University’s receptivity to social innovations: theoretical aspect

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

University's receptivity to social innovations: theoretical aspect

Gintare Jaciune, Vilija Bite Fominiene

Abstract

The relevance of this study. Social innovations issues still cover a very small part of the scientific work in the field of education. It should be stressed that such innovations are particularly important in the education system, as their development not only contributes to the improvement of the quality of teaching or the progress of educational institutions, but also makes a significant contribution to the creation of a sustainable future and to highlighting and solving social problems in society. The main problem. What is the conceptual basis of a university that enables a university to be receptive to social innovations? Object of research: University receptivity to social innovations. The aim of this study is to reveal which concepts lead a university to be the most receptive to social innovations. Results. Social innovations can not only meet the needs of an individual, but also drive social inclusion. Susceptibility to innovation is traditionally defined as the ability of entities to apply innovative ideas and solutions, to be able to create innovations and disseminate them in society. A modern university should be open, innovative, dynamic, responsive to society and its needs. Regardless of the concept chosen by a university, the third mission of higher education should not be forgotten - to use the university's knowledge for a common goal, be socially responsible, and contribute to the well-being of society.

Research methods. This analysis is prepared by using the methods of semi - systematic thematic analysis. Social innovations can not only meet the needs of an individual, but also drive social inclusion. In most cases, the benefits of social innovation reduce public spending by eliminating a specific social problem and creating some added value for the group of people targeted by social innovations. Susceptibility to innovation is traditionally defined as the ability of entities to apply innovative ideas and solutions, to be able to create innovations and disseminate them in society. Susceptibility to social innovations is determined by innovation potential and innovative activity. Management, which is determined by the choice of managerial staff, communication skills, applied methods and support of managers to apply social innovations, is particularly important in the structure of innovation potential. Internal and external factors/ components are also important in shaping receptivity to social innovations.

Keywords: innovations, social innovations, receptivity to innovations, university concepts, modern university.

Анотація

Сприйнятливість університету до соціальних інновацій: теоретичний аспект

Юцюне Гінтаре, докторант Литовського Університету Спорту; Фомінене Біте Вілія, професор, доктор наук, завідуюча кафедри Менеджменту спорту і туризму Литовського Університету Спорта

Актуальність даного дослідження. Питання соціальних інновацій досі охоплює дуже малу частину наукової роботи в галузі освіти. Слід наголосити, що такі інновації є особливо важливими у системі освіти, оскільки їх розвиток сприяє не лише покращенню якості викладання чи прогресу навчальних закладів, а й робить вагомий внесок у створення сталого майбутнього та до висвітлення та вирішення соціальних проблем у суспільстві. Основна проблема. Яка концептуальна основа університету дозволяє університету бути сприйнятливим до соціальних інновацій? Об'єкт дослідження: Сприйнятливість університету до соціальних інновацій. Мета даного дослідження - виявити, які концепції змушують університет бути найбільш сприйнятливим до соціальних інновацій.

Результати. Соціальні інновації можуть не тільки задовольнити потреби особистості, але й стимулювати соціальну інтеграцію. Сприйнятливість до інновацій традиційно визначається як здатність суб'єктів застосовувати інноваційні ідеї та рішення, вміти створювати інновації та поширювати їх у суспільстві. Сучасний університет має бути відкритим, інноваційним, динамічним, чуйним до суспільства та його потреб. Незалежно від того, яку концепцію обере університет, не варто забувати і про третю місію вищої освіти - використовувати знання університету для спільної мети, бути соціально відповідальним, сприяти добробуту суспільства.

Методи дослідження. У статті з метою розкриття теми було обрано метод напівсистемного тематичного аналізу, який є корисним при виявленні теоретичних перспектив або загальних проблем окремої дисципліни. Застосування методу напівсистемного аналізу літератури призначене для ретроспективного огляду дослідницьких проблем дослідників різних галузей (Snyder, 2019). Соціальні інновації можуть не тільки задовольнити потреби особистості, але й стимулювати соціальну інтеграцію. У більшості випадків переваги соціальних інновацій зменшують державні витрати, усуваючи конкретну соціальну проблему та створюючи певну додану вартість для групи людей, на яку спрямовані соціальні інновації.

Сприйнятливість до інновацій традиційно визначається як здатність суб'єктів застосовувати інноваційні ідеї та рішення, вміти створювати інновації та поширювати їх у суспільстві. Сприйнятливість до соціальних інновацій визначається інноваційним потенціалом та інноваційною активністю. У структурі інноваційного потенціалу особливе значення має менеджмент, який визначається вибором управлінського персоналу, комунікативними навичками, застосовуваними методами та підтримкою менеджерів щодо застосування соціальних інновацій. Внутрішні та зовнішні фактори/компоненти також важливі для формування сприйнятливості до соціальних інновацій.

