IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/jecman/v39y2020i1p149-167n1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The concept of a civic technology tool for empowering social innovations

Author

Listed:
  • Szewczuk-Stępień Marzena

    (Faculty of Economics and Management, Opole University of Technology)

  • Jurczyk-Bunkowska Magdalena

    (Faculty of Economics and Management, Opole University of Technology)

Abstract

Aim/purpose – The main objective of this study is to present a concept of an IT tool supporting management of a social innovation process. Design/methodology/approach – The concept was preceded by an analysis of more than 30 leading internet platforms supporting innovation processes. Findings – As a result of the review of the literature and the analysis of internet platforms supporting innovation processes the assumptions of IT tool have been defined. The idea of building the civic technology tool to increase participation in creating a new solution has emerged. Each stage of social innovation development is characterised by individual requirements, it coincides with the participation of different stakeholders. The IT tool concepts which have been proposed include the specification of the social innovation process and show the frame for knowledge collection during the process of new social solution development. Research implications/limitations – The concept of IT tool is a starting point for further research into the issue of using crowd knowledge to empower the cycle of social innovation development. Originality/value/contribution – The scope of this paper fills in the research gap that exists in area of supporting the social innovation processes by IT tools. The proposed concept should be the basis for further work in the use of civic technology in the cycle of social innovation development. In particular, the area of citizens’ participation, e.g. creating the methods and procedures of knowledge acquisition and assessment.

Suggested Citation

  • Szewczuk-Stępień Marzena & Jurczyk-Bunkowska Magdalena, 2020. "The concept of a civic technology tool for empowering social innovations," Journal of Economics and Management, Sciendo, vol. 39(1), pages 149-167, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:vrs:jecman:v:39:y:2020:i:1:p:149-167:n:1
    DOI: 10.22367/jem.2020.39.08
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.22367/jem.2020.39.08
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22367/jem.2020.39.08?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tomlinson, Philip R., 2010. "Co-operative ties and innovation: Some new evidence for UK manufacturing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 762-775, July.
    2. Hans Rawhouser & Michael Cummings & Scott L. Newbert, 2019. "Social Impact Measurement: Current Approaches and Future Directions for Social Entrepreneurship Research," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 43(1), pages 82-115, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hana Kim & Eungdo Kim, 2018. "How an Open Innovation Strategy for Commercialization Affects the Firm Performance of Korean Healthcare IT SMEs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-14, July.
    2. Irene Bengo & Leonardo Boni & Alessandro Sancino, 2022. "EU financial regulations and social impact measurement practices: A comprehensive framework on finance for sustainable development," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(4), pages 809-819, July.
    3. Le Roy, Frédéric & Robert, Frank & Hamouti, Rizlane, 2022. "Vertical vs horizontal coopetition and the market performance of product innovation: An empirical study of the video game industry," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    4. van Criekingen, Kristof & Freel, Mark & Czarnitzki, Dirk, 2021. "Open innovation deficiency: Evidence on project abandonment and delay," ZEW Discussion Papers 21-006, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    5. A. Lasagni, 2011. "European SMEs, external relationships and innovation: some empirical evidence," Economics Department Working Papers 2011-EP04, Department of Economics, Parma University (Italy).
    6. Audretsch, David & Colombelli, Alessandra & Grilli, Luca & Minola, Tommaso & Rasmussen, Einar, 2020. "Innovative start-ups and policy initiatives," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(10).
    7. Portocarrero, Florencio & Newbert, Scott & Young, Maia & Zhu, Lily, 2025. "The affective revolution in entrepreneurship: an integrative conceptual review and guidelines for future investigation," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 126090, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Andræs Barge-Gil, 2013. "Open Strategies and Innovation Performance," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(7), pages 585-610, October.
    9. Othmar Manfred Lehner & Alex Nicholls & Sarah Beatrice Kapplmüller, 2022. "Arenas of Contestation: A Senian Social Justice Perspective on the Nature of Materiality in Impact Measurement," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 179(4), pages 971-989, September.
    10. Alexandra Braga & Carla Susana Marques & Zélia Serrasqueiro, 2018. "Internationalisation Strategy of Knowledge-Intensive Business Services," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 9(2), pages 359-377, June.
    11. Muhammad Nouman & Mohammad Sohail Yunis & Muhammad Atiq & Owais Mufti & Abdul Qadus, 2022. "‘The Forgotten Sector’: An Integrative Framework for Future Research on Low- and Medium-Technology Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-19, March.
    12. Lucas, Sterenn & Soler, Louis-Georges & Rouvin, Etienne, 2020. "Success factors of innovations," Working Papers 302471, Institut National de la recherche Agronomique (INRA), Departement Sciences Sociales, Agriculture et Alimentation, Espace et Environnement (SAE2).
    13. Jin Byungchae, 2020. "The Practical Intelligence of Social Entrepreneurs: Managing the Hybridity of Social Enterprises," Entrepreneurship Research Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-19, January.
    14. Annebeth Roor & Karen Maas, 2024. "Do impact investors live up to their promise? A systematic literature review on (im)proving investments' impacts," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(4), pages 3707-3732, May.
    15. Per Davidsson, 2023. "Ditching Discovery-Creation for Unified Venture Creation Research," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 47(2), pages 594-612, March.
    16. Guillaume Dumont, 2024. "Evaluating the Credibility of Entrepreneurs’ Impact Promises in Early-Stage Impact Investing," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 48(6), pages 1525-1555, November.
    17. Cheng, Colin C.J. & Shiu, Eric C., 2022. "A two-level, longitudinal investigation into the effects of employee social entrepreneurship orientation and top management team decisions on product innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    18. Singaram, Raja & Radu-Lefebvre, Miruna & Gartner, William B., 2023. "Gordian knot uncut: Understanding the problem of founder exit in social ventures," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 19(C).
    19. Khalid, Shazmin & Dixon, Shrijna & Vijayasingham, Lavanya, 2022. "The gender responsiveness of social entrepreneurship in health – A review of initiatives by Ashoka fellows," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 293(C).
    20. Giuliano Sansone & Daniele Battaglia & Paolo Landoni & Emilio Paolucci, 2021. "Academic spinoffs: the role of entrepreneurship education," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 369-399, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    civic technology; Web 2.0 platform; social innovations; participatory model; crowdsourcing;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L31 - Industrial Organization - - Nonprofit Organizations and Public Enterprise - - - Nonprofit Institutions; NGOs; Social Entrepreneurship
    • M15 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - IT Management
    • R11 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Regional Economic Activity: Growth, Development, Environmental Issues, and Changes

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:vrs:jecman:v:39:y:2020:i:1:p:149-167:n:1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.