Open Social Innovation (OSI)A new approach to tackling social problems orchestrates the participation of multiple stakeholders in the process from generating ideas to scaling solutions. ~ We believe that social innovation needs a makeover. It is time to move beyond thinking of heroic individuals, the state, civil society, or business as singular agents of social change. Rather, we need to experiment with social innovation based on collective action facilitated by digital technology. Forging alliances, building multi-stakeholder networks, or adopting collective-impact formats where various actors—industry, NGOs, and governments—collaborate are steps in this direction.As a learning partner of #WirVsVirus, we participated in the hackathon, observed the teams in the support program, and shadowed the organizers in internal meetings. In total, we have conducted about 200 interviews; analyzed social media posts; screened weekly progress reports on the teams; tallied 650 hours observing the interactions of the emerging #WirVsVirus community; and organized reflection workshops with teams, organizations, and external stakeholders. Closely following the experiment of #WirVsVirus allowed us to appreciate the potential of OSI as a collective-action approach to social innovation and to specify the process of OSI along four interrelated yet distinct phases: mobilizing, bundling, curating, and scaling. Each phase requires organizers to focus on a specific set of activities. Detailing these phases helps to specify the tasks and roles of organizers, illustrate the journey of ideas to impact, pace the efforts of innovators, and allocate resources to support the process.Stanford Social Innovation ReviewSSIR_03bd4a0a-fdf5-11eb-a5f3-9f321c83ea00Johanna MairCo-AuthorThomas Gegenhuber Co-AuthorOSI StakeholdersWhat would an experiment where all stakeholders in a society—citizens, civil society, social enterprises, companies, foundations, philanthropists, and public administration—collectively participated in an open process of social innovation look like? And what if such an experiment was actively supported by the government and the chancellery or president’s office of a large and seemingly well-functioning democratic country? Here are a few considerations that might help stakeholders make informed decisions about whether to engage in such an initiative.GovernmentsOSI is an invitation to citizens and organizations from all sectors to collectively specify and solve social problems. It is also a promise that participants’ ideas and expertise are valued. OSI is a method that allows governments to ignite civic engagement and revive sentiments of solidarity. Currently, the German government continues experimenting with OSI as an approach to broaden and rejuvenate civic engagement, to test new forms of political participation, and to empower citizens to become a part of institutional innovation processes. However, governments must avoid making empty promises, guarantee a minimum of support, and enable solutions to scale within the public system. Moreover, those working within government need to understand that OSI can complement policymaking and policy practices. OSI cannot substitute for effective public administration.Public ServantsOSI will most likely expose flaws and pathologies in bureaucratic systems. At the same time, this disclosure helps to catalyze long-overdue transformation processes within the public sector. Public administrators need to be ready for and embrace change. They need to make sure that they and their units are ready for reforms that they co-create with citizens and organizations. Showcasing examples of how collaborations have worked in the past helps to break resistance to future change. Public administrators also need to account for citizen innovators operating at a different pace, in order to manage expectations about how fast tangible results can be achieved.FundersOSI is an appealing approach to tackle complex and/or unexpected challenges. However, the open and participatory nature of the process requires funders and foundations to depart from strict adherence to logic models or strategic plans to monitor and evaluate the success of OSI. Performing anticipated metrics would be counterproductive to an OSI project’s potential. Rather, funders should invest in evaluation as a learning resource, rather than as an accounting effort. They need to carefully assess whether the challenge benefits from a collective-action approach to develop and scale solutions effectively. OSI processes might be less effective if funders micromanage them. Funders should ask if they trust both the organizers to steer the process and the participants to self-organize in the process. They should also consider whether they are ready to accept outcomes that might be unintended but equally valuable to society.OSI ParticipantsOSI requires a serious commitment of time and resources. Participants will learn on many fronts, but they also need to commit to making progress on a problem that might not be their own. If participants focus solely on their individual solutions at the expense of working together, lasting impact based on the stakeholders’ ability to scale a co-created solution is unlikely. Participants should ask themselves if they are committed to the collaborative process.OSI OrganizersOSI ungates the innovation process for wider participation. However, openness and participation do not automatically make social innovation more inclusive. Bias inheres in design choices and decisions on how to structure processes and events that consequently reproduce or create new sources of exclusion. Organizers need to make sure they include feedback loops in their process and can quickly address early signs of exclusion.CitizensCivil SocietySocial