Ключові слова: інновації, соціальні інновації, сприйнятливість до інновацій, університетські концепції, сучасний університет.

university social innovation receptive

Introduction

The development of the knowledge and consumer society shows that solutions to the problems en countered both in everyday life and at work increasingly require intellectual effort and a scientific approach, which can be guaranteed by quality education systems. This situation leads to exceptional public attention to the phenomenon of higher education, where the priority for universities in creating and disseminating new knowledge becomes indisputable. And despite the existing resilience of universities to change (Blass & Hayward, 2014), ongoing technological developments, emerging policy challenges, new and diverse stakeholder needs, changing higher education funding systems, and increased expectations of students are forcing many universities around the world to gain a competitive advantage and survive through innovations (Elrehail et al., 2018) and more specifically, to seek to make innovation a natural part of the university's culture and day-to-day operations (Sciarelli et al., 2020; Elrehail et al., 2018).

There are many definitions of “innovation” in the scientific literature. Nevertheless, it is agreed that they become the key to a competitive advantage for a person or an economic entity in a changing environment in search of a more efficient, superior and modern solution to a problem. (Kudokas & Jakubavicius, 2019). No exception and higher education institutions, where various types of innovations are introduced and developed lead to higher quality studies and help to maintain positions in local and global markets (Gulden et al., 2020). Recent years have shown a growing interest among researchers beyond process and product innovation in higher education (Elrehail et al., 2018) but also in organizational (Sciarelli et al., 2020, open (Huggins et al., 2020; Ye et al., 2020) and technological (Bond et al., 2018) innovations and their impact on the activity and competitiveness of higher education. In addition, with the general growing need for social innovations in society (Audretsch et al., 2022), these innovations have also been analyzed as an opportunity and a challenge for higher education institutions (Dryjanska et al., 2022; Arocena & Sultz, 2021; Monteiro et al., 2021; Anderson et al., 2018). The declining social role and loss of social leadership status in society have been revealed and is an indisputable problem in higher education, especially in universities (Pelekh, 2020). Paradoxically, according to Blass & Hayward (2014) universities could play a key role in creating and developing social innovations, becoming advocates and drivers of change instead of being critics or victims of change. However, this requires the integration of social innovations into university activities, where receptivity to social innovations becomes particularly important (Schroder, & Kruger, 2019; Sysoieva et al., 2021). Nevertheless, researchers do not focus on revealing the essence of the university's receptivity to social innovations and identifying how social innovations in universities can contribute to solving various social problems. These aspects, therefore, form the core of a scientific problem that can be defined by the question: what is the conceptual basis of a university that enables a university to be receptive to social innovation?

The aim of this study is to reveal which concepts lead a university to be the most receptive to social innovations.

Research methods

In the article, in order to reveal the topic, a method of semi-systematic thematic analysis was chosen, which is useful in identifying theoretical perspectives or general problems in a particular discipline. The application of the semi-systematic literature analysis method is intended to review the research problems of researchers in various fields in a retrospective (Snyder, 2019).

Selection process of scientific literature

Literature search was carried out in 2021 October - 2022 April, using the SCOPUS and EBSCO databases. Sources are selected using keywords. The following keywords were used to find related publications: “innovations”, “social innovations”, “receptivity to innovations”, “university concepts”,”modern university”. Due to the lack of research on this topic, the literature was focused on sources not older than 14 years. The search for sources was carried out as long as duplication was avoided and the scientific sources met the selection criteria.

Literature selection criteria

Selected inclusion and exclusion criteria were used to select published sources for analysis (Table 1).

