Sozialforschungsstelle
Permanent URI for this collection
Browse
Recent Submissions
Item Grassroots innovation and social innovation in perspective(2023-10-27) Maldonado-Mariscal, KarinaThis article provides a comprehensive review of social innovation and grassroots innovation over the last 5 years, offering a detailed analysis of both concepts. This study explores the integration of grassroots innovation and social innovation based on an extensive literature review. It examines five dimensions within the literature: key fields, disciplines, actors, geographical areas and theoretical frameworks. Despite significant research in recent decades, there is a notable gap of literature devoted to grassroots innovation and its position within discourse of social innovation. This paper explores the differences and similarities between the concepts of social innovation and grassroots innovation in order to better understand the use of both concepts, the cases in which they are used and possible complementarities. The main findings of the literature on combining the concepts of social innovation and grassroots innovation focus on social enterprises, while research on grassroots innovation as a stand-alone concept focuses on community-led initiatives, civil society organisations, cooperatives and local leaders. Geographically, India plays a very important role in grassroots and social innovation research, followed by Brazil and Spain. In terms of theoretical approach, the combination of social innovation and grassroots innovation has a strong sociological focus, emphasising theories of social practice, collective action, solidarity and community. In contrast, the theoretical frameworks of grassroots innovation are more anchored in power relations and socio-technical transitions, including, for example, resistance to innovation. Grassroots innovation offers practical insights into understanding innovation through the lenses of grassroots and community-based social change. Similarly, social innovation can contribute to the debate on grassroots innovations by understanding not only the agency of actors, but also the innovation ecosystem, actors and types of innovation. Further empirical research on the understanding and application of both concepts in the global North and South in academic discourse offers great potential, therefore potential research questions have been raised here for further investigation.Item Evolving Roadmapping(2023) Tenambergen, Robert; Boll, Judith; Fleiter, Enrico; Schrot, Katharina; Schultze, JürgenItem Evolving Roadmapping(2023) Tenambergen, Robert; Boll, Judith; Fleiter, Enrico; Schrot, Katharina; Schultze, JürgenItem Understanding future skills and enriching the skills debate(2021-03-03) Kohlgrüber, Michael; Behrend, Clara; Götting, Adrian; Cuypers, Mathias; Warhurst, Chris; Wright, SallyDeliverable 6.1 includes a framework for new or increasingly important skills within the digital transformation. This report updates an earlier version that was submitted in December 2019 and reflects progress and new insights. It includes results from a more detailed analysis of future skill demands performed within task 6.2 (which is based on a systematic literature review on skill needs for the digital transformation). These results were used to check and refine the skills ca- tegorisation developed in the first version of the report. Another progress was made within the chapter on the quantitative part of changes in skill demand (section 5) : The availability of data was reassessed by considering several further datasets.Item Understanding future skills and enriching the skills debate(2022-08-31) Behrend, Clara R.; Götting, Adrian; Kohlgrüber, Michael; Pomares, Egoitz; Wright, SallyThis 3rd report of the Deliverable 6.1 builds on the framework for future skills and the skills categorisation developed in the 1st and 2nd reports of the Deliverable 6.1. The report focuses on empirical results of the Beyond 4.0 project on the topic of skills within the digital transformation. It draws from the range of empirical data collected during the qualitative research undertaken in Work Packages 4 and 8 of the BEYOND 4.0 project by identifying illustrative examples exemplifying the impact of digitalisation on the five categories of the aforementioned skills categorisation, presents and discusses the findings along the lines of skills demand and skills supply-sides issues, and accordingly, presents a number of recommendations for policymakers.Item Education and Training in Inclusive Welfare States(2022-04-27) Kangas, Olli; Karonen, Esa; Kohlgrüber, Michael; Behrend, Clara; Cuypers, Mathias; Götting, AdrianThis working paper analyses opportunities for inclusiveness in the context of the digital transfor-mation. There are fears that digitalisation will create new cleavages in societies, and there will be gaps in skills needed in digital working life. Older workers and immigrants, in particular, are in a vulnerable position. The theoretical