Some thoughts on three mechanisms of social innovation

In first-week’s classes and readings, the definitions and the essence of three terms--social entrepreneurship, social enterprise and social innovation--have been actively discussed. Having read the readings, I generated a more comprehensive understanding of social innovation which both social enterprise and social entrepreneurship engage in. What impressed me most are three mechanisms of social innovation mentioned in Rediscovering Social Innovation (Phills, Deiglmeier, Miller, 2008): 1) exchanging ideas and values, 2) shifting roles and relationships, and 3) integrating private capital with public and philanthropic support.

I believe the mechanisms are quite noteworthy, because they represent instructive approaches that various entities in this society can apply to practice so as to make more social value. Also, the mechanisms are, on one hand, closely connected with contemporary trend of this area, and, on the other, intertwined internally. In other word, in today’s society, those who have the ambition to make contributions for the society as a whole should think about and practice these three mechanisms again and again.

In my view, the three mechanisms are interrelated with each other in such way: the mechanism ‘shifting roles and relationships’ provides a necessary mind-set for social innovators and can serve as an overall context of social innovations; the mechanism ‘exchanging ideas and values’, nowadays, is a driving force for social innovation; the mechanism ‘integrating private capital with public and philanthropic support’ provides a rather practical and scientific way of cross-sector collaboration.

This reminds me of China’s status quo of social innovation. According to my personal observation and experience, ‘shifting roles and relationships’ have been partially practiced in terms of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). (Though relating ‘social’ with certain sector is not suggested in this article, I am still using sectors as representatives of social entities to illustrate the situation in China.) In China, for-profit sector SEEMS to be even more ambitious and productive in ‘social innovation’ practice than non-profits. This phenomenon occurred, not because non-profits or public sector are not engaging in social innovation, but because they fail to exchange ideas and values. China’s nonprofits fail to learn financial management, advertising, revenue generation, etc. from enterprises, constraining themselves in a relatively restricted space. Thus, China’s nonprofits are not able to obtain sustainable capital with joint force provided by private and public sectors. The society definitely knows that nonprofits should take responsibilities, but our mind-set and the policy and social environment stifle their practice.

I have a question for those who have had working experience in nonprofits/public sector: do you think these three mechanisms work well in your country?

By the way, I recommend the TED Talk: The way we think about charity is dead wrong, given by Dan Pallotta. He pointed out several wrong perceptions that people have had for charities (nonprofits) and shared some practical ways of operating a charity.