Table 1. Criteria for inclusion and exclusion of literature review

A total of 48 scientific sources were reviewed, and 29 sources were selected and analyzed according to the source inclusion and source exclusion criteria in Table 1. In presenting the results of the analysis of the scientific literature, first, the concept of social innovations and their problems in education and the receptivity of the organization to innovations are presented, then the influence of the university on its receptivity to social innovations is analyzed. Research Results and Discussion Social innovations and their problems in education The concept of “innovation” is quite complex and multifaceted, and as it is the subject of interest and research in many disciplines around the world, it still lacks a universally accepted definition and typology (classification) (Tierney & Lanford, 2016). One of the most commonly used and broadest definitions of innovation, encompassing its various forms, is given by Oslo Manual Report (OECD/Eurostat (2018): “The general definition of an innovation is as follows: An innovation is a new or improved product or process (or a combination thereof) that differs significantly from the unit's previous products or processes and that has been made available to potential users (product) or brought into use by the unit (process)”. However, this concept is more associated with the private sector. Nevertheless, innovation occurs in any sector, including the public sector. It is also relevant in education because education plays a crucial role in creating a sustainable future. In this sector, as claimed by Mykhailyshyn et al., (2019), innovation is considered to be a fairly broad concept encompassing education, as well as technological, infrastructural, scientific, legal, administrative, social and other innovations with different concepts. Still, in general, these are the innovations that “... are intended to raise productivity and efficiency of learning and/or improve learning quality”. (Serdyukov, 2017).

As the importance of education as a social institute serving the needs of society is growing, social innovations is gaining in importance in their activities and especially in higher education. The experience of Covid-19 has clearly confirmed this, showing that, together with teaching, learning and research, which are integral to defining the role of education in the wider social context, creating better youth employment opportunities, reducing societal disparities, ensuring better inclusion of vulnerable and marginalized groups, creating impactful research obviously generates sustainable socio-economic returns (McDonnell-Naughton & Paunescu, 2022).

Social innovations is a fast-growing phenomenon. The first year of their mention as the object of research is considered to be 1970, but a breakthrough in the interest in social innovations is believed to be reached in the year 2000, especially related to the direction of business and management. And over 10 years of research, the number of publications related to social innovations has increased by 500 percent (Bataglin & Kruglianskas, 2022). Nevertheless, and with the growing recognition of these innovations and their contribution, social innovations remains under-explored (Rao-Nicholson et al., 2017) and their definitions still remain difficult to understand (Marques et al., 2018). Many authors who provide definitions of the term “social innovations” cite as their reference to a social area, the fulfilment of social needs and the promotion of social inclusion, which are reflected in vastly quoted Phills et al., (2008) definition of social innovations, as well as in the concept presented by the European Commission (Fougere et al., 2017; Oeij et al., 2019) definition given that social innovations is “.the invention, development and implementation of new ideas to solve social problems faced by individuals, groups or communities”. In this case, a social problem is any situation that prevents individuals, groups or communities from being included in society or from functioning qualitatively in it.

In education, social innovations can be understood as processes of knowledge resources, pedagogical and organizational practices and educational discourses, constellations of actors that identify or eliminate shortcomings, constraints and limitations in the education system and contribute to newer and better practices to address social problems and improve quality of life, education, productivity (Schroder et al., 2018; Kappor et al., 2018, Osetskyy et al., 2020; Fahrenwald et al., 2021). While analyzing social innovations, important to note, that it can work at three levels. Socio-political reform, changes in regulatory frameworks and institutional norms - can be assigned to the macro level, new business models, new services, new management practices - meso level, and strengthening of user participation and new professional practices that generate added value for the addressees asat the micro level (Schroer, 2021). However, despite the breadth of social innovations in the education system, and especially in higher education, it remains central to tackling a wide range of social problems, the value of which belongs to society but not to individuals, and the solutions themselves are not only more effective but also more sustainable (Bolz & Bruin, 2019) while increasing the use of resources to improve the high quality and competitiveness of human capital (Osetskyy et al., 2020).

Success indicators for social innovations in higher education should address the “implementation” of innovations, effective new or improved opportunities and relationships, and better use of assets and resources (Oeij et al., 2019). To do this, a higher education institution, such as a university, must first and foremost be receptive to innovations, as research has empirically indicated that the receptivity to change and to innovations is a direct antecedent to the intention to adopt innovations (Bourrie et al., 2016). From a classical point of view, this can be understood as the subject's desire, potency and ability to create and apply new solutions in its activities (Antropov & Neklyudova, 2021). From a systemic point of view, receptivity to innovations can be seen as an indicator of the capacity to create, transfer and implement innovations (Figure 1).

Susceptibility to innovation is presented as the interaction of innovation activity (the need to consciously apply innovation) and innovation potential (material, technical, social readiness and capacity of the subject). In this context, performs the elements of the management system that regulate the business processes of all companies/ institutions and may have an impact on the receptivity of innovation. It is important to take specific economic activities into account when analyzing receptivity to innovation. The division of innovation potential into internal and external elements is based on the existing conditions affecting the need for and efficiency of innovation, and it is, therefore, necessary to take into account the need for innovation and its efficiency. the role of external environmental conditions, the totality of all the possibilities and factors available to them. In this case, external innovation potential includes regulatory, infrastructure, scientific, social and business/operational components, internal - personnel, technical, technological, financial and scientific components (Войтешонок & Парамонова, 2015). The presented concept of innovations receptivity can be applied to the implementation of all types of innovations, including the assessment of the university's receptivity to social innovation as one of the most modern institutions of society.

