پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 158 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 6,240 |
| تعداد مقالات | 67,872 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 115,484,522 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 90,259,084 |
مدل سنجش نوآوری اجتماعی در ایران | ||
| فصلنامه علمی پژوهشی توسعه کارآفرینی | ||
| دوره 16، شماره 5 (ویژه نامه) - شماره پیاپی 63، اسفند 1402، صفحه 252-271 اصل مقاله (1.26 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقالات پژوهشی- کیفی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/jed.2023.352601.654108 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| ایمان مستشارنظامی1؛ محسن نظری* 2؛ منوچهر انصاری3 | ||
| 1گروه مدیریت، دانشکده مدیریت، دانشگاه تهران، ایران | ||
| 2گروه مدیریت بازرگانی دانشگاه تهران ،تهران ،ایران/ استاد مدعو دانشگاه یورک کانادا | ||
| 3گروه مدیریت بازرگانی، دانشکده مدیریت، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران | ||
| چکیده | ||
| هدف: در سال‌های اخیر، نوآوری اجتماعی یکی از جذاب‌ترین موضوعات در ادبیات مدیریت بوده است. نیاز به نوآوری‌هایی که هدف آن‌ها حل مسائل اجتماعی بغرنج در شرایط بحران مالی جهانی و شیوع کرونا بیش از پیش دیده می‌شود، این مهم راهبردهای مرتبط با نوآوری را تغییر داده است. لذا، در تحقیق فعلی، ما قصد داریم یک مدل برای اندازه‌گیری نوآوری اجتماعی با توجه به ویژگی‌ها و عوامل مؤثر آن در ایران ارائه دهیم.. روش: ابتدا به صورت جامع ادبیات تحقیق مورد بررسی قرار گرفت تا حساسیت نظری مورد نیاز برای اجرای مراحل نظریه برپایه را بدست آوریم. سپس، نمونه‌گیری هدفمند از خبرگان برجسته در حوزه نوآوری اجتماعی انجام شد و مصاحبه‌های نیمه ساختار یافته با ایشان صورت گرفت و نظرات ایشان در رابطه با موضوع تحقیق روشن شد. مصاحبه‌ها ثبت شده و در نرم‌افزار MAXQDA2022 بارگذاری شدند. پس از جمع‌آوری داده‌ها، نسخه اشتراوس و کوربین نظریه برپایه برای ارائه مدل اندازه‌گیری نوآوری اجتماعی در ایران استفاده شد. در مرحله کدگذاری، از کدگذاری باز، محوری و انتخابی استفاده شد و کدها به زیرمقوله‌ها و مقوله‌ها مشخص شدند. یافته‌ها: یافته‌های مصاحبه‌های عمیق و نیمه ساختار یافته با ۱۴ کارشناس منجر به ایجاد مدلی با ۲۲ زیرمقوله و 6 مقوله اصلی شد . در مراحل مختلف فرایند ارزیابی تأثیر، آنچه در گفته‌های خبرگان بیشتر تکرار و تاکید شده بود، نیاز به هم‌آفرینی در فرآیند اندازه‌گیری اثر نوآوری اجتماعی با تمام ذینفعان، به ویژه جامعه بود. همچنین لزوم ایجاد معیارها و روش‌های قوی ارزیابی تأثیر مورد تاکید قرار گرفت. این دو پدیده "دسته مرکزی" تحقیق فعلی هستند. علاوه بر این، کدهای مرحله کدگذاری باز، در زیرمقوله‌های شرایط علی، محیط، شرایط مداخله‌گر، راهبردها و پیامدها طبقه‌بندی شدند نتیجه: عوامل مختلفی که در شکل‌گیری هم‌آفرینی و تکامل فرایند اندازه‌گیری اثر نوآوری‌اجتماعی اثر دارند معرفی شده و در پایان تأکید شده است که اندازه‌گیری نوآوری‌اجتماعی را باید با تمرکز بر تاثیر واقعی و کامل هدایت شود. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| نوآوری اجتماعی؛ مدل سنجش نتایج اجتماعی؛ اندازه‌گیری نتایج؛ جامعه قعر هرم؛ نظریه داده بنیاد | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| A Model for social innovation evaluation in Iran | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Iman Mostashar Nezami1؛ Mohsen Nazari2؛ Manouchehr Ansari,3 | ||
| 1Department of management, University of Tehran, Iran | ||
| 2Department of Business Management, Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Visiting Professor , York University ،Toronto ,Canada | ||
| 3Department of Business Management, Faculty of Management, University of Tehran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Objective: In recent years, social innovation has been one of the most appealing subjects in management Literature. Social innovation has begun to pick up steam. The need for innovations aiming to solve wicked social problems under financial hardships and pandemics has modulated the shape of innovation initiatives. The call for a sustained impact with enduring effects on society has prompted international organizations and several scholars to conduct research and explore best practices in the impact assessment of social innovation. Hence, in the current research, we aim to provide a model for measuring social innovation regarding its characteristics and affecting factors in Iran. Method: We thoroughly reviewed the literature to decipher the impact evaluation of social innovation and acquire the theoretical sensitivity for the grounded theory. Next, purposive sampling was applied to represent preeminent academics and professionals in social innovation. Subsequently, semi-structured interviews were carried out with the participants, casting light on their insights and comprehension of the phenomena. All interviews were documented and uploaded to the MAXQDA2022 software. After data collection, Strauss’s and Corbin’s versions of the grounded theory was employed to provide the model for measuring social innovation in Iran. In the coding step, we utilized open, axial, and selective coding, respectively, to classify codes into sub-categories and categories, all of which resulted in the impact evaluation of the social innovation theoretical concept. Results: Findings of the