Towards Advancing Understanding of Social Innovation Professor Anne de Bruin Director

1. Towards Advancing Understanding of Social Innovation Professor Anne de Bruin Director New Zealand Social Innovation and Entrepreneurship Research Centre (SIERC) http://sierc.massey.ac.nz/ Professor of Economics Massey University, New Zealand Presentation to Challenge Social Innovation 19 - 21 September 2011 Vienna, Austria

2. Summary Seeks to advance social innovation (SI) on 2 fronts through: • Discussion of New Zealand insights • Historical and contemporary experience ofSI • Roleandactivitiesofthe New ZealandSocial Innovation andEntrepreneurship Research Centre (SIERC) Premises: Buildingthe community of like-minded scholars and other interested stakeholders is vital and Dissemination ofcountry-basedsocialinnovationinsightsareinvaluable, togrowingthefieldofsocialinnovation. • Discussion on themacro-microdichotomousstrandsoftheSI discourseandhowthemacro-microdividemightbebridged

3. New Zealand Context • Long tradition and image of a pioneering 'social laboratory’ e.g. 1893 women’s right to vote (other leading democracies after WW1) • Contemporary SI e.g. Maori restorative justice • Yet SI rarelyfeatures in researchandpolicy • Emphasis on innovation in science & technology • Drasticchange in focustoincludesocialinnovationislongoverdue • Socialscienceresearchcanplay a criticalrole in re-focus

4. New ZealandSocial Innovation andEntrepreneurship Research Centre (SIERC) • Recent rise in institutes, consultancies (Howaldt And Schwartz 2010) • SIERC among latest – latter half of 2010 Massey University • Only academic research centre in NZ devoted to the area • Mission: ‘To be a centre of research excellence dedicated to advancing SI and entrepreneurship in New Zealand and internationally’ • Objectives: include more NZ specific foci: ‘To become the pre-eminent research centre and knowledge hub for SI and entrepreneurship in NZ; In association with Government - central, regional and local; professional, business and community groups, to contribute toward SI in New Zealand.’ Other objectives: emphasisethe role of research collaborations and partnerships in building SI knowledge • Interdisciplinary research is a core value. • Research associates and external research affiliates of the Centre from across the Social Science and Humanities disciplines • Research associates – Massey University • Research affiliates widen the research capability

5. SIERC Initiatives Designed to disseminate and grow knowledge • 2011 ‘Massey University Albany Campus Innovation Lecture Series’ is in association with the Centre. • SIERC’s Director Anne de Bruin and external affiliate Eleanor Shaw are co-editing a Special Issue of the International Small Business Journal on the theme ‘Social Innovation and Social Entrepreneurship: Extending Theory, Integrating Practice’ with the Call for Papers now open. • An inaugural Social Innovation and Entrepreneurship Conference will be held from 1- 3 December 2011 at Massey University's Albany Campus.

6. SIERC Research: Successfactorsofsocialinnovation in New Zealand • Effective leadership - leadershipstyle andinfluencesvary • Measurement difficulties - lack of measures to quantify more important, but less tangibly measurable goals • Faith-basedorganisations- adaptingtonewneeds in communitiesandsociety in innovative ways • Renewalofexistingideas in different contextsandfor different purposes e.g. youthcouncils • Civicentrepreneurship (Goldsmith 2010) – catalyse SI by buildingpartnershipsandnavigatingthechoppyseasofbureaucracy

7. Social Science Researchers • Act as (modified) Gramscian ‘organic intellectuals’ ‘Every social group, coming into existence on the original terrain of an essential function in the world of economic production creates together with itself, organically, one or more strata of intellectuals which give it homogeneity and an awareness of its own function not only in the economic but also in the social and political fields’ (Gramsci 1971 transl: 5). • Academics mindful of their ‘critic and conscience of society’ responsibilities which is a statutory obligation for NZ universities • Play a crucial role in advancing SI theory and practice • Must work not as leaders but in partnership with other stakeholders to support social innovation and social and environmental change movements (albeit research leaders). • Researchers in the field of SI have a ‘responsible reciprocity’ and higher obligations • Their interdisciplinary study and advocacy of social innovation can supplement and complement the current mainstream technical innovation perspective to provide a holistic and inclusive innovation paradigm.

8. Dichotomous Discourses • Macro - dramatic change in the processes and structure of innovation, new era of multiple actors, corporate SI, call for recognition of a new innovation paradigm Discourse on the nature of innovation in general, and the role and importance of social innovation is a more overarching one. • Micro – SI isembeddedratherthan a dedicatedstrandofthisgeneralsocialentrepreneurshipdiscussionandislinkedtoinnovationsbysocialentrepreneurs. Neither consensus on the meaning of the term social entrepreneurship nor the boundaries of the field

9. Bridge: Common Definitional Threads? SI Definitions • Novel social practices (Howaldt and Schwartz 2010) • New ideas to meet social needs (Mulgan et al 2007) • Novel solution to a social problem (Phills, Dieglmeire and Miller 2008) Absence of definitional consensus not unexpected for a new field of study and given the complexity of social innovation

10. Social Entrepreneurship (SE) • Opportunity – entrepreneurship consensus • An opportunity based definition of Social Entrepreneurship: ‘Social entrepreneurship encompasses the activities and processes undertaken to discover, define, and exploit opportunities in order to enhance social wealth by creating new ventures or managing existing organizations in an innovative manner’ (Zahra et al. 2008: 118).

11. Connecting SI & SE definitional strands • Opportunity discovery and development process, may be conceived in terms of finding and developing solutions to problems (Shane 2003; Nickerson and Zenger 2004; Hsieh et al. 2007; de Bruin and Ferrante 2011). • Aligning with Zahra et al. definition of SE and Phills, Dieglmeire and Miller definition of SI  problem-solution perspective therefore provides a bridge

12. Thoughts • Interpretative social problem-solution framework can be useful for framing research questions • Different solution paths – path-breaking, radical; incremental and path-dependent • Social problems: at different levels -Local, regional, national, global • Interconnections • Scaling potential

13. Comment • Research groupings and centresthroughtheiractivitiescanbuildanddisseminateknowledge in thefieldand bring togetherlike-mindedscholarsandotherstakeholdersto catalyse the awareness and ‘preparedness of society to adopt new solutions for needs and challenges” (Hochgerner 2010). • A critical mass of like-minded researchers and protagonists of SI are needed to change the lopsided perspective on innovation, which unduly emphasises technical innovation, to a holistic and inclusive standpoint on innovation.

14. Thank you for listening