EnterprisesCompaniesFoundationsPhilanthropistsPublic AdministratorsHackathons... hackathons ... open spaces for creative thinking, assembling teams, and collaborating on ideas under time pressure. Their potential lies in generating a sizable collection of useful ideas, if not prototypes.Public SectorIndeed, organizations associated with the public sector—such as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the National Science Foundation (NSF), the United Nations, and even local governments, like the city of Toronto—have discovered the potential of hackathons to advance the common good. Such events—including contests, competitions, and BarCamp (an international network of user-generated conferences)—have become popular tools to enhance openness and participation in social innovation processes.National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)National Science Foundation (NSF)United NationsLocal GovernmentsCity of Toronto#WirVsVirus... we are excited to report on #WirVsVirus (“We Versus Virus”)—a social experiment in Germany initiated at the beginning of the first COVID-19 lockdown by seven civil society organizations and supported by the German government. Through an open call to action, #WirVsVirus identified pressing challenges related to COVID-19, such as how to quickly digitalize health-care services, how to help citizens of all ages cope with lockdown-induced isolation, and how to respond to increasing instances of domestic violence. Twenty-eight thousand citizens across demographic and professional categories participated in a 48-hour-long hackathon to develop ideas about how to address these challenges.Social problems are tackled_03bd4be0-fdf5-11eb-a5f3-9f321c83ea00To orchestrate the participation of multiple stakeholders in the process from generating ideas to scaling solutions._03bd4d66-fdf5-11eb-a5f3-9f321c83ea00Social InnovationWe believe that recent experiments on open and participatory approaches offer important insights for rejuvenating the practice of social innovation. They also raise important questions about how well-intended initiatives might lead to unintended forms of exclusion.ExperimentationWhat would an experiment where all stakeholders in a society—citizens, civil society, social enterprises, companies, foundations, philanthropists, and public administration—collectively participated in an open process of social innovation look like? And what if such an experiment was actively supported by the government and the chancellery or president’s office of a large and seemingly well-functioning democratic country?ParticipationInclusionDefying the Illusion of Inclusion ~ OSI encourages the participation of stakeholders who are often regarded as sidelining or slowing down the process of developing and scaling solutions to social challenges. But including a more diverse set of participants does not prevent the process from reproducing old, or producing new, patterns of exclusion. The design choices in OSI involve trade-offs and can lead to unintended forms of exclusion. In our research, we identified three areas where biases can creep in. There is no one best way to resolve trade-offs, but we learned that organizers can take certain actions to mitigate the effects of bias.TechnologyThe call to action critically shapes OSI processes and outcomes. How technology is framed in the call determines who feels welcome and who does not. Technology can be framed as enabling the search for solutions or as a core component of solutions. This context may cause participants to prioritize a technological solution (“Let’s build a platform”) while excluding those who deeply understand the problem but are not tech-savvy. Also, the choice of event and space created for interaction matters for signaling the extent to which technology is a core feature of the OSI approach. An organizer using the hackathon frame automatically speaks to a community of tech experts, which in Europe is predominantly white, male, and below the age of 40. One remedy is to intentionally engage with those who are unlikely to respond to the call to action. The #UpdateDeutschland organizers sought to increase diversity by directly contacting various underrepresented communities to encourage them to become ambassadors and spread the message about #UpdateDeutschland within their networks. The organizers aimed for inclusion by avoiding the tech frame of a “hackathon” and instead calling the mobilizing event a “48-hour sprint.” The shift to a more ambiguous label, however, appealed less to programmers. The lesson here is that the choice of a frame affects who might participate.CompetitionGenerating many ideas and solutions is integral to the OSI process. Integrating competitive elements, such as selecting winners from the hackathon, is an essential motivating device and allows organizers to effectively illustrate the transformative potential of solutions. Here, the source of bias is who decides, or judges, the competition.LocationSite of interaction ~ OSI approaches rely on social interaction among participants. These interactions can take place offline and online. When thinking about online interactions, people who are less familiar with digital platforms like Slack might be discouraged from participating. Indeed, some people may be unfamiliar with these tools or lack access to fast broadband internet and suitable devices. Because building digital infrastructure and improving digital skills rank high on many countries’ political agenda, these barriers might be lower for OSI initiatives in the future.CommitmentCommitment as Fulcrum ~ OSI is not a panacea, and it is not an effective approach to all societal challenges. Perspectives about what OSI should and can achieve also might differ among organizers and participants. Expectations