how can we…? connecting inventive social research with ... · (chen et al 2016; julier and...

22
How can we…? Connecting inventive social research with social and government innovation Lucy Kimbell Afterword in Noortje Marres, Michael Guggenheim and Alex Wilkie (eds). 2018. Inventing the Social. Manchester: Mattering Press. Please cite from published version, not this one. In their introduction the editors argue that inventive approaches to social research combine “the doing, representing and intervening into social life” (Marres et al, ppxx). They emphasise how social life – and research – exists in the making and foreground why inventive approaches should be experimental. The carrying out and assessment of such experimentation in doing, representing and intervening into social life is always in question. They argue for the value of (researchers) pursuing long-term associations and changes to social life. But they point to the limitations of prioritising easily traceable, short-term associations between social research and social action which might result, for example, in Das Kapital not being seen as able to demonstrate research impact or policy relevance. This afterword explores these ideas in relation to two contemporary domains of social life in which such creative experimentation is evident. It suggests how inventive social research as discussed in this volume might intersect with developments in the fields of social innovation and government innovation.

Upload: others

Post on 20-Oct-2020

0 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • How can we…? Connecting inventive social research with social and

    government innovation

    LucyKimbell

    AfterwordinNoortjeMarres,MichaelGuggenheimandAlexWilkie(eds).2018.

    InventingtheSocial.Manchester:MatteringPress.

    Pleasecitefrompublishedversion,notthisone.

    Intheirintroductiontheeditorsarguethatinventiveapproachestosocial

    researchcombine“thedoing,representingandinterveningintosociallife”

    (Marresetal,ppxx).Theyemphasisehowsociallife–andresearch–existsinthe

    makingandforegroundwhyinventiveapproachesshouldbeexperimental.The

    carryingoutandassessmentofsuchexperimentationindoing,representingand

    interveningintosociallifeisalwaysinquestion.Theyargueforthevalueof

    (researchers)pursuinglong-termassociationsandchangestosociallife.But

    theypointtothelimitationsofprioritisingeasilytraceable,short-term

    associationsbetweensocialresearchandsocialactionwhichmightresult,for

    example,inDasKapitalnotbeingseenasabletodemonstrateresearchimpactor

    policyrelevance.

    Thisafterwordexplorestheseideasinrelationtotwocontemporarydomainsof

    sociallifeinwhichsuchcreativeexperimentationisevident.Itsuggestshow

    inventivesocialresearchasdiscussedinthisvolumemightintersectwith

    developmentsinthefieldsofsocialinnovationandgovernmentinnovation.

  • SocialinnovationisoneofthenewsocialsidentifiedbyMarresandGerlitzin

    theirchapter,atermgiventoanareaofpracticeandscholarshipthataimsto

    addresssocialneedsthroughcreatingstrategies,infrastructures,ventures,

    productsorservicesthatinvolvenewconfigurationsofresources(Mulganetal

    2006;NichollsandMurdock2011).Acloselyrelatedareaofgovernment

    innovationisanemerginginstitutionalpracticewithinnational,regionaland

    localgovernmentadministrations,oftenintheformof‘policylabs’(egOECD

    2016;Putticketal2014;Williams2015).Insuchsettings,diverseactors

    includinggovernments,communityorganisations,fundersandbusinesses

    conductexperimentsintocontemporarysociallife,sometimesincollaboration

    withacademicresearchers.Inboth,thedevicesandpracticesof‘socialdesign’

    areincreasinglyvisibleasaresourcetodrivecreativityandconnectpublic

    servantsandotherswithcitizensandotherpublics,oftenwithunclearresults

    (Chenetal2016;JulierandKimbell2016).

    Myaimhereistomixinsightsfromthisbookwiththecreativepracticestiedup

    withhowpublicpolicies,solutionsandservicesarebeingconstituted,

    researched,designed,developedandevaluatedastheyco-emergeinrelationto

    socialissuesandpolicyagendas.InwhatfollowsIreviewsomeoftheconcerns

    ofparticipantsinthisworldofsocialandgovernmentinnovation.Ithenidentify

    opportunitiesforinventivesocialresearchtoreconfiguretheseevents,

    narrativesandpractices.FinallyIsuggestsomeissuesthatresultfromusingan

    inventiveapproachinrelationtosocialinnovationandtogovernment

    experimentation.Assomeonewithstakesinthesemattersasacitizen,user,

    researcher,educatorandconsultant,mydiscussionisunapologetically

  • interventionistandactivisti.ItakewhatIunderstandtobethepossibilitiesof

    inventivesocialresearchandexplorehowitcanreconfiguredevices,practices

    andnarrativesassociatedwith‘innovation’tochangehowthingsaredonein

    publicpolicycontexts.Myhopeisthattheacademicdiscussioninthisbook,

    whichrecognizesthepotentialforengagementbetweensocialresearchand

    creativepracticeandexperimentationinsociallifecanintersectproductively

    withthepracticesofsocialandgovernmentinnovationthroughwhichpublic

    issuesareformedandaddressed.Howeverthismightpresentsomechallenges

    becauseoftheemphasisintheseworldsondemonstratingshort-term

    achievementsandeasilytraceablepassagesbetweeninsightandevidenceand

    actionandoutcome.

