包容性创新:概念、特征与关键成功因素

包容性创新是企业面向金字塔底层（BOP）市场进行多元价值创造的全新创新形态,在创造经济财富的同时也通过为穷人提供平等参与市场的机会而缓解与降低贫困,体现了创新促进商业与社会相容性发展的最新理念。本文对该领域进行初步的理论探索,首先对包容性创新进行概念界定与说明并描述其基本特征,进而归纳出包容性创新的关键成功因素,最后用一个具体案例予以说明,为后续研究奠定比较与验证的基础,也为企业在BOP市场的包容性创新实践提供参考与借鉴。     

包容性创新:研究综述及政策建议

包容性创新是企业面向低收入市场的专门创新形态,强调在获得经济回报的同时也能以缓解甚至消除贫困的方式创造出社会价值,促进包容性增长的实现。由于低收入市场与中高端市场在参与主体、制度环境与基础设施等方面存在的差异,包容性创新在思维、模式与特征上也与传统创新有很大不同。基于包容性创新的对象与环境特质,本文从营销、战略、制度与组织四个理论视角对现有文献进行梳理与归纳,最后提出针对性的政策建议,以期为未来研究与政策制定提供参考和借鉴。     

Challenging the “deficit model” of innovation: Framing policy issues under the innovation imperative

As innovation is increasingly becoming an imperative for policymakers around the globe, there is a growing tendency to frame policy problems as problems of innovation. This logic suggests that we are unable to address grand societal challenges and ensure economic competitiveness because our societies, institutions, scientific activities or individual predispositions are not sufficiently geared towards innovation. In this paper, we analyze this “deficit model” of innovation in which a lack of innovation is routinely invoked as the main obstacle to social progress. Drawing parallels to research on the deficit model of public understanding of science (PUS), we develop a theoretical framework that captures the dynamics and normative implications of deficit construction, highlighting five salient dimensions: problem diagnoses, proposed remedies, the role of expertise, implied social orders, and measures of success. We apply this framework to three empirical case studies of recent innovation strategies in Luxembourg, Singapore, and Denmark. Attention to this deficit framing around innovation is important, we argue, because it is an essential part of how innovation transforms societies in the 21st century: not only through new technological possibilities or economic growth, but also by shaping public discourse, narrowing policy options, and legitimizing major institutional interventions. The implied pro-innovation bias tends to marginalize other rationales, values, and social functions that do not explicitly support innovation. It further delegates decisions about sweeping social reconfigurations to innovation experts, which raises questions of accountability and democratic governance. Experiences from the history of PUS suggest that, without a dedicated effort to transform innovation policy into a more democratic, inclusive, and explicitly political field, the present deficit logic and its technocratic overtones risks significant social and political conflict.     

面向金字塔底层的包容性创新政策研究

作为为广大处于金字塔底层的低收入群体提供机会来平等参与市场并获取收益的新的思路、模式与方法,包容性创新需要在国家层面制定明确的政策与执行计划。为此,首先阐述包容性创新的内涵及其制约因素,进而归纳了中国、印度与巴西等主要发展中国家的包容性创新政策现状,在此基础上构建出更为系统完整的包容性创新政策体系,旨在既能激励企业与科研院所等外部主体针对低收入群体进行创新,又能支持低收入群体自身参与创新和享受创新成果。     

Configuration of inclusive innovation systems: Function,agents and capabilities

Social exclusion represents a major challenge to policies advocating sustainable development in the Global South. Although this is a problem not prioritized in the realms of innovation policy focused on economic growth and competitiveness, it is now widely accepted that innovation may contribute significantly to the well-being of the social excluded. However, it is debated whether the innovation system approach is capable of informing transformational innovation policies aiming at overcoming social exclusion and other global challenges. This paper argues that the system innovation approach is adequate for facing this endeavour and identifies key constituent elements of innovation systems which are necessary for inclusion to emerge from the system dynamics. We illustrate the elements of this system configuration drawing upon the case of the appropriation of biorational approaches in pest management and precision agriculture techniques by a group of peasants in a rural village in Colombia. The proposal considers new elements that configure inclusive innovation systems in an agent-based, bottom-up perspective, such as new agents, capabilities, directionalities, and the integration of traditional knowledge with scientific and technology knowledge, elements that enable a new system function. In terms of policy implications, some reflections are made on favouring the sustainability paradigm and promoting inclusive learning processes.     