about process and outcomes can vary among stakeholders. However, stakeholders’ commitment to the process is essential to the success of an OSI initiative. MobilizationCraft and disseminate calls for action._03bd4f32-fdf5-11eb-a5f3-9f321c83ea001#WirVsVirus OrganizersIn their call to action, the organizers of #WirVsVirus put forward various challenges related to COVID-19 and formulated problems in broad terms. The #WirVsVirus call included challenges in 48 categories, such as volunteer work, mental health, and digitalizing health-care services. The organizers published a list of frequently asked questions on the website, which included information about how they would contribute to the post-hackathon process—for example, “We will set up a support program to turn your prototypes into impactful solutions.” The #WirVsVirus organizers distributed the call widely, with the objective of including as many citizens as possible.Social Media UsersSocial media users shared the Twitter announcement for the hackathon nearly 1,200 times.TwitterIn the mobilization phase, challenges are identified, problems further specified, and ideas and potential solutions scouted. Successfully scouting for ideas and possible solutions requires stakeholders to become aware of the call to action and decide to commit their time, skills, and knowledge in the solution search. Critical activities for organizers in this phase are crafting the call for action and disseminating it. ChallengesRender the challenges intelligible._03bd5086-fdf5-11eb-a5f3-9f321c83ea001.1The call to action needs to render the challenge intelligible and set expectations for stakeholders. It answers prospective participants’ questions: ProblemsSpecify problems to be solved._03bd51da-fdf5-11eb-a5f3-9f321c83ea001.1.1What problem needs to be solved?RequirementsIdentify the requirements to be met._03bd5356-fdf5-11eb-a5f3-9f321c83ea001.1.2What requirements must a solution meet?IdeasExplain how ideas will be processed._03bd559a-fdf5-11eb-a5f3-9f321c83ea001.1.3What happens to generated ideas? RewardsExplain what participants will get out of the solutions._03bd56f8-fdf5-11eb-a5f3-9f321c83ea001.1.4OSI ParticipantsWhat do participants get out of the solution (e.g., networking, recognition, or monetary awards)? DisseminationDisseminate calls for action._03bd5860-fdf5-11eb-a5f3-9f321c83ea001.2Disseminating the call sounds trivial, but in a world where many suffer from information overload, being heard is a challenge. Mobilizing incurs costs, such as hiring staff to promote the call or buying advertising for (social) media. Given the costs associated with mobilizing, organizers need to ask: Which stakeholders should get involved? How can they be reached?StakeholdersIdentify the stakeholders to be engaged._03bd59dc-fdf5-11eb-a5f3-9f321c83ea001.2.1OutreachDetermine how to reach the targeted stakeholders._03bd5b3a-fdf5-11eb-a5f3-9f321c83ea001.2.2BundlingMatch and combine problems, ideas, and solutions._03bd5cac-fdf5-11eb-a5f3-9f321c83ea002In the bundling phase, problems, ideas, and solutions are matched and combined, and experimentation linking problems and solutions begins. Experimentation can start with the problem specified in the call to action and innovators assembling around the problem. But it can also start with an existing solution or prototype and innovators finding a match for their solution in the problems that the call presents.Collaboration SpacesEstablish spaces for creating, developing, and gathering ideas._03bd5e0a-fdf5-11eb-a5f3-9f321c83ea002.1OSI ParticipantsParticipants can submit their ideas using digital platforms, which in turn foster collaboration, as participants are encouraged to form teams and jointly work on problem-solving.OSI OrganizersOrganizers need to design these spaces and decide whether participants should meet online, offline, or both. The advantage of an offline event is that participants can collaborate in a face-to-face setting. The advantage of digital infrastructure is that it can be scaled rather quickly to accommodate an unanticipated increase in participants.#WirVsVirus ParticipantsIn the case of #WirVsVirus, the decision to stage an online hackathon was based on necessity. However, online hackathons will most likely remain popular, as—because of the pandemic—more people are able and willing to work creatively online.SlackAssembling thousands of people requires an effective technological infrastructure. #WirVsVirus relied on the social team software Slack, which allows people to meet and coordinate within channels organized around challenges. However, organizing OSI requires improvisation with technology. Because of the sheer number of participants, Slack broke down on the first day.Stewart ButterfieldSlack’s CEO, Stewart Butterfield, reacted with a tweet noting that inviting 28,000 people at once might have been “a bad idea.”YouTubeThe organizers quickly moved to YouTube and Twitter to broadcast messages to participants.TwitterSlack CommunityThe organizers fixed the technical issue overnight, with the help of Slack’s community management, and the following morning, participants could communicate and interact again.To facilitate this process, organizers establish a space for creating, developing, and gathering ideas.CurationSelect problem-solution combinations._03bd5f7c-fdf5-11eb-a5f3-9f321c83ea003OSI OrganizersIn this phase, organizers need to carefully sort solutions and at the same time manage the community.