    Theword‘innovation’hasgainedwidecurrencyinacontextinwhichneo-

    liberalismincreasinglypushespublicservants,politiciansandcitizenstocome

    upwithnovelsolutionstosociety’sissues.Socialandgovernmentinnovationare

    perhapsbettercharacterizedasinvention(Barry2001),whichforegroundsthe

    processualandperformativenatureofhownovelsolutionsareconstitutedand

    re-made.Inventionmightbeseenasaphaseorstagewithinaninnovation

    process,emphasisingthereconfiguringofconstituentelementsintonovel

    arrangements,whichcannotbepre-determined(Garudetal2013).Butmore

    thanatemporalphase,theconceptofinventionalsopointstothelogicsthrough

    whichnewcombinationsofresourcesareassembledandthroughwhichnew

    publicsandissuesarebroughtintobeing.

  • Recentdevelopmentssuggestgrowingvisibilityofactivitiesseenas,orhopedto

    resultin,innovationinrelationtopublicadministrations,withclosealignmentto

    relatedexperimentationhappeninginbusiness.Argumentsfor‘mission-

    oriented’innovationintoday’sgovernments(egMazzucato2013)intersectwith

    ‘agile’softwaredevelopment(egGovernmentDigitalService2016),‘lean’start

    up(egRies2011),‘smart’government(egNoveck2015)andnewpartnerships

    betweengovernment,businessandsocialenterprise(EggersandMacmillan

    2013).Suchdevelopmentshaveco-emergedalongsiderelatedactivitieswithin

    thinktanksandcommunityandvoluntarygroupsaswellasbeinginformedby

    academicresearchii.Theyarealsoshapedbyneo-liberaldriverswithinsome

    governmentstopromoteausterity,drivecommercialisationofpublicservice

    provisionandco-producesolutionswithsocialactors,sometimesshiftingthe

    responsibilityforaddressingsociety’sissuesawayfromgovernmentstoothers

    (Julier2017).Asaresult,todifferingextents,itispossibletofindbigdata

    analysis,digitalplatforms,socialmediaengagementandanalysis,randomised

    controltrials,participatorydesignandsocialandbehaviouralresearchused

    alongsideoneanothertogenerateandexploresuchsolutionstopolicyissues(in

    thecaseofgovernmentinnovation)ortoaddressproblemsthatmayresultfrom

    policydecisionsandactions,ortheirlack(inthecaseofsocialinnovation).

    Commontobothsocialandgovernmentinnovationarepreoccupationswith,and

    narrativesabout,experimentation,politics,participationandsystemschange.

    Challengesinsocialandgovernmentinnovation

  • Muchsocialandgovernmentinnovationascurrentlyorganisedistiedupwith

    ‘challenges’.Sometimesachallengeissimplyexpressedintheformofa

    summaryofanissueandaquestionstarting‘howcanwe…?’iiiSuchchallenges

    arearticulationsofissueswhichmanagersofpublicservices,policymakers,

    funders,businessesandentrepreneursaswellasuniversitiesandthirdsector

    groupsorganisethemselvesinrelationto,possiblywiththeinvolvementof

    academicsandwithacademicresearch.Familiartopicsincludeaddressing

    environmentalchange,tacklingobesityorimprovingprospectsforpeoplefacing

    unemployment.Theconstructionandarticulationofsuchchallengestakesa

    varietyofformsdependingonone’slocationinrelationtoanissue,withvarying

    degreesofagency,accountabilityandlegitimacy.Forexamplefunders,

    consultancies,universities,thinktanks,communitygroupsandservice

    provsidersmayconstructorbeinvitedtorespondtoachallengeviamechanisms

    suchasinvitationstotender,callsforproposals,competitions,sandpits,jams,

    anddesignbriefs,withassociatedplatforms,resources,networks,fundingand

    meansofassessingtowhatextentachallengecanorhasbeenaddressed.

    Funders,policyteams,researchersandmanagersseektomobilisediverse

    resourcesinaddressinganissueincludingresearchers,professionals,citizens,

    activistsor‘users’–oftenwithuncertainmotivations,accountabilitiesor

    rewardsanddifferentlevelsofurgency–alongsidedifferentinstitutional

    researchcapacities,organisationalroutines,datasetsandmodesofparticipation.

    Indeed,suchistheextentofthechallengethatthereisnowacentrestudying

    andgivingguidanceonorganisingoneiv.Accordingly,inwhatfollowsIidentify

    someofthecurrentchallengeswithinsocialinnovationandgovernment

    innovation,informedbymyresearchandpracticeintheUK.Aspresentedbelow,

  • thesechallengesarealsoapproachesortechniquesusedtoaddresspublicissues.

    Buttheyarethemselvesorganisationalissueswithwhichpublicleadersand

    managersarepreoccupied,inacontextinwhichtheyarerequiredtoproduce

    their‘innovations’.

