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":null,"pages":null},"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.
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.