包容性创新的国际经验与启示

区别于传统创新,包容性创新是通过多元创新解决社会发展中的弱势群体本身的权利的贫困和所面临的社会排斥,是推动我国经济可持续发展与和谐稳定的必然选择。这一概念与中国现阶段社会经济转型升级密切相关。国际上一些国家开展包容性创新的探索和实践并积累了经验,引起了广泛关注。归纳和总结世界各国包容性创新的经验,汲取其中的教训,为我国包容性创新提供借鉴和启示。     

包容型领导研究述评与中国视域下的展望

包容型领导作为一种新兴的领导方式,日益受到学者的关注,其出现反映了特定时代背景下研究者和实践者对新的领导风格的诉求。因此,文章系统梳理了包容型领导的概念起源、维度测量、影响效应、作用机制以及影响结果,构建了包容型领导研究整体框架,对已有的文献进行整理述评,拓展其研究层次及方法,并将中介与调节变量纳入组织分析框架之中,同时强化了本土情境下的权变作用,并以此来讨论现有文献存在的不足,以期为未来组织管理更好地发展提出可行性结论。     

国外包容性创新研究现状述评与未来展望

包容性创新是促进经济发展成果惠及社会大多数人的引擎,是实现经济、社会、生态可持续发展的重要手段。包容性创新与科学发展、和谐发展以及创新驱动发展一脉相承,因此,如何驱动包容性创新已成为创新研究的一个热点问题。在文献梳理的基础上,首先对包容性创新概念、内涵与特征进行界定,并归纳其与精英创新的不同;然后从商业模式、企业社会责任、战略管理、影响因素、影响作用等5个视角对现有的相关研究成果进行比较系统的评介;最后,在指出现有研究不足的基础上对未来研究进行展望。     

基于企业视角的包容性创新研究

我们将包容性创新定义为一种使普通大众受益的创新,这既是一个过程,亦是一种表现结果。包容性创新关注的核心是弱势群体(或称边缘群体)。经过对国外的一些案例进行总结,可以将企业包容性创新定义为企业对新思想的发展和实践,旨在通过创造更多机会提高普通大众的社会及经济状况。     

普惠化制度安排、选择性直接支持与企业研发绩效——政府参与的异质性创新治理效应

基于2008—2017年中国A股制造业上市公司数据以及企业所在城市地方政府工作报告的文本分析,考察普惠化制度安排和选择性直接支持对企业研发绩效的影响及其异质性创新治理效应。研究发现：（1）与选择性直接支持相比,普惠化制度安排能够更精准地促进企业高质量研发产出,且其创新促进作用更持久;（2）政府参与创新的两种方式对企业高质量研发产出存在协同促进作用;（3）普惠化制度安排能够缓解不完善的市场化环境对企业研发活动的负面影响,而选择性直接支持的创新促进作用在较高的市场化水平下才能充分实现;（4）普惠化制度安排对不同生命周期企业的研发绩效均有显著促进作用,而选择性直接支持的政策效果在成长期企业中更显著。政府应在进一步优化现有选择性、差异化直接支持政策的同时,更加注重通过功能性、普惠化的制度安排推动国家创新治理体系完善和优化。     

数字普惠金融、要素市场扭曲与企业创新能力——基于数字经济行业研究

坚持以创新为先导,加强数字普惠金融对要素市场的影响力赋能企业创新发展,是我国在后疫情时期实施创新驱动战略,实现经济高质量发展的关键。因此,本文基于2013—2020年中国数字行业上市公司数据,选取数字产业的基础行业即数字产业化部分,构建数字经济行业企业研发指数,实证检验了数字普惠金融发展对企业创新能力的影响及作用机制。研究表明: (1)数字普惠金融的发展显著促进了企业创新能力的提升,且在考虑稳健性问题后这一结论仍然成立;(2)数字普惠金融的发展对企业创新能力的影响存在差异,即数字普惠金融对数字经济行业的创新投入、创新产出均有显著的正向作用;(3)数字普惠金融的发展通过缓解地区要素市场扭曲程度,对企业创新能力形成正向的激励效应;（4）相较于中西部地区,东部地区数字普惠金融的发展对企业创新能力的提升更能显著的起到正向作用。     