    Thechallengeofunderstandingandsettingissues.Oftendescribedas‘wicked’

    (RittelandWebber1972)or‘complex’(egSnowdenandBoone2007),today’s

    problemsarticulatedinthecontextofsocialinnovationorpolicyinnovationare

    dynamic,multi-actorandmulti-sited.Informedbyperspectivesinsystems

    theory,futuresandstrategicmanagement,therehasbeenrecognitionforseveral

    decadesthat‘transdisciplinaryapproaches’(Bernstein2015)areneededto

    addresssuchissues.Issuessuchasloweducationalattainmentforwhite

    workingclassboysintheUKcrosstheboundariesofdisciplines,organisational

    capabilities,sitesofpracticeandscalesofgovernment,requiringactorstowork

    togethertounderstandthesocialworldtheywanttochange.Suchissuesare

    seenasdynamicandinfluxandashavinginterdependencies,contingenciesand

    feedbackloopsthatmakethemhardtoidentify,describeoranalyse.Issuesco-

    emergewithpublics;non-governmentstakeholderscanplayactiverolesin

    enrollingothersintoanissue(Marres2005;Hillgrenetal2016).Butdespite

    thesemoves,inmanycasespolicyorsocialproblemshaveendured,despitethe

    applicationoveryearsofdifferentkindsofexpertise,analysis,investmentsin

    organizationalchange,changesinleadership,technology,andotherresourcesas

    wellasfluctuationsincollectivevisionsaboutwhichproblemsmatter.Different

    assumptionsplayouthereaboutwhatcountsasevidencethatthereisanissue,

    whatkindofissueitisandforwhom.Bigdataandbehaviouralresearchare

  • increasinglyevidentasresourcesanddriversoforganisationalattentioninthe

    policyecosystem(Dunleavy2016).Suchevidenceisoftentiedtothecapacities

    ofcorporationstoassemble,organiseandanalyselargedatasetsproviding

    particularkindsofsocialdata.Butalongsidebigdatatooaremicro-social

    perspectivesfromethnographyaswellasparticipatoryapproachestoexploring

    issuesthroughworkshops,eventsandonlineplatforms.Thegrowingavailability

    ofandinterconnectionsbetweendifferentformsofdataarereconfiguringsocial

    andgovernmentinnovationlandscapes.

    Thechallengeofgeneratingandexploringsolutions.Inacontextinwhichissues

    areseenasdynamic,multi-sitedandmulti-actor,thenadvocatesforsocialand

    governmentinnovationoftenargueforanexperimentalapproach(egBreckon

    2015).Differentkindsofexperimentalityemergeinresponsetodifferentsocial

    orpolicyissuesinvolvingdifferentkindsoforganisationalapparatus.Some

    approaches,forexample,healthcareimprovement(egRobertandMacdonald

    2016),recognisethevalueoflocalactorswithastakeinanissuebeinginvolved

    ingeneratingandco-producingsolutions–whichhandilycoincideswitha

    smallerroleforgovernmentinaneo-liberalworld(Julier2017).Digital

    platformsareoftenimplicatedintheworkofgoverning.Someresponsesto

    socialorpublicpolicyissues,suchastheOpenIDEOdigitalplatformvpublish

    openchallengessetbyapolicyteam,foundationorcorporatesponsorand

    structureandenableprocessesthataimtoengagepeoplenotpreviously

    connectedtoanissuetoexploreitandgenerateanditeratepossiblesolutions.

    Alongsidethiskindofexperimentation,othertraditionshavebecomemore

    visibleinsidegovernmentandpublicpolicy.Inparticularrandomisedcontrol

  • trialsadaptedfromclinicalsciencesarepromotedbysomefunders,researchers

    andcivilservantsaswaystotestideasandprovideevidenceforpolicydecisions

    about‘whatworks’,oftentiedtobehaviouraltheory(seePuttick2012;Halpern

    2015)vi.Asinscienceandtechnologystudies(STS),forcivilservantsandsocial

    entrepreneursapersistentpreoccupationisscale,notasananalyticalconstruct

    butasanoperationalachievement:howcansolutionsdevelopedandtestedhere,

    berolledoutandeffectivethere?

    Thechallengeofunderstandingchange.Currentpracticeinsocialand

    governmentinnovationtosomeextentrecognisesthatmultipleactorsare

    involvedinconstitutinganissueandthenshapingpotentialresponsestodoing

    somethingaboutitinordertoachieveintended‘outcomes’,recognisingthat

    unintendedconsequenceswillalsoresult.Tounderstandaproblemorto

    generateasolution,amanagerinavoluntarysectororganizationoracivil

    servantmaybeaskedtoarticulatea‘theoryofchange’.Theoriesofchangein

    playoftenforegroundmicro-socialworldsand‘choices’madebyindividuals

    ratherthansocialpractices(e.g.Shoveetal2012)orareinformedby,drawon

    anddeployformsoftechnologicaldeterminism(e.g.WilkieandMichael2008).

