dc.contributorSCARINGELLA, Laurent
dc.creatorLenis Salcedo, Steffany
dc.date.accessioned2020-05-31T20:46:55Z
dc.date.accessioned2022-09-22T15:19:19Z
dc.date.available2020-05-31T20:46:55Z
dc.date.available2022-09-22T15:19:19Z
dc.date.created2020-05-31T20:46:55Z
dc.identifierhttps://repository.urosario.edu.co/handle/10336/24445
dc.identifier.urihttp://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/3446689
dc.description.abstractSocial problems have always shown a challenge to solve; certain with more urgency than others. However, although there are currently new tools and opportunities to solve them, a more holistic view of these problems is still needed to arrive at a more effective and efficient solution. A relatively new phenomenon within the academy is focused on the study of diverse ecosystems and their behaviors. Following this logic, through collaboration and human networks, all the actors within an ecosystem are empowered and thus participate in the search for a solution. Social innovation ecosystems are a comprehensive tool that helps to understand not only the interactions between all the actors involved, but also the complexity inherent in any innovation ecosystem. Furthermore, social entrepreneurship companies such as Ashoka, show the role of organizations within the Social Innovation Ecosystem and how they can participate in solving these social problems; notwithstanding, in this work it is highlighted that the roles of traditional companies or companies with other approaches are also fundamental for the success of the ecosystem. It is highly important to understand the institutional context and how it can affect complex networks that ultimately affect the success of the ecosystem. Additionally, due to the complexity of these social issues, it is also important to highlight and consider the institutional differences in each country that help all the actors involved and policy makers to implement effective and place-based solutions.
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherUniversidad del Rosario
dc.publisherAdministración de Negocios Internacionales
dc.publisherFacultad de administración
dc.rightshttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/co/
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rightsAbierto (Texto Completo)
dc.rightsEL AUTOR, manifiesta que la obra objeto de la presente autorización es original y la realizó sin violar o usurpar derechos de autor de terceros, por lo tanto la obra es de exclusiva autoría y tiene la titularidad sobre la misma. PARGRAFO: En caso de presentarse cualquier reclamación o acción por parte de un tercero en cuanto a los derechos de autor sobre la obra en cuestión, EL AUTOR, asumirá toda la responsabilidad, y saldrá en defensa de los derechos aquí autorizados; para todos los efectos la universidad actúa como un tercero de buena fe. EL AUTOR, autoriza a LA UNIVERSIDAD DEL ROSARIO, para que en los términos establecidos en la Ley 23 de 1982, Ley 44 de 1993, Decisión andina 351 de 1993, Decreto 460 de 1995 y demás normas generales sobre la materia, utilice y use la obra objeto de la presente autorización. -------------------------------------- POLITICA DE TRATAMIENTO DE DATOS PERSONALES. Declaro que autorizo previa y de forma informada el tratamiento de mis datos personales por parte de LA UNIVERSIDAD DEL ROSARIO para fines académicos y en aplicación de convenios con terceros o servicios conexos con actividades propias de la academia, con estricto cumplimiento de los principios de ley. Para el correcto ejercicio de mi derecho de habeas data cuento con la cuenta de correo habeasdata@urosario.edu.co, donde previa identificación podré solicitar la consulta, corrección y supresión de mis datos.
dc.rightsAtribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 2.5 Colombia
dc.sourceAdner, R. (2017) ‘Ecosystem as structure: an actionable construct for strategy’, Journal of Management, 43(1), pp. 39–58.
dc.sourceAdner, R. and Kapoor, R. (2010) ‘Value creation in innovation ecosystems: how the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations’, Strategic Management Journal, 31(3), pp. 306–333.
dc.sourceAvelino, F. et al. (2017) ‘Transformative social innovation and (dis)empowerment’, Technological Forecasting and Social Change. Elsevier, (May 2015), pp. 1–12. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.05.002.
dc.sourceCajaiba-santana, G. (2014) ‘Technological Forecasting & Social Change Social innovation : Moving the fi eld forward . A conceptual framework’, Technological Forecasting & Social Change. Elsevier B.V., 82, pp. 42–51. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2013.05.008.
