CHAPTER 5 Analytical framework development
5.3 Inclusive innovation system analysis framework
5.3.3 System analysis approach
In order to derive a method to assess the functionality of each system function, we draw mainly on the studies by Bergek et al. (2008), Wieczorek and Hekkert (2012), Jacobsson and Bergek (2004) and Klein Woolthuis et al. (2005). The functional assessment is the first stage of the functional-structural analysis. Here it is important to identify the functionality of each IIS function. Table 30 outlines a summarised approach of the developed indicators for each system function. The developed indicators allow an analysis to be specific about the aspects hindering the functionality of a specific system function. The guide of system indicators and diagnostic questions serves the purpose to reduce biased opinions from the researcher. The functional assessment further requires a thorough guided description of each system function and a description of the functional weakness in order to perform the preceding systemic problem identification step. This allowed the current study to be focussed towards those functions that are absent or weak.
1) System
identification
2) System
description
3) System
analysis
4) System
intervention
80
Table 30: Assessing the I4ID functionality of each system function
Function Indicators Weakness indicator guide and description
Function 1: Entrepreneurial activities
1.1 Marginalised involvement Information based on each indicator of each function, with the aim of explaining the ‘type’ of weakness of an indicator. This information is derived during the qualitative process of the study, after the system description step. 1.2 Depth of involvement 1.3 Business involvement 1.4 Incentivised plans 1.5 Plan to scale Function 2: Knowledge development 2.1 Local knowledge 2.2 Research capacity 2.3 Research collaboration 2.4 Origin of knowledge
2.5 Focus of knowledge development 2.6 Training and development of capabilities/capacity
2.7 Institutional empowerment Function 3:
Knowledge diffusion
3.1 Knowledge platforms and boundary spanning
3.2 Depth of knowledge
3.3 Knowledge influence trajectory 3.4 Marginalised-centred knowledge 3.5 Local language incorporation Function 4:
Guidance of search
4.1 Clear shared vision and goal 4.2 Supportive legislation 4.3 I4ID expectation 4.4 Outcome indicators 4.5 Recognised constraints Function 5: Market formation
5.1 Define target market 5.2 Institutional barriers
5.3 Existing market interventions 5.4 Market structures supportive of I4ID 5.5 Institutional incentives Function 6: Resource mobilisation 6.1 Financial mechanisms 6.2 Access to resources 6.2 Investment security 6.3 Technological capabilities 6.4 Access to informal communities 6.5 Assessment of business plans 6.6 Public funding
Function 7: Creation of legitimacy
7.1 Reputation of investments for I4ID 7.2 Resistance to change
7.3 Awareness of intention 7.4 Government
involvement/commitment 7.5 Private sector commitment
The coupled functional-structural analysis allows for the identification of the reason why system functions may be weak or absent and allow for the precise and systematic identification of the problems hindering the functionality of system functions. Table 31 outlines a condensed guide to identify systemic problems hindering the functionality of IIS functions.
81
Table 31: Identification of systemic problems
System
functions Structures Type of systemic problems Systemic problem guide Functions
[F1–F7]
Actor
Presence Missing relevant formal actors. Missing marginalised actors. Missing intermediary actors.
Capabilities Actors may lack competence/capacity to articulate consumer requirements and lack competence to develop goals and strategies to I4ID.
Institutions Presence Institutions supporting the IIS or I4ID are absent. Capacity Hard institutional set-up is hindering the IIS or I4ID.
Strict institutional set-up favour incumbent actors. Weak institutional set-up hinders I4ID, through insufficient support.
Relationships Presence Relationships are absent due to ‘distance’ between actors. Quality Quality/intensity of relationships.
strong network – strong networks among current actors hinder knowledge sharing and development, blocking the necessity to open up to external forces (‘new constellation’).
weak network – hinders interactive learning and innovation;
Conflicting objectives, assumptions, capacities between formal and informal actors.
Lack of trust between formal and informal actors. Infrastructure Presence Infrastructure is absent (physical, financial, knowledge)
Quality Infrastructure is inadequate or malfunctioning – cannot support the IIS and I4ID.