    Somedomainssuchashealthcareimprovementallowanunderstandingof

    changethatrecognizesmultiplekindsofsocialworldandresearchers’and

    managers’participationwithinitalongsidethebeneficiariesofinterventionsor

    usersofservices.Butinothercases,innovationtoolkitsviiandcallsforproposals

    publishedbycommissionersofservicesspreadtheideathatsuchtheoriesof

    changecanbeadequatelydescribedinapageortwo.Somefunders,forexample,

    requireapplicantstodescribetheirtheoryofchangeunderpinningaproject(eg

  • Nesta2016).Elsewhere,methodsdrawingonparticipatorydesigninsocialor

    policyinnovationworkshopsaskparticipantstomaterialisemodelsofpotential

    solutionsandactoutthroughroleplayhowsolutionsmightchangeasituation

    (Kimbell2015).Indescribinghowadesiredchangeinasocialworldmight

    unfoldasaresultofaproposedintervention,participantsareaskedto

    foreground‘barriers’tochangeandhowtheseneedtobeaddressedin

    implementingasolution.Thetemporalandspatialorderingofhowchangeis

    constituted,experienced,understood,assessedandevaluatedisdownplayed.

    Discussionsofwhohasagencytomakechangeandtheconditionsand

    possibilitiesaroundthisareoftenleftunexamined.

    Thechallengeofparticipation.Fromdifferentperspectives,socialinnovationand

    governmentinnovationarebothpremisedoncurrentandfuturerelations

    betweenactorsinvolvedinanissue.Suchpracticesforegroundhumanactors

    suchas‘users’,‘citizens’orpossibly‘beneficiaries’,oftenalreadyidentifiedas

    involvedinanissueandhavingparticular‘needs’or‘capacities’.Insocial

    innovationandgovernmentinnovationpractice,emergingactivitiesinclude

    generatinginsightsaboutwhatishappeninginasocialworldfromthe

    perspectiveofsuchactors;identifyingandmobilisingemergingpractices;

    identifyingnon-obviousactorsinanissue;andengagingactorsingeneratingand

    possiblyco-producingsolutions.Inthecaseofcaringforolderpeople,for

    example,humanactorsmightincludepeopledirectlyexperiencingthesocialor

    policychallenge(e.g.olderpeopleandtheirfamilies,friendsorneighbours),

    professionals(e.g.socialworkers,healthvisitors,nurses),serviceproviders(e.g.

    carersworkingformunicipalitiesorcommercialfirms),businesses(eg

  • entrepreneursorlocalshopsorutilities),researchers(socialorhealthcare

    researchers,butalsodataanalysts),andvoluntaryorcommunitygroups(e.g.

    thoseworkingwitholderpeopleorcarers).AperspectivefromSTSwouldalso

    emphasisethenon-humanactorsthatco-constituteadultsocialcare,suchas

    assistivetechnologies,particularkindsofhousingarrangementandlayout,

    conceptssuchas‘ageing’and‘caring’andfinancialmodelsforcareservices.For

    peopleself-identifyingassocialorgovernmentinnovators,acknowledgingand

    engagingawidearrayofactorsmaybedriveninpartbyopennesstoemergence

    aswellasdemocraticideals.Nonethelessexistingandfuturelevelsofagencyand

    powerrelationsmaybeunder-examined.Forinnovatorsinsidegovernment,

    participationhasacomplicatedrelationshiptoformaldemocraticstructuresand

    processes,partypoliticsandthemedia.Forexampleinvitingresponsesviaan

    onlineconsultationorthroughparticipationinapolicyworkshopcanprivilege

    somecontributionsoverothers(egFortier2010).

    Opportunitiesforinventiveapproaches

    Thesebriefsummariesofsomeofthechallengesfacingthoseinvolvedinsocial

    andgovernmentinnovationhavehighlightedsomeconcernsthatresonatewith

    inventivesocialresearch.Whilesomereadersmayobjecttomyemphasison

    relativelyshort-term,easily-traceableintervention,Iwanttoexplorewhat

    inventivesocialresearchhasto‘offer’servicemanagers,deliverypartners,policy

    makers,fundersorcommunitiesentangledwiththesechallenges.Howmight

    inventivesocialresearchexpressandconnectsocialphenomenainthesettingsI

    describe,resultinginchangesinhowthingsaredone,aswellasinnewinsights?

  • Howdoesitchallengedominantnotionsofinnovationingovernmentand

    society?Thethingsthatinventivesocialresearchmightofferorprovoke,

    however,arenotnecessarilywhattheseactorswant,value,orhavecapacityto

    engagewith,atopictowhichIwillreturnlater.

    Challengingthechallenge.Asindicatedinthisbook,acorecharacteristicof

    inventivesocialresearchishowitproblematisesanissue.Insteadoftakingupa

    challengeasinitiallyarticulatedorframed,inventivesocialresearchstartswitha

    queryintoadomain.Itdoesnottakeasgiventheconstituentsofanissue.