in-depth and semi-structured interviews with 14 experts yielded a model with 22 factors. In different steps of the impact evaluation process, the recurring theme of the interviews was a sense among interviewees requiring the co-creation with all beneficiaries, in particular, the society where the social innovation is implemented. Also, it is imperative to acquire robust impact evaluation metrics and methods for the interviewees' arguments. These two phenomena are the “core category” of the current research. Moreover, categories of the open coding phase were classified as the axial coding phase under the causal conditions, context, intervening conditions, strategies, and consequences. Conclusion: Various factors affecting co-creation formation and the evolution of the measurement process of social innovation effectiveness have been represented. It was emphasized that the measurement of social innovation impact should be performed based on the real impact. Different parts of the model and the impact measurement in different social innovation stages (Figures 1 and 2) suggest that before commencing the work, a specific definition for social innovation and its activities should be determined. Also, it should be checked whether the activity has an opinion on the social innovation definition or not. As aforementioned, in the evaluation process, independent evaluators are of paramount importance to evaluate the work. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| social innovation, impact evaluation, social impact measurements, grounded theory | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Akinboade, O. O. A., Taft, T., & Weber, J. F. (2023). How the social entrepreneurship business model designs in South Africa create value: a complex adaptive systems approach. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, 15(1), 70-95. doi.org/10.1108/JEEE-02-2021-0057 Alharbi, A., Cantarelli, C., & Brint, A. (2022). Crowd Models for Last Mile Delivery in an Emerging Economy . Sustainability, 14(3), 20-28. doi.org/10.3390/su14031401 Bhardwaj, R., Srivastava, S., Bindra, S., & Sangwan, S. (2023). An ecosystem view of social entrepreneurship through the perspective of systems thinking. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 40(1), 250-265. doi.org/10.1002/sres.2835 Bund, E., Gerhard, U., Hoelscher, M., & Mildenberger, G. (2015). A methodological framework for measuring social innovation. Historical Social Research/Historische Sozialforschung, 48-78. Doi:10.12759/hsr.40.2015.3 Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2014). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory: Sage publications. Cunha, J., Alves, W., & Araújo, M. (2022). Challenges of impact measurement in social innovation: Barriers and interventions to overcome. RAM. Revista de Administração Mackenzie, 23(6), 1-32. Doi:10.1590/1678-6971/eRAMD220077.en Ebrahim, A., Battilana, J., & Mair, J. (2014). The governance of social enterprises. Research in organizational behavior, 34, 81-100. Doi :10.1016/j.riob.2014.09.001 Edwards-Schachter, M., & Wallace, M. L. (2017). ‘Shaken, but not stirred’. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 119, 64-79 .Doi :10.1016/j.techfore.2017.03.012 Farasatkhah, M. (2016). Qualitative research method in social sciences with emphasis on "grounded theory. Tehran: Agah. (In Persian) Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In Handbook of qualitative research. (pp. 105-117). Sage Publications, Inc. Gujarati, A., Karimi, R., Alzayat, S., Hao, W., Kaufmann, A., Vigfusson, Y., & Mace, J. (2020). Serving DNNs like clockwork: Performance predictability from the bottom up. In 14th USENIX Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI 20), 443-462. Howaldt, J., & Schwarz, M. (2021). Social innovation and social change. In A Research Agenda for Social Innovation, Edward Elgar Publishing. Huang, Y., Huang, B., Song, J., Xu, X., Chen, X., Zhang, Z., & Xue, B. (2021). Social impact assessment of photovoltaic poverty alleviation program in China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 290, 125-142. Doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125208 Karimi, t., Karimi, a., Sadabadi, A. A., & Ramezani, s. (2020). A framework for social innovation evaluation at macro level. Journal of Entrepreneurship Development, 13(1), 61-79. Doi: 10.22059/jed.2020.290947.653159 (In Persian) Keshtkar Haranaki, M. (2017). Designing the Strategic Model of Social Innovation in the Islamic Republic of Iran with Structural Equation Modeling Approach. Journal of Entrepreneurship Development, 9(4), 671-690. Doi: 10.22059/jed.2017.61550 (In Persian) Krasnopolskaya, I., & Korneeva, I. (2020). Social innovation measurement: a room for quantitative metrics. International Review of Applied Economics, 34(5), 567-587. Doi: 10.1080/02692171.2020.1776686 Kumari, R., Kwon, K.-S., Lee, B.