Concepts of a modern university and their significance for the university's receptivity to social innovations

Fig. 1. Receptivity to innovation as an indicator of an organization's innovations activity and innovation potential (Войтешонок & Парамонова, 2015)

Analyzing a modern university operating in an uncertain rapidly changing external environment and influenced by the principles of academic freedom, it is often considered an important institution in society. In the discussion of which university is best able to function and represent itself to the public, various concepts are distinguished, such as the science university, business university, bureaucratic university, soft university, authentic university, ecological university (Barnett, 2011).

Table 2. The receptivity of modern university concepts to social innovations

Conditional estimates: * low receptive; ** average receptive; *** very receptive

Table 2 shows what concepts a modern university is based on and what aspects it can be receptive to social innovations. A university based on the concepts of business, bureaucracy and soft, ecological university is likely to be more receptive to social innovations than universities based on the concepts of science and authentic university because they have specific knowledge, technological/ technical readiness and values that integrate social innovations.

The modern university, regardless of the concept, operates directly and indirectly and is influenced by society. It maintains close links with the public in the development of new scientific knowledge and is a hub for science, technology and innovations. It can be argued that a modern university should be open, innovative, dynamic, responsive to society and its needs. Regardless of the concept chosen by the university, it should not forget the third mission of the university and use its knowledge for a common goal, to be socially responsible, contributing to the wellbeing of society.

Conclusions

Social innovations can not only meet the needs of an individual, but also drive social inclusion. In most cases, the benefits of social innovation reduce public spending by eliminating a specific social problem and creating some added value for the group of people targeted by social innovations.

Susceptibility to innovation is traditionally defined as the ability of entities to apply innovative ideas and solutions, to be able to create innovations and disseminate them in society. Susceptibility to social innovations is determined by innovation potential and innovative activity. Management, which is determined by the choice of managerial staff, communication skills, applied methods and support of managers to apply social innovations, is particularly important in the structure of innovation potential. Internal and external factors/components are also important in shaping receptivity to social innovations.

A modern university should be open, innovative, dynamic, responsive to society and its needs. Regardless of the concept chosen by a university, the third mission of higher education should not be forgotten - to use the university's knowledge for a common goal, be socially responsible, and contribute to the well-being of society.

References

1. Anderson M.M., Domanski D., Howaldt J. (2018). Social innovation as a chance and a challenge for higher education institutions. Atlas of Social Innovation-New Practices for a Better Future, 50-53.

2. Antropov V., Neklyudova N. (2021). The concept of innovative receptivity: methodological aspects. In SHS Web of Conferences (Vol. 120). EDP Sciences.

3. Arocena R., Sutz J. (2021). Universities and social innovation for global sustainable development as seen from the south. Technological forecasting and social change, 162, 120399.

4. Audretsch D.B., Eichler G.M., Schwarz E.J. (2022). Emerging needs of social innovators and social innovation ecosystems. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 18(1), 217-254.

5. Barnett R. (2011). Being a University. England: Routledge.

6. Bataglin J.C., Kruglianskas I. (2022). Social Innovation: Field Analysis and Gaps for Future Research. Sustainability, 14(3), 1153.

7. Blass E., Hayward P. (2014). Innovation in higher education; will there be a role for “the academe/university” in 2025? European Journal of Futures Research, 2(1), 1-9.

8. Bolz K., de Bruin A. (2019). Responsible innovation and social innovation: toward an integrative research framework. International Journal of Social Economics, 46(6), 742-755.

9. Bond M., Marin V.I., Dolch C., Bedenlier S., Zawacki-Richter O. (2018). Digital transformation in German higher education: student and teacher perceptions and usage of digital media. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15(1), 1-20.

10. Bourrie D.M., Jones-Farmer L.A., Sankar C.S. (2016). Growing the intention to adopt educational innovations: An empirical study. Knowledge Management & E-Learning: An International Journal, 8(1), 22-38.

11. Dryjanska L., Kostalova J., Vidovic D. (2022). Higher Education Practices for Social Innovation and Sustainable Development. Social Innovation in Higher Education, 107.

