowledge management (KM) strategies (exploration, exploitation), also considering environmental dynamism as an influencing variable on these connections. The predicted CSR-KM interplay suggests, from stakeholder and knowledge-based views of the firm, the existence of ideal configurations between CSR and KM strategies that generate differentiated impacts on companies’ innovation capabilities, especially in dynamic environments.

Structural equation modeling by means of the partial least squares technique was used to test the study’s hypotheses after collecting survey data from Spanish companies of the renewable energy sector.

The study findings show that in highly dynamic environments, companies will tend to commit prominently in CSR, although their orientation (economic, environmental, social) and effects on innovation capabilities will depend mainly on the selected KM strategies. Social and environmental CSR are found to be highly related to KM exploration, whereas economic CSR is highly related to KM exploitation. Nevertheless, while a significant indirect effect of economic CSR by means of the KM exploitation strategy on innovation capabilities is found, the proposed indirect effect of both environmental and social CSR through the KM exploration strategy on innovation capabilities is not significant.

The results suggest that company managers should be aware of the advantages of following specific paths of investment in KM and CSR initiatives in highly dynamic environments, as there is a potential payoff in terms of innovation capability improvement. The results also suggest that “good” relationships with stakeholders, built from specific CSR investments, make firms able to get valuable knowledge that it is useful to develop KM strategies for innovation capability development.

Previous studies do not consider the interplay between KM strategies and CSR as a catalyzer for developing a firm’s innovation capabilities. This paper contributes to the KM and innovation literatures by introducing CSR into the conversation about how to improve innovation capabilities in dynamic and sustainable industries by using configurations of KM strategies and specific CSR investments in economic, social and environmental areas.

This study aims to provide an example of the intersections between resilience and innovation within the social economy. It describes the Portuguese context, boosted by a pioneering public policy focused on building resilience through innovation. The sustainable development concept usually sets multilevel relationships among the government, social investors and entrepreneurs. In this sense, the study explores the role of innovation in promoting resilience in initiatives and society that may lead to sustainability.

The authors collected the primary data through semistructured interviews with social investors and an online survey with the invested or awarded entities from 2015 to 2020. The database represents 43.63% of acknowledged Portuguese social innovative initiatives, describing a complex and multilevel result. The case also provides a unique context for deepening the understanding of popular, relevant, but still underdeveloped concepts.

The results highlight progress in overcoming social and economic challenges. This progress happens through innovative initiatives aiming to solve social problems that reflect collective interests. The data suggest a context dynamization due to an increase of 31.3% in new initiatives. This increase can potentially represent a consistent investment in resilience and sustainable development.

This paper helps to contextualize and structure information for three fragmented concepts. It relies on their combination to compensate for each other frailties, assuming that innovation can be a crucial factor for boosting sustainable development, making possible the countries’ resilience. It also argues that the literature state can result from a paradigm shift, and these features can favor this process toward a better world.

Social innovation education aims to equip students with the skills and mindsets to pursue sustainable and just solutions to complex challenges, yet many programs fail to address the power dynamics underlying unjust social structures. This paper aims to examine a social innovation course that integrates equity, diversity and inclusion principles through critical service-learning.

Researchers conducted semi-structured interviews of 25 students and 5 key informants in a qualitative, single case design to understand multiple perspectives on significant factors in transformative learning. Document review and auto-ethnographic insights provide additional case background.

Students identified the service experience as unique and high impact. Significant factors included the atypical service structure, the EDI framework, and the partner organization as an exemplar in the field. Students displayed a spectrum of learning, from recall and comprehension to critical evaluation, new worldviews, and behavior change.

The findings of this qualitative study pertain to one partnership but are generalizable to theories. These findings are plausibly transferable to other experiential social innovation courses embedded in elite, private, predominately white research universities.

This empirical case examines a unique pedagogical and curricular innovation. By seeking to understand factors and outcomes of experiential learning, this study contributes to the literature on social innovation education and critical service-learning. The analysis produced novel insights for faculty and institutions aiming to integrate equity, diversity, and inclusion goals into social innovation programs.