Managing stakeholders’ engagement in social innovation projects – learnings from the online world of open source innovation

Hristian Yuriev Daskalov

Abstract


Purpose of the article While failure rates remain a significant challenge for open source projects, there is a great opportunity for social innovation projects to learn from the online world when it comes to raising the levels of stakeholders’ engagement. With more than 15 million open source contributors worldwide, the purpose of the article is to draw from the learnings on how to engage contributors and appy those learnings to implement better, more efficient and effective solutions to social problems.

Methodology/methods Based on previous findings from the open source innovation body of knowledge, a directed qualitative analysis is used within the current research to analyze interviews with social innovation stakeholders in Latvia, and identify the set of applicable practices/elements/areas that are perceived to be of high importance to the successful engagement of key stakeholder groups when it comes to implementing social innovation projects.

Scientific aim By seeking to connect the findings from interviews with social innovation stakeholders in Latvia and the broader theoretical framework, concerting factors, perceived to influence engagement levels in open source innovation projects, the research aims to enable cros-polination of best practices and bridge the gap between the physical and online worlds of managing collaborative innovation.

Findings As a result of the directed qualitative content analysis, it was found that factors, perceived as leading to successful management of stakeholder engagement in open source innovation projects, are also considered to be of relevance in the case of social innovation. Based on this finding, a set of best practices from the open source world was suggested for implementation in the key areas identified – “Contextual awareness” and “Value-oriented communication and collaboration”.

Conclusions The research confirmed that the main set of factors for successful engagement of project stakeholders is not limited to a particular country, stakeholder or project group. A need for broader efforts in the area of cross-pollination of knowledge, originating from the digital and the physical worlds, was found to be of importance in the current case (and in general). Such cross-pollination is projected to play ever more important role in business and entrepreneurship development in the digital age, especially in the dawn of the 4th industrial revolution, characterized by the fusion of technologies that is blurring the lines between the physical and the digital.


Keywords


social innovation, open source innovation, open collaboration, stakeholder engagement, stakeholder management, critical success factors

Full Text:

PDF

References


Aksulu. A., Wade, M. (2010). A comprehensive review and synthesis of open source research. Journal of the Association for Information Systems /JAIS/, 11, Special Issue.

Bhatt, P., Ahmad, A., Azam, M. (2016). Social innovation with open source software: User engagement and development challenges in India. Technovation, 52-53. Doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2016.01.004

Caulier-Grice, J., Kahn, L., Mulgan, G., Vasconcelos D. (2010). Study on social innovation: The social innovation exchange (SIX) and the young foundation for the Bureau of European Policy Advisors. Retrieved from: http://youngfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Study-on-Social-Innovation-for-the-Bureau-of-European-Policy-Advisors-March-2010.pdf

Cicourel, A. (1982). Interviews, Surveys, and the Problem of Ecological Validity. The American Sociologist, 17(1).

Clark, J., Good, B., Simmonds, P. (2008). Innovation in the public and third sectors. NESTA Innovation Index Working Paper. Retrieved from: http://nesta.org.uk/sites/default/files/kcfinder/files/4.2.InnovationinthePublicandThirdSectors.pdf

Crowston, K., Annabi, H., Howison, J. (2003). Defining Open Source Software Project Success. Syracuse University.

Curtis, J. R., Wenrich, M. D., Carline, J. D., Shannon, S. E., Ambrozy, D. M., Ramsey, P. G. (2001). Under-standing physicians’ skills at providing end-of-life care: Perspectives of patients, families, and health care workers. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 16(1). Doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2001.00333.x

Dobele, L. (2015). Factors, which influence the development of social innovation in Latvia. In Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference “Economic science for rural development”.

Hiskey, G., Kipping, C. (1996). A multi-stage approach to the coding of data from open-ended questions. Nurse Researcher, 4(1), 81-91. Doi: 10.7748/nr.4.1.81.s9

Hsieh, H., Shannon, S. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277-1288. Doi: 10.1177/1049732305276687

Huddart, S. (2008). Open source, social innovation and a new economy of engagement. Technology Innovation Management Review. Retrieved from http://timreview.ca/article/184

Levine, S., Prietula, M. (2013). Open collaboration for innovation: Principles and performance. Organization Science, 25(5), 1414-1433. Doi: 10.1287/orsc.2013.0872

Martin, G. (2015). Anatomy of an open source project – Key success factors. Samsung Open Source Group.

Mattila, A.L., Mehtonen, T. (2013). Measuring open source software success & recognising success factors. University of Oulu.

Mulgan, G., Tucker, S., Ali, R., Sanders, B. (2006). Social innovation: what it is, why it matters and how it can be accelerated. London: The Young Foundation.

Oganisjana, K., Surikova, S., Laizans, T. (2015). Factors influencing social innovation processes in Latvia: Qualitative research perspective. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 3(2).

Oganisjana, K. (2016). Involvement of the society in social innovation for providing sustainable development of Latvia. Report on stage 2 and discussion of the objectives of stage 3. Faculty of Engineering Economics and Management, Riga Technical University.

Project Management Institute (PMI). (2013). A Guide to the Project Management Book of Knowledge (PMBoK). 5th ed. PMI.

Rockart, J. F. (1979). Chief executives define their own data needs. Harvard Business Review, 57(2).

Schwab, K. (2015). The Fourth Industrial Revolution: What It Means and How to Respond. Foreign Affairs. Retrieved from: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2015-12-12/fourth-industrial-revolution


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


FBM BUT KAUNAS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY NICOLAUS COPERNICUS UNIVERSITY OF TORUŃ RIGA TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY VILNIUS GEDIMINAS TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY FACULTY OF BUSINESS MANAGEMENT