Conducting literature review on Social innovation and industry 4.0

This report conducts a literature review on the relationship between social innovation and industry 4.0. It explores the impact of industry 4.0 on social innovation and the factors influencing co-production and co-creation methods with society. The study aims to bridge the gap between various theories and provide insights into tackling industry 4.0 from a social perspective.

Running head: SOCIAL INNOVATION AND INDUSTRY
Social innovation and industry 4.0
Name of the student:
Name of the university:
Author Note

1SOCIAL INNOVATION AND INDUSTRY
Abstract
In this report, the effects of social innovation and industry 4.0 are understood. For this, research is
conducted on various prior books and journals. Here an exploratory approach is determined to
analyze how to tackle industry 4.0 from a social perspective. More precisely, the kind of relationship
between industry 4.0 and social innovation is clearly demonstrated through this study. A gap
between various theories is bridged here.

2SOCIAL INNOVATION AND INDUSTRY
Title: Conducting literature review on Social innovation and industry 4.0
1. Introduction:
1.1. Rationale:
The social innovations refer to new ideas meeting various social needs. This also includes the
development of relationships and generating different collaborations. Moreover, the innovations are
models, services and products that address various unmet necessities. It is a novel solution to any
social issue, which is more sustainable, efficient and effective apart from being an existing solution.
Here, the value generated accrues mainly to society, instead of a private one. Besides, this
innovation is coped up with industry 4.0. Social innovation has been related to every societal and
social issues and demands where any kind of innovation is helpful to procure the development on the
basis of progress and newness. This is the new way to address the necessities and solve challenges
through determining latest idea or social structures. This induces the shift towards the demand-pull
model. Here the solutions are been found to be adapted by huge number of people participating in
development with an explicit concentration over social interactions.
The industry 4.0 refers to the present trend of data exchange and automation in various
manufacturing innovations. This involves cognitive computing, cloud computing. Internet of Things
and cyber-physical systems. Further, it is also indicated as the fourth industrial revolution. With the
advent of this latest digital industrial technology or industry 4.0, there is a transformation possible to
collect and investigate information around more flexible, enabling quicker, machines and more
effective methods. This is create more higher-quality good at lesser expenses. Further, this
revolution in manufacturing has risen the productivity, fostered industrial growth, shift economic

3SOCIAL INNOVATION AND INDUSTRY
and change the workforce profile. This has ultimately changed the competitiveness of regions and
companies.
1.1.1. Gap analysis:
Regarding social innovations there are promising emergence of effect of market forces,
investing that has never pushed mainstream capital in the field of social innovations. Then the social
innovation funders has been drawing the novelty of the idea stage. Thirdly, there are scaling of social
innovations within the long-term processes. This is rare for funders to develop multi-year
commitments and stands by leaders. This s done through ups and downs coming with efforts for
creating the long-term changes.
Besides, for innovation 4.0 it is found that IoT is a primary concern. There are skills and
educations of workers needed for working over industry 4.0 on the basis of processes required to get
developed. Besides, there are redundant workers under corporate IT department and thus adopting
industry 4.0 is an important threat for the IT staffs. Besides, there are common reluctance for
changing the industry 4.0 by the stakeholders of the company. There, are necessities to eradicate
various IT snags as this results in expensive outages of the production.
1.2. Objectives:
The current study focuses on the following objectives.

4SOCIAL INNOVATION AND INDUSTRY
 What is the nature of relationship between industry 4.0 and social
innovation?
 What are the factors influencing co-production and co-creation methods with society?
 What are the results of co-creation and co-production process considering the society?
2. Methods:
2.1. Eligibility criteria:
Study design Here, only empirical studies are considered. Further, more evidence-
based understanding is established regarding adding value to social
innovation and industry 4.0. In this analysis, case studies are included
as the research design to the present literature review. Moreover,
PRISMA approach or “Preferred Reporting Items for
Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses” is included to
develop the literature search strategy. For this an evidence based
minimum set of items are used to report in meta-analysis and
systematic reviews. Moreover, the reports are reviewed that are
analyzed through randomized trails. Additionally, it can be utilized as
the basis to report the systematic reviews of various kinds of research,
specially evaluating interventions. The methodology is well enough as
this is totally an evidence based least set of elements to report the meta-
analysis and systematic reviews. The methodology has been totally
focusing on the reviewing of reports that is investigated through
randomized trails. However, this can be utilized as the platform to
report systematic reviews of different kinds of researches, especially

5SOCIAL INNOVATION AND INDUSTRY
analysis of various interventions.
Report characteristic In this review, English written documents are chosen provided with a
reliability of review and practical complexities to translate. The
publication status consists of worldwide peer-reviewed books and
articles from the area of public administration. As far as year of
publication is considered, the records are chosen from 2014 to 2019.
2.2. Information sources:
Here, the screening of every books and article has ultimately led to include 8 studies (3 on
social innovation and 5 on social innovation and industry 4.0).
2.3. Search:
For the search, three search strategies are used. Firstly, the electronic databases were
searched through the terms society and innovation. Secondly, the same topic is searched in the
public administrative journals in the name of public management review, research and theory,
society and administration. Next, the books of society and innovation in an industry 4.0 are
analyzed. This is done by Google Books. However, as the second step is repetitive, it gives rise to
limitation for the study.

6SOCIAL INNOVATION AND INDUSTRY
2.4. Study selection:
The screening of the books and articles have led to the ultimate inclusion of 8 studies.
Figure 1: “PRIMSA Flow diagram for the present research”
(Source: Created by Author)
Records identified through
database searching (n=16)
Sc
re
en
in
g
In
cl
ud
ed
El
igi
bil
ity
Id
en
tif
ic
ati
Additional records identified
through other sources (n=20)
Records after duplicates removed (n= 5)
(n = )
Records screened (n=31)
(n = )
Records excluded (n=17)
(n = )
Full-text articles assessed
for eligibility (n=14)
Full-text articles excluded,
with reasons (6)
Studies included in
systematic review (n=8)

7SOCIAL INNOVATION AND INDUSTRY
Here, n denotes the number of books at any instant. At first, 16 records were identified
through database search. Besides, 20 records are considered from additional sources. Next, 5
duplicate records are removed. Then 17 records are eliminated during screening. Further 6 of them
are excluded as per eligibility. Lastly, 8 studies are left through systematic review.
2.5. Risk of bias in individual studies:
To ascertain the validity of various eligible trials that are randomized, various pairs of
reviewers ware performing independently with sufficient reliability. This indicates the concealment
of allocation, a sufficiency of randomization, data collectors, analyzing outcomes and extending the
loss of following up. This refers to the fact that all the records in which the investigation is done are
unable to ascertain the result. In this study, the trials without any reporting of proper allocation
concealment make exaggeration of treatment impacts in the average. This is as compared to
adequate concealment. Thus it vital for the researcher to demonstrate methods used for gauging the
risk of bias. In this studies and the ways in which the information is used.
2.6. Risk of bias across studies:
There are scopes that the results of the research might influence the decisions. This is to
publish and distribute that. Hence, publication bias can be occurring. