On the evaluation of social innovations and social enterprises: Recognizing and integrating two solitudes in the empirical knowledge base

Szijarto, Barbara; Milley, Peter; Svensson, Kate; Cousins, J. Bradley

doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2017.08.010

Cited by 27 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Tanimoto, 2012), so the mapping process should also be concerned about being aware of the unknown potential of partnerships (Raynor, 2019). To avoid problems generated by different organizational cultures, it is recommended a pre-determination of how the value created by the SI will be shared (Slimane and Lamine, 2017;Voltan and De Fuentes, 2016), a collectively definition of the "social" component of SI (what and how social needs will be met) (Dufays, 2019) and engagement with a long-term evaluation initiative to establish strong partnerships, with sense of shared property and a SI evaluation adapted to the needs of different groups as they became better understood (Szijarto et al, 2018 Finally, specific networks of social entrepreneurs and innovation can offer better support to the creative process than the traditional networks (Zivojinovic et al, 2019), where the ideas of social innovators could be misunderstood or even ridiculed (Lettice and Parekh, 2010). In this regard, Svensson and Hambrick (2019) identified that through in loco visits (5 to 10 days) or virtual learning community, the leaders of social sports organizations, shared parts of curriculums, training methodology, impact measurement and tools among them, which promoted collective learning.…”

Section: An Integrated Framework Of Social Innovation Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Another recommendation is the use of continuous participative evaluation methods and reflective sessions to create "neutral" places to build trust and comprehension through dialogue and critical thinking (Szijarto et al, 2018).…”

Section: An Integrated Framework Of Social Innovation Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Evaluation is a fertile field of study as it requires the development of innovative, flexible and creative approaches in order to help social innovators meet the challenges they face (Szijarto et al, 2018). Geobey et al (2012) point out that although SI funding agents demand methodologies that balance the social risk and uncertainty in ways to attract capital allocation by different stakeholders, research in this field is still incipient.…”

Section: Frequency Of the Different Drivers Of Social Innovation In Smentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Social innovation drivers in social enterprises: systematic review

João-Roland

Granados

2020

JSBED

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeIdentify the drivers of social innovation (SI) that bring together the main management tools and approaches associated with the creation of SI in social enterprises (SEs).Design/methodology/approachA systematic review was developed in the Web of Science, Scopus and EBSCO databases, using the keywords: social innovation, social enterprise and management. After analysis of quality and application of inclusion and exclusion criteria, 54 articles were selected for full analysis.FindingsSI process was systemised into four steps: mapping and development, consolidation, scaling up and evaluation. The drivers of SI were mapped and classified into three main factors: contextual, organisational and managerial.Practical implicationsIn organisational factors, business model was emphasised, as well as partnerships, participatory culture and intrapreneurship, adequate levels of bricolage and continuous learning. The management factors included the characteristics of the entrepreneur/innovator and managerial practices, where those that facilitate teamwork and the participation of all involved are best suited. In contextual factors, the highlight was the need for support from policy makers; community participation and demand for innovations that consider local context and usability.Originality/valueThis study connects previously scattered knowledge in a generic model of SI, highlighting routines and processes used, and provides a starting point for innovators and social entrepreneurs in the complex, uncertain and often unknown process of SI. Additionally, several research gaps were identified to be addressed by future research in the context of SI management.

show abstract

Section: An Integrated Framework Of Social Innovation Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: An Integrated Framework Of Social Innovation Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Frequency Of the Different Drivers Of Social Innovation In Smentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Social innovation drivers in social enterprises: systematic review

João-Roland

Granados

2020

JSBED

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our analysis suggested that the SE studies constituted a distinct subgroup with differences in terms of stakeholder interests, evaluation objectives, theoretical background and study methodologies used. These studies were sufficiently distinct as to warrant separate in-depth analysis (see Szijarto, Svensson, Milley et al, 2018). We thus focused this article on the 28 non-SE studies, to which we continue to refer as SI.…”

Section: Sample Refinement and Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The evaluation of social innovation: A review and integration of the current empirical knowledge base

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social innovation has gained prominence as a way to address social problems and needs. Evaluators and social innovators are conceptualizing and implementing evaluation approaches for social innovation contexts; however, no systematic effort has yet been made to explore and assess the overlap between evaluation and social innovation based on the empirical knowledge base. We address this gap, drawing on 28 empirical studies of evaluation in social innovation contexts to describe what evaluation practices look like, what drives those practices, and how they affect social innovations. Findings indicate most had developmental purposes, emphasized collaborative approaches, and used multiple methods. Prominent drivers were a complexity perspective, a learning-oriented focus, and the need for responsiveness. Reported influences on social innovations included advancing strategies, improving delivery, balancing aggregate and local information needs, and reducing risk. Conflict resolution, the quality of relationships, and availability of time and capacity mediated these influences. More peer-reviewed empirical studies and a broader range of study designs are needed, including research on how evaluations influence social innovation processes over time, phases, space and scale.

show abstract

“…The advantages and disadvantages of integrating machine-building enterprises should be considered similarly to the main concepts used by firms -technological, institutional, and strategic [8][9][10][11].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integration Processes In Russia Engineering: Condition For Business Continuity

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article discusses the nature and main approaches to the integration of enterprises and organizations of mechanical engineering, introduces the concepts of «business continuity» and «business continuity management», offers recommendations for the implementation of a business continuity management procedure in mechanical engineering enterprises. According to the authors, integration refers to the process of strengthening production relations and economic relations, the organizational and economic merging of several components (components, parts) into a single whole, acquiring a higher quality than the arithmetic addition of parts. The limits of the integration processes of the organization are analyzed according to the three possible modern concepts of the company. The evolution and main stages of the integration processes in the engineering industry of Russia for the period from 1991 to the present are analyzed in the article. The current state of the level of integration in the engineering industry of Russia is also given. The assumption about the direct correlation between business continuity and the degree of integration in the engineering industry of Russia is formulated. The prospects for the further development of the integration of industrial enterprises in Russia are evaluated.

show abstract

On the evaluation of social innovations and social enterprises: Recognizing and integrating two solitudes in the empirical knowledge base

Cited by 27 publications

References 44 publications

Social innovation drivers in social enterprises: systematic review

Social innovation drivers in social enterprises: systematic review

The evaluation of social innovation: A review and integration of the current empirical knowledge base

Integration Processes In Russia Engineering: Condition For Business Continuity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About