#WirVsVirus OrganizersThe #WirVsVirus organizers kept as many projects as possible in the process because the problems related to COVID-19 were poorly understood at the time of the hackathon and most ideas were in their early stage. As one of the organizers told us, “How could we know one week after the hackathon which ideas would take off?” Out of 400 applications for the post-hackathon support program, the organizers picked 130 innovator teams and established community management that pursued common activities, rituals, and symbols to foster belonging.ZoomIn the #WirVsVirus support program, the community met every Wednesday evening on Zoom for six months. Between 100 and 400 people attended each meeting. These weekly meetings became a powerful ritual, which participants referred to as “Solution Enabler Day.”TwitterThe organizers strengthened participants’ commitment and reified this ritual through social activities, such as playing the same music at the beginning of each call, composing virtual group pictures, and creating collective “Twitter storms”—everyone tweeting about the #WirVsVirus at the same time to make it a trending topic on Twitter. The #WirVsVirus organizers orchestrated input from renowned experts and celebrated team success stories during the Wednesday calls.Thematic ClustersMore important, the organizers created thematic clusters (e.g., digitalizing health care), led by mentors with domain expertise, in which teams shared their experiences and reflected collectively on their successes and obstacles.In the curation phase, problem-solution combinations are selected. This phase requires diligence, as it significantly reduces not only the number of ideas but also the number of participants in the process.SortingSort solutions._03bd60f8-fdf5-11eb-a5f3-9f321c83ea003.1The fundamental question for the selection is: Do I want to continue with one or a limited number of ideas, or do I want to keep as many solutions as possible in the process? Picking a small number of projects—a logic used in accelerators—has the advantage that the organizer can concentrate resources and provide hands-on assistance. However, if solutions are at an early development stage, this is a high-risk bet, even when organizers are considering quality signals (e.g., professional application, a participant’s background, etc.). In contrast, selecting many projects and supporting them for an extended period allows projects to develop their impact potential at their own pace.ManagementManage the community._03bd627e-fdf5-11eb-a5f3-9f321c83ea003.2In parallel with selecting solutions, organizers need to manage and nurture community, facilitate collective action, and enable ongoing experimentation. Successful community management addresses two questions: How can I create a sense of community belonging, and how can I provide learning opportunities to innovators?ScalingPut solutions on pathways to achieve impact._03bd6404-fdf5-11eb-a5f3-9f321c83ea004OSI OrganizersOrganizers can support innovators in this process in various ways.#WirVsVirus InnovatorsIn the early phase of #WirVsVirus, innovators invested their time, expertise, and networks and, in some cases, their own financial resources.Private SectorThe private sector committed pro-bono resources to assist teams.FoundationsWith the support of foundations, the #WirVsVirus organizers paid 32 stipends to innovators who committed to working on solutions for at least 30 hours per week.Federal Ministry of Education and ResearchThe Federal Ministry of Education and Research repurposed and adapted an existing program for funding open-source software development to give teams and their solutions additional funding.#WirVsVirus OrganizersAnd #WirVsVirus organizers indirectly and directly mediated between innovators and scaling partners. For example, the organizers hosted an event where innovators could present their ideas to social-welfare organizations. They also sought to push promising projects by directly approaching foundations or government agencies as scaling partners. #WirVsVirus might seem an outlier because it emerged in response to a global crisis. Nevertheless, documenting it allowed us to showcase the OSI process. Understanding the process is helpful for differentiating among and comparing different OSI initiatives.Innovation ContestsFor example, other initiatives, such as innovation contests, prioritize the front end of the process and see great value in mobilizing and bundling ideas and solutions but do not engage in curating and scaling these solutions with stakeholders. However, what they all have in common is an open call to action.In the scaling phase, solutions are put on different pathways to achieve impact. Innovators need to make critical decisions on the scaling pathway: Will they start a new social business? Scale through government or business? Will they hand over the solution or develop it further in a proprietary way?ResourcesOffer resource support to innovators._03bd65a8-fdf5-11eb-a5f3-9f321c83ea004.1OSI OrganizersInnovatorsDeveloping ideas consumes resources. Hence, organizers can offer concrete resource support to innovators, such as stipends, other forms of funding, or hands-on resources.Intermediation & NetworkingServe as intermediaries and leverage networks._03bd674c-fdf5-11eb-a5f3-9f321c83ea004.2OSI OrganizersOrganizers can engage in either direct mediation (e.g., selecting a solution and directly approaching a scaling partner) or indirect mediation (e.g., creating events where innovators and possible scaling partners can meet each other).InnovatorsScaling PartnersAnother action for organizers is serving as intermediaries and leveraging their networks to link innovators with promising solutions to potential scaling partners.Selection & DirectionSelect solutions and directly approach scaling partners._03bd6d50-fdf5-11eb-a5f3-9f321c83ea004.2.1EventsCreate events where innovators and possible scaling partners can meet each other._03bd6f8a-fdf5-11eb-a5f3-9f321c83ea004.2.2InnovatorsScaling Partners2021-08-15https://ssir.org/articles/entry/open_social_innovationOwenAmburOwen.Ambur@verizon.net