The coordinates of scaling: Facilitating inclusive innovation

Abstract

The desire to ensure that the benefits of successful small‐scale social innovation are more widely available has led to a plethora of frameworks that seek to scale such innovations. We review 20 extant frameworks for scaling and distinguished four directions: up (producing changes in laws, policies, institutions or norms), down (resource allocation to support implementation), in (ensuring organizations have the capacity to deliver the type and number of good practices required) and out (geographically replicating or broadening the range or scope of good practices). In addition to these directions of scaling a generic pathway, or process, to achieve scaling is also discernible across many of the frameworks reviewed. This involves five phases: identifying, planning, implementing, learning and adapting. We stress the need for a more dynamic and systemic approach to scaling, as well as one which anticipates, addresses and assesses the extent to which scaling is inclusive of marginalized groups.

Prioritizing factors for effective strategy implementation in small and medium-size organizations

“…It is relevant to mention that a well-defined responsibility for each strategy actor allows each participant to be aware of what must be accomplished, when it must be done and the level of intensity required (Wang et al , 2022). Although loyalty has less weight, the degree of collaborators’ loyalty should not be understood in a positivist way but as the result of multiple organizational interactions that promote a high degree of sense of need and responsibility (Rodríguez et al , 2021).…”

“…In contrast, this factor obtained W = 0.132 in our model, translating into a support aspect for managers (Wong et al , 2019). Although agreement must be generated to successfully deploy the strategy, the design of the system structure must be more robust so that ESI can be achieved regardless of the individuals involved (Rodríguez et al , 2021).…”

“…In terms of interpersonal and managerial actions, studies about ESI have focused on addressing considerations such as leaders’ communication, behavior (Apraiz et al , 2021) and leadership style (Ma et al , 2022). Regarding commitment to ESI, special attention has been given to human capital management (Rodríguez et al , 2021), marketing and expertise in data analysis (Wibbens, 2021) as conditions for ESI. The perspective focused on human capital for implementation has considered the background of managers and financial skills to promote dynamic capacities for implementation (Jaiswal et al , 2021).…”

“…In this regard, Akhmedova et al (2020) combined mixed methods to explore the relationship between knowledge-based strategies focused on the combination of tacit-internal- and explicit-external-oriented strategies, determining that management efforts should be directed toward generating operational and structural synergies (Brorström, 2020; Weiser et al , 2020). Akhmedova et al (2020) and Rodríguez et al (2021) argued that it is essential to overcome the monopolization syndrome in which managers centralize activities as it restricts learning competitiveness (Zhang et al , 2021). According to Hoyer et al (2020), research on ESI has moved into the systemic domain, also determining that greater attention must be paid to methodological complementarity, and the adoption of control principles (Martinez-Lozada and Espinosa, 2022).…”

Scaling of Organisations of Persons with Disabilities: A Case Study in the People’s Democratic Republic of Lao

“…Organisations of Persons with Disabilities (OPDs) aim to implement and innovate good practices to fulfil the rights of persons with disabilities, and in so doing to promote their social inclusion. There are currently more than 20 different frameworks to guide scaling, which have recently been synthesised into an approach that is focused on social inclusion, and is therefore very relevant to challenges that face OPDs (Sánchez Rodríguez et al, 2020). Scaling often requires dissemination of ideas, transfer of methods, and improving the quality of interventions to increase the scale of impact (Binswanger & Aiyar, 2003;Hancock et al, 2003;Manor, 2007;Hartmann & Linn, 2008), and "doing it more reliably, more efficiently, and with a steady improvement in quality" (Seelos & Mair, 2016).…”