The Social Innovation Trap: Critical Insights into an Emerging Field

IF 14.3 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS Academy of Management Annals Pub Date : 2023-07-01 DOI:10.5465/annals.2021.0089
Christine M. Beckman, Jovanna Rosen, Jeimee Estrada-Miller, Gary D. Painter
{"title":"The Social Innovation Trap: Critical Insights into an Emerging Field","authors":"Christine M. Beckman, Jovanna Rosen, Jeimee Estrada-Miller, Gary D. Painter","doi":"10.5465/annals.2021.0089","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":": We present an integrative approach to social innovation research to build a unified understanding of this emerging field. Based on a systematic literature review of articles about social innovation published in top tier journals from 2003 to 2021, we argue that a social innovation trap, resulting from disciplinary silos, has limited our inquiries thus far. We contend that the social innovation trap has led the field to overlook three key insights. First, fragmentation across disciplines obscures the particular advantages of different sectors to social innovation. Second, the dominance of management within the social innovation field has led us to ignore the extent to which social innovation is embedded in space and place, which makes scale a fundamental dimension in need of exploration. Third, the management bent within social innovation scholarship has favored market perspectives and resisted more democratic approaches. We call attention to two competing schools of thought, the instrumental and democratic perspectives, that open the field to broader inquiries into the role of innovation, knowledge, participation, and outcomes in social innovation. We conclude by delineating a research agenda that incorporates these three insights, to build the foundation for a more comprehensive social innovation field.","PeriodicalId":48333,"journal":{"name":"Academy of Management Annals","volume":"60 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":14.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academy of Management Annals","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2021.0089","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

: We present an integrative approach to social innovation research to build a unified understanding of this emerging field. Based on a systematic literature review of articles about social innovation published in top tier journals from 2003 to 2021, we argue that a social innovation trap, resulting from disciplinary silos, has limited our inquiries thus far. We contend that the social innovation trap has led the field to overlook three key insights. First, fragmentation across disciplines obscures the particular advantages of different sectors to social innovation. Second, the dominance of management within the social innovation field has led us to ignore the extent to which social innovation is embedded in space and place, which makes scale a fundamental dimension in need of exploration. Third, the management bent within social innovation scholarship has favored market perspectives and resisted more democratic approaches. We call attention to two competing schools of thought, the instrumental and democratic perspectives, that open the field to broader inquiries into the role of innovation, knowledge, participation, and outcomes in social innovation. We conclude by delineating a research agenda that incorporates these three insights, to build the foundation for a more comprehensive social innovation field.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
社会创新陷阱:对新兴领域的批判性洞察
我们提出了一种综合的社会创新研究方法,以建立对这一新兴领域的统一理解。通过对2003年至2021年发表在顶级期刊上的关于社会创新的文章进行系统的文献回顾,我们认为,由学科孤岛造成的社会创新陷阱迄今为止限制了我们的研究。我们认为,社会创新陷阱导致该领域忽视了三个关键的见解。首先,跨学科的碎片化模糊了不同部门对社会创新的特殊优势。其次,管理在社会创新领域的主导地位导致我们忽视了社会创新在空间和地点上的嵌入程度,这使得规模成为一个需要探索的基本维度。第三,社会创新学术界的管理倾向倾向于市场观点,抵制更民主的方法。我们呼吁关注两种相互竞争的思想流派,即工具论和民主论,它们为更广泛地探讨创新、知识、参与和社会创新成果的作用开辟了领域。最后,我们描绘了一个包含这三个见解的研究议程,为更全面的社会创新领域奠定基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
36.00
自引率
1.40%
发文量
34
期刊介绍: The mission of the Academy of Management Annals (Annals) is to publish up-to-date, in-depth and integrative reviews of research advances in management. Often called "reviews with an attitude," Annals papers summarize and/or challenge established assumptions and concepts, pinpoint problems and factual errors, inspire discussions, and illuminate possible avenues for further study. Reviews published in Annals move above and beyond descriptions of the field–they motivate conceptual integration and set agendas for future research.
期刊最新文献
Categorizing Concepts and Phenomena in Management Research: A Four-Phase Integrative Review and Recommendations Standardization: Research Trends, Current Debates, and Interdisciplinarity Purpose in Management Research: Navigating a Complex and Fragmented Area of Study Heuristics in Organizations: Toward an Integrative Process Model Understanding How People React to Change: A Domain of Uncertainty Approach
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1