Following the functional-structural analysis of the IIS, systemic goals may be derived (Wieczorek & Hekkert, 2012; Woolthuis et al., 2005). The systemic goals here serve as a guide for the future state of an IIS. The systemic goals are specifically designed to serve as a guide to system structures in order to overcome systemic problems hindering the formation of IISs (Wieczorek & Hekkert, 2012; Woolthuis et al., 2005). The goals of systemic instruments as described further guide the following process of identifying systemic instruments to achieve an integrated IIS and diffuse effective I4ID solutions as outlined in Table 32. To develop the systemic goals we again largely drew from the research by Wieczorek and Hekkert (2012), where we adapted and elaborated on systemic goals orientated to IISs.
Table 32: IIS systemic goals
Structures Type of systemic problems
Systemic problem guide Systemic policy goals Actor
Presence Missing relevant formal actors. Missing marginalised actors. Missing intermediary actors.
Encourage and organise involvement of a wide variety of actors
Establish new relationships and collaboration among the ‘new’ set of actors in the system.
82
Involve formal businesses and government in innovative ways.
Involvement of a multi-partner cross- sectoral team is required where the marginalised is actively involved.
Establish a set of intermediaries that act as knowledge brokers.
Gain and develop a deep understanding of the targeted individuals (the market). Acknowledge the marginalised as valuable
partners in business processes (users to partners).
Capabilitie s
Actors may lack
competence/capacity to articulate consumer requirements and may omit to develop goals and strategies
Establish spaces and methods for actor capability development
Development of research institutes and their capabilities to study the dynamics of I4ID and IIS.
Develop capabilities for the creation of sustainable I4ID business models and scaling initiatives through advanced technologies.
Documentation and learning from best practices (real-time data for evaluations) for I4ID and IIS.
Create spaces and environments for the integration of different actors’ capability.
Institutions Presence Institutions supporting the IIS or
I4ID are absent. Presence of (hard and soft) institutions for the specific innovation in focus Shared commitment: has a common goal and
vision with benefit to all actors.
Hierarchy and silo approaches require intervention mechanisms to overcome too strong formal set-ups.
Establish institutions favouring I4ID. Capacity Hard institutional set-up is
hindering the IIS or I4ID. Strict institutional set-up favours incumbent actors.
Weak institutional set-up hinders I4ID through insufficiently support.
Prevent too weak/stringent institutions
Establish institutional processes and participatory planning of marginalised actors.
Institutional structures support collaborative actions and orientation of formal actors towards inclusive solutions.
Inclusivity indicates readiness and localised implementation of inclusive solutions
Relationshi
ps Presence Relationships are absent due to ‘distance’ between actors. Conflicting objectives, assumptions, capacities between formal and informal actors. Lack of trust between formal and informal actors.
Motivate interaction opportunities between diverse actors.
Cooperative research programmes among the relevant knowledge-creation bodies. Cooperative grants and programmes
aligning interaction towards a shared interest for the marginalised.
Bridging instruments serve as enablers for interactions among diverse actors.
Debates facilitate decision-making towards inclusive system approaches. This should be evidence-based as far as possible.
Quality Quality/intensity of relationships.
Foster quality interactions among a diverse set of actors.
83 strong network – strong
networks among current actors hinder knowledge sharing and development, blocking the necessity to open up to external forces (‘new constellation’). weak network – hinder
interactive learning and innovation.
Stimulate the development of innovation platforms and collaborative learning and interaction sessions.
Research programmes and workshops explore novel interaction networks.
Infrastruct ure
Presence Infrastructure is absent
(physical, financial, knowledge) Motivate physical, financial and knowledge infrastructure. Financial:
Align funding of projects to the intended inclusive goals and appropriate time frames. The development and creation of sustainable
business models.
R&D grants for research institutes to develop inclusive interventions.
Taxes and loans that align and support inclusive interventions.
Knowledge:
Acknowledge the consumer component of the technology.
Establish deep-rooted local knowledge (bottom-up knowledge), especially appropriate delivery mediums.
Measures and indicators of the effect of inclusive interventions.
Create traditional spaces and places enabling the involvement of a diverse set of actors. Develop knowledge that guides decisions
and implementations of I4ID.
Seek knowledge of sector and cluster studies.
Physical:
Ensure adequate physical infrastructure is present.
Quality Infrastructure is inadequate or malfunctioning and cannot support the IIS and I4ID.
Ensure infrastructure quality is sufficient. Knowledge:
Create traditional spaces and places enabling the involvement of a diverse set of actors. Develop knowledge that guides decisions
and implementations of I4ID.
Seek knowledge of sector and cluster studies.
Create knowledge management techniques to ensure that data is relevant to the actors involved.
Physical:
Infrastructure must be of adequate quality for its intended purpose.
84