dc.sourceChesbrough, H. . and Bogers, M. (2014) ‘Explicating open innovation: clarifying an emerging paradigm for understanding innovation.’, in Press, O. U. (ed.) New Frontiers in Open Innovation, pp. 3–28.
dc.sourceCourpasson, D., Dany, F. and Delbridge, R. (2017) ‘Politics of space: The meaningfulness of resisting places.’, Human Relations, 70, pp. 237–259.
dc.sourceDedehayir, O., Mäkinen, S. J. and Roland Ortt, J. (2016) ‘Roles during innovation ecosystem genesis: A literature review’, Technological Forecasting and Social Change. Elsevier Inc., 136, pp. 18–29. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2016.11.028.
dc.sourceDorado, S. (2005) ‘Institutional entrepreneurship, partaking, and convening.’, Organization Studies, 26, pp. 385–414.
dc.sourceDrucker, P. . (1993) Post-capitalist society. Butterwort.
dc.sourceEdwards-Schachter, M. and Wallace, M. L. (2017) ‘“Shaken, but not stirred”: Sixty years of defining social innovation’, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 119, pp. 64–79. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.03.012.
dc.sourceGarud, R. et al. (2013) ‘Perspectives on Innovation Processes’, The academy of Management Annals, 7(1), pp. 773–817. doi: 10.1080/19416520.2013.791066.
dc.sourceGomes, L. A. de V., Facin, A. L. F., Salerno, M. S. and Ikenami, R. K. (2016) ‘Unpacking the innovation ecosystem construct: Evolution, gaps and trends’, Technological Forecasting and Social Change. Elsevier Inc., 136, pp. 30–48. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2016.11.009.
dc.sourceGreenwood, R. et al. (2011) ‘Institutional Complexity and organizational responses’, Academy of Management Annals, 5, pp. 317–371.
dc.sourceHauser, C. et al. (2018) ‘Measuring regional innovation: A critical inspection of the ability of single indicators to shape technological change’, Technological Forecasting and Social Change. Elsevier, 129(January 2017), pp. 43–55. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.10.019.
dc.sourcevan der Have, R. P. and Rubalcaba, L. (2016) ‘Social innovation research: An emerging area of innovation studies?’, Research Policy. Elsevier B.V., 45(9), pp. 1923–1935. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2016.06.010.
dc.sourceHuq, J. (2018) ‘Conditioning a Professional Exchange Field for Social Innovation’, Business and Society, pp. 1–36. doi: 10.1177/0007650318758321.
dc.sourceIansiti, M. and Levien, R. (2004) ‘Strategy as ecology’, Harvard Business Review, 82(3), pp. 68–81.
dc.sourceLettice, F. and Parekh, M. (2010) ‘The social innovation process: Themes, challenges and implications for practice’, International Journal of Technology Management, 51, pp. 19–158.
dc.sourceMoore, J. . (1993) ‘Predators and prey: a new ecology of competition’, Harvard Business Review, 71(3), pp. 75–86.
dc.sourceMoulaert, F. (2009) ‘Social Innovation: Institutionally embedded, territorially (re) produced.’, in McCallum, D. et al. (eds) Social Innovation and Territorial Development. Ashgate. Farnham, UK, pp. 11–24.
dc.sourceMoulaert, F., Maccallum, D. and Mehmood, A. (2014) learning and transdisciplinary research General introduction : the return of social innovation as a scientific concept and a social practice. doi: 10.3935/rsp.v21i3.1225.
dc.sourceNeumeier, S. (2012) ‘Why do social innovations in rural development matter and should they be considered more seriously in rural development research? Proposal for a stronger focus on social innovations in rural development research’, Sociologia Ruralis, 52, pp. 48–69.
dc.sourceNicholls, A. and Murdock, A. (2012) ‘Nature of social innovation’, in Nicholls, A. and Murdock, A. (eds) Social innovation: Blurring Boundaries to Reconfigure Markets. UK: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 1–30.
