How to deal with an "essentially contested concept" on the field? Sampling social innovations through the Delphi method

Abstract

IntroductionThis article addresses a specific methodological challenge in social innovation research: how to select cases for multi-case analysis? In other words, it deals with the practical question of sampling 2 social innovation. Three connected reasons explain why this question deserves attention. First, knowledge on social innovation has been built to a large extent on case studies. This is understandable given the importance of contextual factors in innovation studies. Second, case study methodology clearly requires prior consideration of the type of cases that will be scrutinized. Third, and that point 1 This article is based on the results of the WISDOM research project (Innovation sociale dans l'accompagnement à domicile en Wallonie) funded by the Walloon Region (DG06, Germaine Tillion program, 2014Tillion program, -2017 and coordinated by the authors. They would like to thank their colleagues and their partners for their active contribution to the project, the anonymous reviewers for their thoughtful comments on the paper and express their gratitude to Dr. Anna Safuta for her careful proofreading. 2 Our sampling procedure differs from the logic referred to in probabilistic methods. Sampling here refers to the process of identifying (i.e. casing), sorting out and then selecting a certain number of units of analysis for further research through in-depth case studies.Creative Commons 4.0 International © Sinnergiak, Some Rights Reserved

Unpacking the social innovation ecosystem: an empirically grounded typology of empowering network constellations

“…van der Have and Rubalcaba 2016; Amanatidou, Cox, and Gagliardi 2018). Moreover, this study has confronted the methodological challenges of operationalization and sampling that arise from this conceptual ambiguity (Bouchard et al 2015;Callorda Fossati, Degavre, and Nyssens 2017). Reaching beyond the fragmented evidence of exemplars, contrasting cases and "partial" typologies (Elman 2009), the empirical denotations of the SI ecosystems concept have been charted through a wider empirical variety.…”

Editorial: Background and Further Perspectives on Social Innovation in Social Enterprises

“…Social innovation then remained limited to what Laville (2014) and Nyssens (2015) call a "weak conception", in which solutions were proposed at the level of the enterprise, avoiding the prospect of sustainable institutional change through public policy as well as of substantive workplace policy improvement (Callorda Fossati, Degavre and Lévesque, 2018). This historical episode perfectly illustrates why Ayob, Teasdale and Fagan (2016) are speaking of an "essentially contested concept", as social innovation is subject to power relations and to "endless disputes" about its meaning (Callorda Fossati, Degavre and Nyssens, 2017).…”

Towards a theory of transformative social innovation: A relational framework and 12 propositions

“…First we have considered the pervasive single-case particularism in SI research, reaching beyond the reliance on evocative exemplars (Cf. Jaeger-Erben et al, 2015;Callorda Fossati et al, 2017). Especially transformation-oriented SI researchers have urged to look beyond the intricacies of single innovation journeys (Lévesque, 2016), and to systematically compare larger numbers of cases (Howaldt et al, 2016;McGowan and Westley, 2017).…”