    Throughsuchresearch,asocialorpolicyinnovationchallengeislikelytobe

    reconfigured.Thismayallowidentificationofspecificaspectsthatneed

    addressing,oracknowledgementofdifferentactorsfromthoseoriginally

    thoughttobepartoftheissue,orashiftinlocation,scaleortimeframe.For

    exampleinhischapteronmakinginterventionstotheBarcelonaPavilion,Jacque

    revealsthematerialpractices,objectsandmaterialsassociatedwithits

    maintenanceandmanagement,bytemporarilyrecomposingtheconstituentsof

    thepavilion.Forsocialorpolicyinnovators,inventivesocialsciencedraws

    attentiontothepossibilitythatthechallengemotivatingtheirworkiscomposed

    differentlythantheyoriginallyunderstood,whichcanberevealedthrough

    creativeintervention.Theactorsorpublicsinvolvedinconstitutingthechallenge

    mightnotbetheonesinitiallyassumedtobepartofit,andtheircapacitiesmight

    alsobeotherthanoriginallyunderstood(StilgoeandGuston2017).

    Sensitisingparticipantstothe‘socials’beingenacted.Inventivesocialresearch

    doesnottakethe‘social’asagivenbutperformsanemergingunderstandingof

  • particularsocialsthroughexperimentalco-articulation–offeringan‘experiential

    togetherness’asSavranskyobservesinhischapter.Byintentionallymodifying

    settingsorpromptingactorstoexpressthemselvesorperformdifferently,social

    phemomenabecomevisibleinnewways.Inventiveresearchrevealsthe

    agenciesanddifferentkindsofsocialwhichmayco-existandinteractwithone

    another.Beingabletoidentify,bringintoview,oranalysethesewithinaproject

    canenablethoseworkinginsocialinnovationorgovernmentinnovationto

    developandcontinuallyrevisetheirunderstandingsofthepolicydomainand

    howpotentialsolutionsarereconfigured.Thiscanhelpthemthinkthroughthe

    waysinwhichtheproblemmightchangeasexperimentationproceeds–and

    drawattentiontohowaproject’sactivitiesareimplicatedinarticulating

    particularsocials.

    Generatinginfrastructures/practicesthatconstituteanissueorpublic.The

    versionsofinventivesocialresearchthatcombinedesignandSTSresemble

    somecontemporaryactivitieswithinsocialandgovernmentinnovation.

    Expertisewhichbridgesresearchandpracticeisnowbeingdevelopedas

    capabilitiesinsidegovernmentteamsandsocialinnovationnetworks.For

    example,civilservantsintheUKgovernmentareusingcreativeapproachesthat

    combinethedoing,representingandinterveninginpolicydevelopment(eg

    Kimbell2015).Bycombiningdifferentkindsofresearch,materialisingmodelsof

    potentialpoliciesandorganisingparticipatoryworkshops,multiple

    understandingsofthepolicyissueandpotentialinterventionsarebroughtinto

    view,changingtheissueandtheinstitutionofgovernment,notjustrepresenting

    theissue.Forsocialorpolicyinnovators,adoptinganinventiveapproachwould

  • allowthemtobetterunderstandhowpolicyagendas,devices,workprogrammes

    andpublicsareconfiguredrelationally.Itwouldallowsuchpractitionersto

    recogniseandreflectontheirrolesindoinginfrastructuringworkbyproviding

    resources,designingworkprogrammesandproducingdevicessuchasmodels,

    frameworks,guidelinesandcriteria(egLeDantecandDisalvo2014;Hilgrenetal

    2016).

    Enablingattentivenesstoscaling.Scalingandthedistributionofagencyarelong-

    standingconcernswithinSTSandareevidentininventiveapproachestosocial

    research.ForexampleNold’smacroandmicroprototypesconnecttheissueof

    noiseannoyanceatHeathrowandpublicswithinnewconfigurations.Wilkieand

    Michael’schaptershowshowthesituatedperformancesofthenetworked

    EnergyBabbledisruptedassumptionsoftheresearchfundersabout‘community’

    andpolicyframingsabouttheusageofinformationfromsmartmeters.Inventive

    socialresearchinsocialinnovationorgovernmentinnovationcontextscan

    highlighthowscaleisperformed,ratherthanpre-existing,assumedorgiven.It

    hasthepotentialtogeneratenewpossibilitiesenablingintendedoutcomestobe

    identified,assessedandrevisedwhilebeingopentorecognizinghownovel

    configurationsandconsequencesunfoldinpractice.

    Openinguptheworkofresearching.Inventivesocialresearchdrawsontraditions

    whichhighlightthedistributionofagencyacrosshumanandnon-humanactors

    andthetranslationsinvolvedproducingknowledgeandachievingtechnological

    change.MarresandGerlitz’saccountofacollaborativeanalysisofadatasetfrom

    Twittershowedhowcategoriessuchas‘frequency’or‘volume’gotinthewayof

  • detectingthesocialityofTwitter,whichledtotheresearchteamrefocusingtheir

    attentionondevelopingothermeanstoaccessdynamicinteractionsbetween

    Twitteraccounts.IntheirchapterGuggenheimetalcombineobjects,situations

    andpressuretodemonstratethe(creative)workthatgoesoninresearchingan

    issue.Bringingtheseorientationsintosocialandgovernmentinnovationdraws

    attentiontothematerialpractices,eventsandactorsinvolvedindoingand

    representingresearchandinterveningintoanissue.Insteadofanalyzingand

    reproducing‘whatworks’–acontemporarypreoccupationwithinsocialor

    governmentinnovation,thisapproachcanhighlightwhatisrequiredfora

    solutionto‘work’andthepracticalaccomplishmentsofdoingresearchinsocial

    andgovernmentsettings.

    Inshortthereispotentialforinventiveapproachestoengagedirectlywithsocial

    innovationandgovernmentsettings.By‘directly’Imeanacademicresearchers

    workingexperimentallyincollaborationwithpeople(whomayhaveresearch

    training)inlocalorcentralgovernment,communityandvoluntarygroups,think

    tanks,serviceproviders,entrepreneurs,activistsorothersinthepolicy

    ecosystemwhoareengagedinunderstandingaproblemdomainandintervening

    intoit.Someofthechallengessuchindividualsorteamsfaceindoingtheworkof

    socialorgovernmentinnovationpresentopportunitiestoenactnovelkindsof

    doing,representingandinterveninginsocialworlds.Whilethismaybedriven

    by,andresultin,theprioritisationofshort-term,easilytraceableassociations,on

    theotherhandthereisalsopotentialforinventiveresearchtointervenetooin

    institutionalpractices,devicesandnarrativesthatdrivethisshort-termism.

  • Implications

    Inventivesocialresearchcanproblematiseaccountsofpolicyissuesand

    potentialsolutionsdevelopedinrelationtothem.Itcanproposemodesofdoing

    researchbyopeninguptheoriesofchange,identifyinghowscaleoperates,

    acknowledginghumanandnon-humanconstituentsandagency,andexamining

    thegovernanceandstylesofparticipationenactedinaproject.Insodoing,new

    possibilitieswillemerge.Byengagingexperimentallyinreconfiguringprojects

    thataimtoaddresssocialorpublicpolicyissues,researchersmayhelparticulate

    anddetectnewsocials;developnewdevices,infrastructuresandmethods;and

    produceunderstandingoftheirgenealogies,possibilitiesandlimits.Theymay

    alsobeabletosituatethemselvesmorecloselyinrelationtosomeofthe

    challengesthatserviceproviders,policymakersandactivistsareinvolvedinby

    co-producing‘change’aswellas‘knowledge’(FacerandEnright2016).

    Withthepossibilityofcloserengagementbetweeninventivesocialresearchand

    socialandgovernmentinnovationcomeanumberofmattersthatneedfurther

    consideration.Thefirstisthedifferenttemporalitiesthatcomeintoplayinthe

    worldsofacademicresearch,whichmaynotbealignedwiththosewithinsocial

    innovationandpolicyexperimentation.Academiahasitsowntemporal

    intensitiesthatemerge,forexample,whenapplyingforfunding,doingresearch,

    presentingatworkshopsorconferences,andwritingpapersorbooks,aswellas

    movingbetweenjobsorinstitutions.Someofthesetakeplaceoverdaysor

    weeks;somemaytakeplaceoverseveralyears.Withinsocialinnovationand

    governmentinnovation,timescalesareequallyvariedandintense.Invitationsto

  • tendermayhavedeadlinesofweeksormonths,researchundertakentoshape

    policymakingmaytakemonths,whileeffortstoresearch,developandredesign

    aservicemighttakemonthsoryears.Incontrastaministermightwantapolicy

    recommendationtobeproducedinamatterofdays;acampaigntochange

    regulationsorthelawmighttakeyears.Aligningtheperspectivesandresources

    ofresearchersinrelationtoorganisationalroutinesandresourcesinsidepublic

    administrationsandtheorganisationalecosystemsaroundthemisnotatrivial

    matterbutasGuggenheimetalargue,theapplicationofpressuremaybe

    productive.

    Asecondandrelatedissueistheaccountabilitiesheldbydifferentactors

    involvedinaninventivecollaboration.Academicsmightholdthemselves

    accountabletocolleagues,currentorfuturestudents,theirinstitutions,funders,

    professionalbodiesorpartnersfromcivilsociety,businessorthepublicsector.

    Managers,volunteers,activistsorcivilservantshaveotheraccountabilities

    whichmightincludetocolleagues,professionalbodies,serviceusersor

    residents,fundersanddonors,organisationalpartners,codesofpractice,orto

    publicbodiessuchasparliament.Bringingintoviewandarticulatingdistinct

    accountabilitiesatdifferentlevelsofinstitutionalisationandformality,

    recognizingthattheseaccountabilitiesmaycontinuetochange,requires

    attentionandreflexivity.

    Athirdissueisthejostlingforpowerandnegotiationsbetweendifferentkindsof

    expertiserequiredtodoinventivesocialresearch,whichalsoemergesinother

    kindsofappliedacademicresearch.IntheirchapterGuggenheimetalpropose

  • thatexperts‘accompany’alaypersonalonganexperimentalpath.Doing

    inventivesocialresearchinthecontextofsocialorgovernmentinnovation

    requiresawarenessofdifferentkindsandsitesofexpertiseandthe

    infrastructures,practicesanddevicesthatenablethis.Indifferentways,the

    contributorstothisbookrevealsomeoftheskillsandknowledgerequiredto

    undertakeinventivesocio-materialandaestheticexperiments.Asthe

    connectionsbetweensocialandgovernmentinnovatorsandcreativepractices

    continueintensify,newpatternsofexpertisewillemergewithininventive

    research.Moreintersectionsbetweenthekindsofacademicresearchdiscussed

    inthisvolumeandthepracticesIhavedescribedwillleadtothedevelopmentof

    newtools,bureaucraticrelationshipsandsystemsofvalorisationand

    governance.

    Eachoftheseissuesshapesthematerialpractices,devices,infrastructuresand

    processesofdoinginventiveresearchinthecontextsofsocialandgovernment

    innovation.Bybeingattentivetotemporalities,accountabilitiesandexpertiseas

    constitutiveofinventiveresearch,suchexperimentalcollaborationswillplayout

    differently.

    Toconclude,thissketchhassuggestedhowinventivesocialresearchmight

    engagewithcurrentpreoccupationsandpracticesinsocialinnovationand

    governmentinnovation.Sharedconcernsincludeexperimentation,systems,

    participationandthereorderingandreconfiguringofasocialworldandthe

    politicsofsodoing.Bydrawingattentiontotheprocessualreconfiguringof

    resourcesandrelationsthroughachangeprocess,inventiveresearchersand

  • theircollaboratorsinsocialinnovationandgovernmentsettingsmayadd

    nuance,criticalappreciationofandinsighttotheclaimsmadeforandabout

    innovation.MyhopeisthatmydescriptionofthechallengesIseeinsocialand

    governmentinnovationandbriefoutlineofhowthiscouldunfoldwillsparknew

    engagements.Attheveryleast,thisaccountmaypromptinterestamong

    researchersinsomeofthesesettingsinmoreinventivedoing,representingand

    intervening.

    References

    Bernstein,J.H.,‘Transdisciplinarity:Areviewofitsorigins,development,and

    currentissues’,JournalofResearchPractice,11(1),2015,ArticleR1.Retrieved

    fromhttp://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/article/view/510/412Accessed2July,

    2017).


    Breckon,J.,BetterPublicServicesThroughExperimentalGovernment,(London:

    AllianceforUsefulEvidence,2015).

    Chen,D.-S.,Cheng,L.-L.,Hummels,C.,andKoskinen,I.,‘Socialdesign:An

    introduction’,InternationalJournalofDesign,2016,10(1),1-5.

    Dunleavy,P.‘”Bigdata”andpolicylearning’,inGerryStokerandMarkEvans,

    eds,MethodsthatMatter:SocialScienceandEvidence-BasedPolicymaking,

    (Bristol:ThePolicyPress,2016).

  • Eggers,W.andMacmillan,P.,TheSolutionRevolution:HowBusiness,Government,

    andSocialEnterprisesAreTeamingUptoSolveSociety'sToughestProblems,

    (Boston:HarvardBusinessSchoolPublishing,2013).

    Facer,K.andEnright,B.,CreatingLivingKnowledge.TheConnectedCommunities

    Programme,CommunityUniversityRelationshipsandtheParticipatoryTurninthe

    ProductionofKnowledge,(Bristol:UniversityofBristol/AHRCConnected

    Communities,2016).

    Fortier,A-M.‘Proximitybydesign?AffectiveCitizenshipandtheManagementof

    Unease’,CitizenshipStudies,2010,14(1):17-30.

    Garud,R.,Tuertscher,P.andVandeVen,A.‘PerspectivesonInnovation

    Processes’,TheAcademyofManagementAnnals,2013,7(1):775-819.

    GovernmentDigitalService,‘Agiledelivery’,2016,

    [accessed4December

    2016].

    Halpern,D.,InsidetheNudgeUnit:HowSmallChangesCanMakeaBigDifference,

    (London:Penguin,2016).

    Hillgren,P.A.,Seravalli,A.andErikson,M.,‘Counter-hegemonicPractices;

    DynamicInterplayBetweenAgonism,CommoningandStrategicDesign’,

    StrategicDesignResearchJournal,2016,9(2):89-99.

    Julier,G.,EconomiesofDesign.(London:Sage,2017).

    Julier,G.andKimbell,L.,Co-producingSocialFuturesThroughDesignResearch,

    (Brighton:UniversityofBrighton,2016).

    Kimbell,L.,ApplyingDesignApproachestoPolicyMaking:DiscoveringPolicyLab,

    (Brighton:UniversityofBrighton,2015).

  • LeDantec,C.A.andC.DiSalvo,‘Infrastructuringandtheformationofpublics’,

    SocialStudiesofScience,2013,43(2):241–264.

    Mazzucato,M.,TheEntrepreneurialState–DebunkingPublicvs.PrivateSector

    Myths,(London:AnthemPress,2013).