Normative contestation in transitions ‘in the making’: Animal welfare concerns and system innovation in pig husbandry

Previous studies of system innovations mainly focused on historical cases that were driven by commercial motivations of pioneers and entrepreneurs. This article investigates a system innovation in the making that is driven by normative concerns, such as sustainability or animal welfare, initially formulated by outsiders like special-interest groups. Our central research question is: How, when and why is normative contestation of existing regimes effective in influencing the orientation of transitions in the making?The conceptual framework enriches innovation studies and the multi-level perspective with insights from social movement theory (SMT) and political science. SMT is used to analyze the build up of normative pressure (through framing, resource mobilization, and political opportunity structures). From political science we use the notion of multiple streams, in our analysis a problem, regulatory, market and technology stream.The research design consists of a comparative case study of pig husbandry systems. One case analyses the sub-sector of pregnant sows where normative pressures, after several decades, led to the changes advocated by the contestants. The second case concerns the sub-sector of pig fattening where normative pressure was less successful.The difference is partly explained by the normative pressure for pregnant sows being larger than for fattening pigs. The other part of the explanation is that in the first case normative pressure aligned better with the three other streams (regulatory, market and technology) to lead to the changes desired by the contestants.     

高校科研团队领导语言框架与成员创新行为研究

与以往领导影响下属创新行为的研究多从正向促进视角切入不同，本研究探讨了高校科研团队中领导者积极/消极语言框架对科研人员创新行为的促进/抑制双向影响路径。通过采用三阶段式问卷调查法对高校科研团队中228位科研人员及其直接领导进行实证调研，回归分析结果显示：领导者积极语言框架与科研人员创新行为显著正相关，领导消极语言框架与科研人员创新行为显著负相关；同时，科研人员认知评价中介了领导者语言框架与科研人员创新行为间的关系；而且，领导—下属交换关系正向调节领导者积极语言框架对下属挑战性评价的影响作用。本研究对阐释高校科研团队中，领导者影响（促进/抑制）科研人员创新行为的心理机制具有重要的意义。     

Organizing for transformative innovation policies: The role of social enterprises. Theoretical insights and evidence from Italy

Transformative innovation policies can provide systemic solutions to socio-environmental challenges because of their “experimental”, “reflexive” and “inclusive” character. We contend that social enterprises can act as catalysts for transformative innovation for the geographically and socially marginalized. Thus, including social enterprises in transformative innovation policies can mitigate the negative effects of innovation-based growth, making policies more socially and geographically inclusive. Following a syncretic approach to the literatures on transformative innovation policies and social entrepreneurship, this paper identifies the key dimensions of social enterprises' transformative innovation potential: directionality (i.e., social goals as the purpose of innovation); social and geographical inclusiveness (i.e., the inclusion of marginalized areas and individuals in the provision of goods or services); reflexivity (in terms of participatory governance and monitoring the achievement of goals); and experimental character (in terms of establishing partnerships with heterogeneous actors). We then assess this capacity through an exploratory cluster analysis of Italian social enterprises. We identify three distinct groups that suggest a range of entrepreneurial approaches from largely transformative to not at all. The transformative innovation readiness of social enterprises has implications for policymakers seeking to undertake pilot schemes and implement actions that support an appropriately transformative innovation ecosystem.     