-H., & Choi, K. (2019). Co-Creation for Social Innovation in the Ecosystem Context: The Role of Higher Educational Institutions. Sustainability, 12(1), 307-311. Doi: 10.3390/su12010307 Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel psychology, 28(4), 563-575. Doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x Leal, W., Fritzen, B., Vargas, V. R., Paco, A., Zhang, Q., Doni (2022). Social innovation for sustainable development. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, 29(4), 311-322. Doi: 10.1080/13504509.2021.2013974 Lukesch, R., Ludvig, A., Slee, B., Weiss, G., & Živojinović, I. (2020). Social innovation, societal change, and the role of policies. Sustainability, 12(18), 74-82. Doi: 10.3390/su12187407 Mihci, H. (2020). Is measuring social innovation a mission impossible? Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 33(3), 337-367. Doi: 10.1080/13511610.2019.1705149 Mobin Dehkordi, A., & Keshtkar Haranki, M. (2015). Social Innovation: An Exploration of Conceptualization Based on the Content Analysis of Definitions. Innovation Management Journal, 4(2), 115-134. (In Persian) Mobin Dehkordi, A., & Keshtkar Haranaki, M. (2016). Transformation of social innovation models. Social Development and Welfare Planning, 8(26), 101-138. (In Persian) Molecke, G., & Pache, A.-C. (2019). How do we know when social innovation works. In: Handbook of Inclusive Innovation, 83-105. Mulgan, G., Tucker, S., Ali, R., & Sanders, B. Social Innovation: what it is, why it matters, how it can be accelerated. London: University of Oxford, Young Foundation. 2007. Narasimhalu, A. D. (2011). Agile Innovation Management. International Society for Professional Innovation Management Innovation Symposium, Wellington, New Zealand, 29 November - 2 December 2011. Research Collection School Of Computing and Information Systems.Available at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sis_research/1463 Nazari, M., Mostashar Nezami, I., & Zargar, Z. H. E. (2022). The journey from Corporate Social Responsibility to Corporate Social Innovation. Technium Business and Management, 2(2), 27-39. Doi: 10.47577/business.v2i2.6539 Novikova, Marina. 2022. Social Innovation Impacts and Their Assessment: An Exploratory Study of a Social Innovation Initiative from a Portuguese Rural Region. Social Sciences 11(3), 122-145. Doi: 10.3390/socsci11030122 Pedrini, M., Molteni, M. M., Ciambotti, G. (eds.), Enabling the change! Social innovation and enterprisesfor a better future. Proceedings of the13th International Social Innovation Research Conference, EGEA, Milano 2022, 526-570. https://hdl.handle.net/10807/222513 Phills Jr., J. A., Deiglmeier, K., & Miller, D. T. (2008). Rediscovering Social Innovation. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 6(4), 34–43. Doi: 10.48558/GBJY-GJ47 Pisano, U., Lange, L., & Berger, G. (2015). Social innovation in Europe : an overview of the concept of social innovation in the context of European initiatives and practices, ESDN Quarterly Report 36(1) Vienna, European Sustainable Development Network. Rahimian, H., Ahmadpour Dariani, M., Abbaspour, A., & A’lami, F. (2013). Identifying Causal Factors of Forming Social Entrepreneurship Behavior in Iran. Journal of Entrepreneurship Development, 6(1), 185-202. Doi: 10.22059/jed.2013.36256 (In Persian) Repo, P., & Matschoss, K. (2019). Social innovation for sustainability challenges. Sustainability, 12(1), 319-341. Doi: 10.3390/su12010319 Sadabadi, A. A. (2021). Explain the logical analysis of social innovation. Journal of Innovation and Creativity in Human Science, 11(1), 67-104. (In Persian) Sadabadi, A. A., Ramezani, S., Karimi, T., & Karimi, A. (2020). Designing a social innovation evaluation framework for universities. Management inThe Islamic University, 9(2), 275-294. Doi: 10.22034/miu.2021.983 (In Persian) Sadabadi, A. A., Ramezani, S., & Fartash, K. (2019). Investigating the Social Innovation Evaluation model and providing a framework through exploration of multi-vocal literature. Quarterly journal of Industrial Technology Development, 17(38), 25-36. Doi: 20.1001.1.26765403.1398.17.38.3.0 (In Persian) Schmidpeter, R. (2013). Social innovation: A new concept for a sustainable future?. In Social innovation: Solutions for a sustainable future (pp. 1-9). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-36540-9 Unceta, A., Castro-Spila, J., & Fronti, J. G. (2016). Social innovation indicators . Innovation-the European Journal of Social Science Research, 29(2), 192-204. Doi: 10.1080/13511610.2015.1127137 Unceta, A., Luna, Á., Castro, J., & Wintjes, R. (2020). Social Innovation Regime: an integrated approach to measure social innovation. European Planning Studies, 28(5), 906-924. Doi: 10.1080/09654313.2019.1578338 Voorberg, W. H., Bekkers, V. J., & Tummers, L. G. (2015). A systematic review of co-creation and co-production: Embarking on the social innovation journey. Public Management Review, 17(9), 1333-1357. Doi: 10.1080/14719037.2014.930505 | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 1,948 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 233 |
||