approaches of social investment and combined capabilities stress the needs for upskilling. These are identified to develop digital and non-digital skills to cope with the challenges of the digital transformation. We show that it is not enough to develop indi-vidual capabilities. To really improve inclusiveness, combined capabilities are needed, which take into account institutional arrangements and corresponding public services.Item Understanding future skills: requirements for better data(2022-12-20) Behrend, Clara; Cuypers, Mathias; Wright, Sally; Kohlgrüber, Michael; Götting, AdrianDeliverable 6.3 focuses on data necessary for a comprehensive analysis of skills for digitalisation. Reliable data is needed to make appropriate decisions for the New Skills Agenda for Europe, national initiatives, and VET systems. Qualitative assessments of Tasks 6.1 to 6.4 are contrasted with quantitative WP3 data to identify gaps in data, indicators and measures that support monitoring of skill requirements. The main outcome is that there are still gaps in European data on skills that leave stakeholders partially blindfolded when looking at changes in skill demand and resulting needs for adaptations of skill supply. The report formulates requirements for the improvement of data.Item BEYOND4.0 - Understanding Future Skills(2020) Kohlgrüber, Michael; Behrend, Clara; Cuypers, Mathias; Götting, AdrianItem Policy Brief #4 - Skills for the Digital Transformation(2021-04-01) Kohlgrüber, Michael; Schröder, Antonius; Behrend, Clara; Cuypers, MathiasItem Transdisciplinary research along the logic of empowerment: perspectives from four urban and regional transformation projects(2023-03-04) Hölsgens, Rick; Wascher, Eva; Bauer, Carolin; Boll, Judith; Bund, Stephanie; Dankwart-Kammoun, Saskia; Heese, Irina; Schrot, Katharina; Schultze, Jürgen; Tenambergen, RobertTransformative research requires transdisciplinary collaboration, forcing researchers out of their disciplinary comfort zones. In transdisciplinary research projects, the role of (social) scientists changes, and non-scientific actors become part of research projects. Transdisciplinary research is particularly suited to not only generate scientific knowledge, but also invent real-world solutions and to innovative. This, however, does not come without challenges. Implementing a transdisciplinary project is time-consuming and requires the alignment of both the research and impact ambitions of all project partners. In this paper we build upon experiences gained in four transdisciplinary research projects and ask: (1) What is the transdisciplinary approach followed by the project? (2) Which opportunities and challenges can be identified for successful transdisciplinary collaborations? (3) What is the rationale for engaging in transdisciplinary research from the perspective of social scientists? Building upon the logics of interdisciplinary, a fourth logic, called the logic of empowerment, is identified as a driver for transdisciplinary research. Transdisciplinary collaboration empowers researchers to not only ‘discover’ innovations, i.e., to invent, but also to implement, i.e., to innovate.Item Mutual learning in innovation and co-creation processes(2021-05-10) Kohlgrüber, Michael; Maldonado-Mariscal, Karina; Schröder, AntoniusNew digital solutions are often lacking integration and acceptance by potential users. Therefore, only a small amount of innovative software solutions is really in use. The article describes a co-creation process by integrating end-users and relevant stakeholders right in the beginning in a social innovation process. Within this process, technology is seen as an enabler of innovation getting its relevance from new social practices of the people using it (e.g. working practices). Against the background of EU funded projects conducted by the authors (GT-VET, GREEN STAR, COCOP, and ROBOHARSH) the relevance of mutual learning processes of engineers / researchers / trainers on the one side and end-users / beneficiaries / learners on the other side will become evident. Moreover, new (digital and analogue) skills of employees have been identified as key for a successful digital transformation. Thereby, this article shows a twofold perspective on social innovation in education: new skills demands for employees and mutual learning processes of developers and users/stakeholders. To obtain needed skills, traditional innovation practices have to be changed by setting up a social innovation process. Such a process design has to include stakeholder and user involvement beyond pure feedback on a new technology. Co-creation means that experience, knowledge and ideas of users will be considered to ensure high usability and impact of the new technology framed by organisational and people related measures. In this respect, the innovation process and the innovation itself is much more than technological functionality–it is a contribution to new social practices and performances of the people that