数字普惠金融发展、金融错配缓解与企业创新

本文利用2011—2018年沪深两市A股上市公司的数据,将其与北京大学数字普惠金融指数及地级市城市特征数据匹配,并采用双向固定效应模型与工具变量法基于金融错配视角实证检验数字普惠金融对企业创新的影响以及其内在机制。结果表明,数字普惠金融的发展显著地促进企业创新,且此结论在考虑内生性问题及稳健性检验后依然成立。进一步地,机制检验发现,数字普惠金融能够显著缓解企业金融错配程度,进而对企业创新产生显著的促进效应,且金融错配在数字普惠金融三个子维度影响企业创新的过程中也均起到中介作用。最后,异质性分析表明,在国有企业以及中西部地区企业,数字普惠金融通过缓解金融错配来推动企业创新的效应更为显著。总体而言,本文结论表明,数字普惠金融发展有利于缓解金融资源错配问题,对于提升企业自主创新水平具有重要的现实意义。     

包容型人力资源管理实践对员工创新行为的影响——-基于创新自我效能感的中介作用

个体创新行为是组织创新的基础,本文将“包容理念”与“人力资源管理实践”相结合,探讨了包容型人力资源管理实践对员工创新行为的影响,同时验证了员工创新自我效能感的中介作用。研究表明：（1）包容型人力资源管理实践包括公平分配共享收益、容许犯错鼓励建言、注重跨部门交流、用人所长正向激励、多样性引进人才、重视员工培养投入六个方面。创新行为包括创新过程和创新结果。（2）包容型人力资源管理实践各维度与员工创新过程和创新结果都具有显著正相关。容许犯错鼓励建言对员工的创新过程和员工创新结果都有显著影响;用人所长正向激励显著影响员工创新过程;创新自我效能感对员工创新过程和创新结果具有显著影响。（3）员工自我效能感在容许犯错鼓励建言与员工创新过程和创新结果之间起完全中介作用,员工自我效能感在用人所长正向激励与员工创新结果中起部分中介作用。     

BOP电商包容性创新案例研究——社会中介视角

从社会中介的视角出发,以遂昌县网店协会三合一综合体为案例研究对象,探讨了BOP电商实现包容性创新的内在机理。研究结果表明:聚集是促进BOP电商发展并最终实现包容性创新的关键因素;社会中介作为值得信赖的第三方,通过组织和职能的演变推动BOP电商的聚集和发展以实现包容性创新;社会中介作为电子信任平台的核心主体,通过与企业中介和技术中介的功能合作推动BOP电商的聚集和发展以实现包容性创新。本文从研究背景、研究内容和研究视角三方面对现有的包容性创新理论进行了拓展,同时对电商情境下的包容性创新活动亦具有实践指导意义。     

Understanding regional innovation cultures: Narratives,directionality, and conservative innovation in Bavaria

In recent years, innovation policy has increasingly embraced “situated” perspectives to better account for both how culture matters for innovation in diverse settings and how to deal with growing socio-economic inequalities and conflicts in the global innovation landscape. In this paper, we develop the framework of “regional innovation cultures” to put these perspectives on more solid theoretical footing. Regional innovation cultures refer to unique ways in which regional innovation initiatives and technology developments (their goals, meanings, material organization, and actor constellations) are being brought into alignment with local identities, socio-economic legacies, and unique political cultures. Our framework foregrounds five analytic dimensions: imagined social orders, representations, political cultures, relationship to national and global initiatives, and local controversies. We apply this framework to one in-depth regional case study of the German state of Bavaria, focusing on innovation policy in three sectors: space, agriculture, and automotive. We show how Bavaria enacts what we call a “conservative innovation culture”, where innovation is framed as a way to preserve socio-economic orders rather than disrupt them, and where political and economic incumbents forcefully shape and absorb emerging niche activities. Innovation in Bavaria is performed through a political culture of small state-like corporatism that emphasizes strong coordination of all major actors, grants state bureaucracies a key role in defining directions for innovation in the form of a quasi-technonationalism, and tends to sideline alternative visions and voices for innovation. Across all three sectors, culture serves as a framing device to legitimize innovation primarily as an extension of existing social orders; conversely, innovation serves as a vehicle to reinforce dominant ideas of the public good. Through the lens of culture, innovation ceases to be primarily a source of social change and disruption, but can be understood as a mode of socio-cultural reproduction subject to tentative, constrained experimentation. Innovation initiatives cannot break too radically with existing social norms and orders without risking public support or legitimacy, thus creating a trade-off between proposing novelty and ensuring continuity. Our analysis lends further support for constructivist approaches to innovation studies, emphasizing plural and socially grounded perspectives on the rationalization, implementation, and evaluation of innovation.