12. Elrehail H., Emeagwali O.L., Alsaad A., Alzghoul A. (2018). The impact of transformational and authentic leadership on innovation in higher education: The contingent role of knowledge sharing. Telematics and Informatics, 35(1), 55-67.

13. Fahrenwald C., Kolleck N., Schroer A., Truschkat I. (2021). Editorial “Social Innovation in Education”. Frontiers in Education (p. 469).

14. Fougere M., Segercrantz B., Seeck H. (2017). A critical reading of the European Union's social innovation policy discourse:(Re) legitimizing neoliberalism. Organization, 24(6), 819-843

15. Gulden M., Saltanat K., Raigul D., Dauren T., Assel A. (2020). Quality management of higher education: Innovation approach from perspectives of institutionalism. An exploratory literature review. Cogent Business & Management, 7(1), 1749217.

16. Huggins R., Prokop D., Thompson P. (2020). Universities and open innovation: The determinants of network centrality. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 45(3), 718-757.

17. Ye L., Zeng G., Cao X. (2020). Open innovation and innovative performance of universities: Evidence from China. Growth and Change, 51(3), 1142-1157.

18. Kudokas V., Jakubavicius A. (2019). Inovacj raiska Lietuvos versle. In 22nd Conference for Young Researchers “Economics and Management”.

19. Marques P., Morgan K., Richardson R. (2018). Social innovation in question: The theoretical and practical implications of a contested concept. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space, 36(3), 496-512.

20. McDonnell-Naughton M., Paunescu C. (2022). Facets of social innovation in higher education. In: Paunescu C., Lepik K.L., Spencer N. (eds) Social innovation in higher Education. Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management. Springer, Cham.

21. Mykhailyshyn H., Kondur O., Serman L. (2019). Innovation of Education and Educational Innovations in Conditions of Modern Higher Education Institution. Journal of Vasyl Stefanyk Precarpathian National University, 5(1), 9-16.

22. Monteiro S., Isusi-Fagoaga R., Almeida L., Garria-Aracil A. (2021). Contribution of higher education institutions to social innovation: practices in two southern European universities. Sustainability, 13(7), 3594.

23. OECD/Eurostat (2018), Oslo Manual 2018: Guidelines for Collecting, Reporting and Using Data on Innovation, 4th Edition, The Measurement of Scientific, Technological and Innovation Activities, OECD Publishing, Paris/Eurostat, Luxembourg.

24. Oeij P.R., Van Der Torre W., Vaas F., Dhondt S. (2019). Understanding social innovation as an innovation process: Applying the innovation journey model. Journal of Business Research, 101, 243-254.

25. Osetskyy V, Kiril'chuk O., Savchuk N. (2020). Social innovations in education-drivers of human capital development. Bulletin of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, 1(208), 42-48.

26. Pelekh Y.V. (2020). Urgent issues and modern challenges of higher education. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 78(5), 671-673.

27. Phills J.A., Deiglmeier K., Miller D.T. (2008). Rediscovering social innovation. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 6(4), 34-43.

28. Rao-Nicholson R., Vorley T., Khan Z. (2017). Social innovation in emerging economies: A national systems of innovation based approach. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 121, 228-237.

29. Schroder A., Kruger D. (2019). Social innovation as a driver for new educational practices: Modernising, repairing and transforming the education system. Sustainability, 11 (4), 1070.

30. Schroer A. (2021). Social Innovation in Education and Social Service Organizations. Challenges, Actors, and Approaches to Foster Social Innovation. Frontiers in Education, 5, 555624.

31. Sciarelli M., Gheith M.H., Tani M. (2020). The relationship between quality management practices, organizational innovation, and technical innovation in higher education. Quality Assurance in Education, 28(3), 137-150.

32. Serdyukov P. (2017). Innovation in education: what works, what doesn't, and what to do about it?. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning, 10(1), 4-33.

33. Sysoieva I., Pozniakovska N.M., Balaziuk O., Miklukha O.L., Akimova L.M., Pohrishchuk B. (2021). Social innovations in the educational space as a driver of economic development of modern society. Фінансово-кредитна діяльність: проблеми теорії і практики, 3(38), 538-548.

34. Snyder H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of business research, 104, 333-339.

35. Tierney W.G., Lanford M. (2016). Conceptualizing innovation in higher education. In Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (p. 1-40). Springer, Cham.

36. Voiteshonok M., Paramonova Y. (2015). Ynnovatsyonnaia vospryymchyvost kak obobshchaiushchyi pokazatel sposobnosty k ynnovatsyonnoi deiatelnosty. Science & Innovations, 143(1), 29-32.

Размещено на Allbest.ru