dc.sourcePaolo, F., Lima, M. and Paroutis, S. (2018) ‘Technological Forecasting & Social Change Understanding Smart Cities : Innovation ecosystems , technological advancements , and societal challenges’, Technological Forecasting & Social Change. Elsevier, (xxxx), pp. 1–14. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2018.12.018.
dc.sourcePhillips, W. et al. (2015) ‘Social Innovation and Social Entrepreneurship : A Systematic Review’, Group & Organization Management, 40(3), pp. 428–461. doi: 10.1177/1059601114560063. Pol, E. and Ville, S. (2009) ‘Social innovation: buzz word or enduring term?’, Journal of Socio-Economics, 38, pp. 878–885.
dc.sourcePurtik, H. and Arenas, D. (2017) ‘Embedding social innovation: Shaping societal norms and behaviors throughout the innovation process.’, Business and Society, pp. 1–40.
dc.sourceRao-Nicholson, R., Vorley, T. and Khan, Z. (2017) ‘Social innovation in emerging economies: A national systems of innovation based approach’, Technological Forecasting and Social Change. Elsevier Inc., 121, pp. 228–237. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.03.013.
dc.sourceRussell, M. G. and Smorodinskaya, N. V. (2018) ‘Leveraging complexity for ecosystemic innovation’, Technological Forecasting and Social Change. Elsevier, (November), pp. 1–18. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.11.024.
dc.sourceScaringella, L. and Radziwon, A. (2017a) ‘Innovation, entrepreneurial, knowledge, and business ecosystems: Old wine in new bottles?’, Technological Forecasting and Social Change. Elsevier, (September), pp. 1–29. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.09.023.
dc.sourceScaringella, L. and Radziwon, A. (2017b) ‘Technological Forecasting & Social Change Innovation , entrepreneurial , knowledge , and business ecosystems : Old wine in new bottles ?’, Technological Forecasting & Social Change. Elsevier, (December 2015), pp. 0–1. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.09.023.
dc.sourceShaw, E. and Bruin, A. De (2013) ‘Reconsidering capitalism : the promise of social innovation and social entrepreneurship ?’, International small Business Journal. doi: 10.1177/0266242613497494.
dc.sourceSurie, G. (2017) ‘Creating the innovation ecosystem for renewable energy via social entrepreneurship: Insights from India’, Technological Forecasting and Social Change. Elsevier Inc., 121, pp. 184–195. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.03.006.
dc.sourceTurker, D. and Altuntas, C. (2017) ‘Embedding social innovation process into the institutional context : Voids or supports’, Technological Forecasting & Social Change. Elsevier Inc., 119, pp. 98–113. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.03.019.
dc.sourceUyarra, E. et al. (2017) ‘Understanding regional innovation policy dynamics: Actors, agency and learning’, Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space, 35(4), pp. 559–568. doi: 10.1177/2399654417705914.
dc.sourceWalrave, B. et al. (2018) ‘A multi-level perspective on innovation ecosystems for path-breaking innovation’, Technological Forecasting & Social Change. Elsevier, 136(September 2015), pp. 103–113. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.04.011.
dc.sourceWeerawardena, J. and Mort, G. . (2012) ‘Competitive strategy in socially entrepreneurial nonprofit organizations: innovation and differentiation’, Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 31, pp. 91–101.
dc.sourceWijk, J. Van et al. (2018) ‘Social Innovation : Integrating Micro , Meso , and Macro Level Insights From Institutional Theory’, Business and Society, pp. 1–32. doi: 10.1177/0007650318789104.
dc.sourcePol, E. and Ville, S. (2009) ‘Social innovation: buzz word or enduring term?’, Journal of Socio-Economics, 38, pp. 878–885.
dc.sourceinstname:Universidad del Rosario
dc.sourcereponame:Repositorio Institucional EdocUR
dc.subjectInnovación Social
dc.subjectEcosistemas de Innovación
dc.subjectTeoría Institucional
dc.subjectEmprendimiento Social
dc.titleTechnological and social innovation: two sides of the same coin. Social innovation ecosystem: highlights from Colombia and France
dc.typebachelorThesis


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución