This paper contributes to the sustainability debate by analyzing the inclusion dimension in the responsible research and innovation (RRI) process. RRI is claimed to be an important tool for addressing global challenges and achieving sustainable development goals. While stakeholder involvement is considered to be imperative for the RRI process, there is little empirical evidence on (1) who the stakeholders participating in the RRI process are; (2) when stakeholders participate; (3) how stakeholders’ inclusion contributes to the sustainable innovation process; and (4) who the agents are who orchestrate stakeholders’ inclusion. This paper addresses the issue of stakeholder involvement through the lens of innovation management literature by attempting to link the innovation process to the responsibility concept. We employed a meta-synthesis of empirical studies of RRI to develop a deep understanding of stakeholder inclusion. After screening 139 articles, we identified seven empirical papers highlighting RRI process, mainly from projects nested in academic contexts. The findings indicate that multiple stakeholders are included at a late stage of the innovation process—during the market launch. To some extent, this allows for the adaptation of the solution, but such adaptations are limited in nature. This study also identifies the agents who stimulate stakeholder inclusion as being mainly academic researchers and researchers linked to multi-institutional projects. Our findings indicate that innovation management thinking is rarely applied in the governance of research and innovation projects ‘born’ in academia. We suggest enhancing RRI theoretical development by incorporating elements of innovation management such as early inclusion of users in the innovation process. For practitioners, this means an extension of the design space to allow early stakeholder inclusion in the innovation process to ensure responsible outcomes. We also identified avenues for future research. There is a need to systematically investigate which tools and frameworks for deliberate stakeholder inclusion are relevant at the various stages of the innovation and development process.

PurposeThe objective of this research is to analyze the microfoundations of dynamic capabilities used by microbreweries in Porto Alegre (Brazil) in their coopetition strategies.Design/methodology/approachA case study with a qualitative approach was developed. Data were collected during interviews with owners of 11 microbreweries, via analysis of documents and nonparticipatory observation. The authors used the content analysis technique to infer knowledge.FindingsThe authors identified the microfoundations of dynamic coopetition capabilities including collective purchases, shared distribution expenses, shared production, education of consumers and other beer producers, group interaction and a business roundtable with entrepreneurs from the food and drink sector in the hospitality industry.Research limitations/implicationsThe authors developed a framework that considers the relationship between the microfoundations of dynamic capabilities and coopetition regarding the paradox between competition and cooperation. It is relevant to identify different actors’ movements and the potential outcomes of coopetitive strategies, which yield a competitive advantage for the cluster.Practical implicationsTogether, the microfoundations of dynamic capabilities contribute to the competitive advantage of the cluster.Originality/valueThe study highlights how small companies can jointly develop competitive advantage in a market dominated by a large company.

Innovation involves creating value from ideas, but this raises the question of for whom is the value created [...]

No abstract

Some companies realized that they can develop their business successfully when the resources are applied to solve chronic questions of social aspects, which takes us to the Corporate Social Innovation concept. Considering the definition of CSR as a voluntary integration of business operations with social and environmental concerns in a unilateral way (since initiatives are made when and how the firm establishes clear definition about it) CSI goes further, developing initiatives to minimize social or environmental issues with the participation of the involved public, in a bilateral way. Analyzing the most quoted articles about CSR and CSI studies, it has become possible to consider that CSI is an evolution of CSR, since both search to bring up some social benefits; however, CSI offers more sustainable and long-term results. CSI is a new, unexplored field, which brings effective results for private organizations, as well as for society and the environment. Keywords: Social responsibility; Corporate social responsibility; Social innovation; Corporate social innovation.Resumo: Algumas empresas perceberam que podem desenvolver seus negócios com sucesso quando os recursos são aplicados para resolver questões crônicas de aspectos sociais, o que nos leva ao conceito de Inovação Social Corporativa. Considerando a definição de RSC como uma integração voluntária de operações de negócios com preocupações sociais e ambientais de forma unilateral (uma vez que as iniciativas são feitas quando e como a empresa estabelece uma definição clara sobre isso) a ISC vai além, desenvolvendo iniciativas para minimizar problemas sociais ou ambientais com a participação do público envolvido, de forma bilateral. Analisando os artigos mais citados sobre RSC e ISC, foi possível considerar que a ISC é uma evolução da RSC, uma vez que ambas procuram desenvolver benefícios sociais. No entanto, a ISC oferece resultados mais sustentáveis e de longo prazo. A ISC é um campo novo e inexplorado, que traz resultados efetivos para organizações privadas, bem como para a sociedade e o meio ambiente.