innovate and use the technology.Item Dortmunder U and Union Quarter - The Role of Meanwhile Uses in Urban Regeneration(2021) Castro, Alejandra; Wascher, EvaThis report is part of the T-Factor project Advanced Case Studies Portfolio. It introduces the case of the urban regeneration of "Rheinische Staße" in Dortmund as well as the revitalisation of Dortmunder U with the purpose of investigating the role of meanwhile/temporary uses in urban planning. The report presents a comprehensive overview of the context, chronology, stakeholders, results, impacts, and critical elements pertaining to each of the meanwhile uses that occurred during the urban regeneration in the Union Quarter (Rheinische Straße and Dortmunder U).Item Wissensweitergabe bei Vorsitzwechsel im Betriebsrat(2020) Best, ChristineAufgrund des demografischen Wandels sehen sich deutsche Betriebsräte mit einem Generationenwechsel in ihren Gremien konfrontiert. Gleichzeitig sind infolge eines Wandels der Erwerbsarbeit Themen- und Anforderungskomplexität der Betriebsratsarbeit stetig gestiegen, wodurch die Bedeutung von Wissen zunimmt. Um einen großflächigen Wissensverlust durch das rentenbedingte Ausscheiden älterer Betriebsratsmitglieder zu verhindern und die Handlungsfähigkeit der Gremien angesichts steigender Anforderungen zu erhalten, bedarf es rechtzeitiger Maßnahmen zur Sicherung jenes Wissens. Gerade dem Wissen von Betriebsratsvorsitzenden als zentrale Wissensträger*innen kommt dabei eine besondere Bedeutung zu. Daher werden in der vorliegenden Arbeit Wissensweitergaben bei Vorsitzwechseln in Betriebsräten untersucht, um herauszufinden welches Wissen im Rahmen der Vorsitzwechsel relevant ist, wie der Wissenstransfer welchen Wissens gestaltet wird und welche potenziell fördernden und hemmenden Faktoren Einfluss darauf nehmen. Zu diesem Zweck wurden acht problemzentrierte Einzelinterviews mit amtierenden, bereits ausgeschiedenen und designierten Betriebsratsvorsitzenden geführt und mithilfe der inhaltlich strukturierenden Inhaltsanalyse ausgewertet. Die Ergebnisse decken Wissenstransferprozesse auf, die weitestgehend unstrukturiert stattfinden und individuell gehandhabt werden. Weitergabe von explizitem (Fach-)wissen funktioniert dabei besser als die Weitergabe des impliziten Erfahrungswissens. Insbesondere sozialem und betrieblichem Erfahrungswissen wurde eine sehr hohe Bedeutsamkeit zugeschrieben. Relevante Einflussfaktoren waren neben organisational-strukturellen Rahmenbedingungen zu großen Teilen bei den handelnden Personen selbst zu verorten.Item Sociotechnical perspectives on digitalisation and Industry 4.0(2019-05-15) Kopp, Ralf; Dhondt, Steven; Hirsch-Kreinsen, Hartmut; Kohlgrüber, Michael; Preenen, PaulThe sociotechnical systems approach and theory (STS) helps to deal with today's rapid digital transformations in designing best suitable work, organisations and jobs. Not surprisingly, related approaches based on STS assumptions, such as modern sociotechnical thinking (MST) and workplace innovation (WPI) theory, are rapidly developing in Europe. Yet, research and (theoretical) analyses that place STS in today's digital industry challenges and WPI are sparse. The basics of sociotechnical concepts and new research, needs and perspectives for further development of STS in today's context need to be explored. Therefore, against the background of empirical experiences in logistics and process industry and in context of Industry 4.0, this article discusses firstly the model of classical STS approach and the skill orientated work design. Secondly, MST and its derived concept of WPI is positioned. Furthermore, a complementary 'practice theory' perspective is introduced, illustrated by an example design project. Finally, some future recommendations for research are made.Item A new player for tackling inequalities?(2020-05-14) Unterfrauner, Elisabeth; Hofer, Margit; Pelka, Bastian; Zirngiebl, MartheThe Maker Movement has raised great expectations towards its potential for tackling social inequalities by mediating technology-related skills to everybody. Are maker spaces new players for social inclusion in digital societies? How can this potential impact be framed? While scientific discourse has so far identified broad value and impact dimensions of the Maker Movement, this article adds empirical insight into the potential for tackling social inequalities. The study is based on 39 interviews with makers and managers of maker initiatives and ten self-reporting surveys filled in by maker initiative managers throughout Europe, which have been analyzed qualitatively. We found four main domains in which makers address social inclusion: First, by mediating skills and competences not only in the field of digital technologies but in the broader sense of empowering people to “make” solutions for encountered problems. Second, we found that makers actively strive to provide democratized access to digital fabrication and the knowledge on how to use them. Third and fourth, we found different ambitions articulated by makers to change society and social practices towards a society providing better opportunities for individuals. As an entry point for further research and actions, we derived a maker typology that reflects the diverse and various types of relationships to be found in the maker community. This typology could be used for exploring further collaborations between social actors and the Maker Movement. We conclude with an outlook on potential trajectories of the Maker Movement and specify which could influence the inclusion of marginalized persons.Item Soziale Verantwortung – ein Aspekt für Lehrformate der tertiären Bildung?