    Mulgan,G.,Tucker,S.Ali,R.andSanders,B.,SocialInnovation:WhatItIs,WhyIt

    MattersandHowItCanBeAccelerated.(Oxford:SkollCentreforSocial

    Entrepreneurship,2006).

    Nesta/TheSocialInnovationPartnership.‘GuidanceforDevelopingaTheoryof

    ChangeforYourProgramme’,2016,

    [accessed2November2016].


    Nicholls,A.andMurdock,A.,eds,SocialInnovation:BlurringBoundariesto

    ReconfigureMarkets,(Basingstoke:PalgraveMacMillan,2011).

    Noveck,B.,SmartCitizens,SmarterState:ThetechnologiesofExpertiseandthe

    FutureofGoverning,(Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress,2015).

    OECD.(2016).ObservatoryofPublicSectorInnovation.

    [accessed2

    September2016].


    Puttick,R.WhyWeNeedtoCreateaNICEforSocialPolicy,(London:Nesta,2012).

    Puttick,R.,Baeck,P.andColligan,P.,I-teams.TheTeamsandFundsMaking

    InnovationHappeninGovernmentsAroundtheWorld.(London:

    Nesta/BloombergPhilanthropies,2014).

    Ries,E.TheLeanStartUp.HowRelentlessChangeCreatesRadicallySuccessful

    Businesses.(NewYork:CrownBusiness,2011).

  • Rittel,H.W.J.andWebber,M.M.,‘DilemmasinaGeneralTheoryofPlanning’,

    PolicySciences,1973,4:155-169.

    Robert,G.andA.Macdonald.‘Co-design,OrganisationalCreativityandQuality

    ImprovementintheHealthcareSector:“Designerly”or“Design-like”?’inD.

    SangiorgiandA.Prendiville,eds,,DesigningforService:KeyIssuesandDirections,

    117-129(London:Bloomsbury,2017).

    Shove,E.,Pantzar,M.andWatson,M.TheDynamicsofSocialPractice

    EverydayLifeandHowitChanges.(London:Sage,2012).

    Snowden,D.,andM.Boone,‘ALeader’sFrameworkforDecisionMaking’,

    HarvardBusinessReview,(November,2007)

    Stilgoe,J.andGuston,D.,‘Responsibleresearchandinnovation’,inFelt,U.,

    Fouché,R.,Miller,C.andSmith-Doerr,L.,eds,4thedition,HandbookofScience

    andTechnologyStudies,2017,853-880

    Williamson,B.‘Thedigitalmethodsandimaginationofinnovationlabs’,,2015,

    ,[accessed21September2015]

    YoungFoundation,History,2017,[accessed11June2017].

    iIhavebeeninvolvedindifferentwayswithinthesedevelopmentsforoveradecade:asaneducatorteachingdesignthinkingtoMBAstudentsandsocialentrepreneurs;asformerheadofsocialdesignatTheYoungFoundation;asaresearcherstudyingsocialdesignfortheArtsandHumanitiesResearchCouncil(AHRC);asaresearcherembeddedforayearinPolicyLab,ateamintheCabinetOfficeoftheUKgovernmentviaanAHRCfellowship;asaconsultanthelpinggovernmentbodiesdevelopdesigncapabilities;asauserofpublicservices;andasanactivistwhereIlive.iiThereisalongtraditionofthinktanksintheUKandotherpolicyecosystemswhichcarryoutresearchandundertakeexperimentsinrelationtosocialissuesthataresometimestranslatedintopublicpolicy.AnearlyexamplewastheInstituteofCommunityStudiessetupbyMichaelYoungin1952.Throughhis

  • writing,workontheLabourPartymanifestoin1945,involvementinthecreationofinstitutionssuchastheOpenUniversity,Younghaslongbeenrecognizedanearlysocialinnovatorwhoseexpertisebridgedsocialresearch,publicpolicyandorganistionalaction(YoungFoundation2017).iiiAnexerciseinwhichparticipantsnotedownandthensharechallengesintheform‘howcanwe…?”iscommonintheworkofPolicyLab,ateamintheUKgovernment’sCabinetOffice.Seehttps://www.slideshare.net/Openpolicymaking/policy-lab-slide-share-introduction-final[accessed11June2016].ivTheUK’sinnovationagencyNestasetupaChallengePrizeCentrein2012tostudyandpromote‘challenge-based’innovation,[accessed11June2016].vInternationaldesignconsultancyIDEO’splatformpartnerswithfoundations,corporatesponsorsandgovernmentbodiestosetchallengesforitsuserstorespondto,,[accessed11June2016].viAleadingexamplehereistheUK-basedinternationalBehaviouralInsightsTeamoriginallysetupintheUKgovernment’sCabinetOffice,whichitnowco-ownswiththeUKinnovationcharityNestaandtheseniormanagementteam.SeetheaccountofitschiefexecutiveDavidHalpern(2015).Suchapproachesarenotwithoutcriticism.viiSeeforexampletheDevelopmentImpactandYouToolkitaimedatpeopleworkingindevelopmentcontexts,producedbyUKinnovationagencyNestaandfundedbytheRockefellerFoundation,,[accessed11June2016].