(2019) Janz, SabrinaThis thesis investigates university social responsibility as mediated content of the Projektstudium courses of the bachelor study programme rehabilitation pedagogy of TU Dortmund University as well as Service Learning projects of the University Duisburg- Essen. In the course of societal change, tasks of educational institutions and their teaching concepts also change. In order to take responsibility for society and to educate responsibly acting citizens, university social responsibility may offer a strategy for universities. For its analysis, an orientational framework has been derived from theory. Based on this framework, an interview guide as well as a category system for its evaluation have been created. Results show university social responsibility being an actual mediated content of teaching concepts. The Projektstudium courses show higher impact on development of self-responsibility and competencies, whereas Service Learning projects rather focus on responsibility for society by means of direct services.Item A new innovation paradigm: combining technological and social innovation(2019-03-21) Kohlgrüber, Michael; Schröder, Antonius; Bayón Yusta, Félix; Arteaga Ayarza, AsierA new innovation paradigm is needed to answer the societal, economic and environmental challenges the world and companies are facing. The EU funded Horizon 2020 SPIRE Project “Coordinating Optimisation of Complex Industrial Processes” (COCOP) is combining technological and social innovation within a steel company pilot case (Sidenor). The project aims at reducing raw materials consumption (and energy and emissions reduction as well) by plant-wide optimisation of production processes based on a software solution and at the same time changing social practices. Key for COCOP is a methodology integrating technological innovation within a social innovation process of co-creation and co-development by involving (potential) users of the future software system and relevant stakeholders right from the beginning; thereby improving effectiveness and impact of the innovations and the implementation process. This involvement is instructed and measured by social key performance indicators (social KPIs) and operationalised in surveys (questionnaire and interviews) with future users, engineers and external experts (from different industry sectors not involved in the project). The article presents the results of the starting point of COCOP illustrating the future user perspective of the pilot steel company (Sidenor) contrasted by the view of external experts – seriously taking into account the interfaces between technology, human and organisation.Item Entrepreneurial education for persons with disabilities(2020-02-06) Krüger, Daniel; David, AlexandraFostering entrepreneurship and inclusive societies are on top of EU policy agenda. This article is bringing together both aims by discussing a social innovation framework for inclusive entrepreneurial education for persons with disabilities. Similar to other disadvantaged groups, persons with disabilities can benefit from entrepreneurial skills for self-management or, on a next level, for starting own, opportunity-driven businesses. The framework suggests several building blocks considered necessary for successful entrepreneurial education for the beneficiaries. First, it is approaching the framework through a social innovation perspective. In doing so, it suggests a social innovation ecosystem perspective to operationalize all relevant stakeholders and contextual aspects relevant for the framework. Second, it suggests to build on socially innovative, hence novel, practices by starting from co-creation and co-production in order to meet individual demands and needs of learners. Furthermore, it takes the concept of universal design into account as it holds major implications for inclusive entrepreneurial education for persons with disabilities and underlines the need of different, more suitable practices in entrepreneurship education and beyond, toward an inclusive learning ecosystem.Item Anwendung des Konzepts ‚Nutzungssituation‘ für die Erhebung von Anforderungen an die Modellierung eines neuen Stadtklimamodells im Projekt KliMoPrax(2019) Dankwart-Kammoun, Saskia; Hölsgens, Rick; Schultze, JürgenItem Ausbildung zur digitalen Teilhabe?(2019) Schulz, Ann Christin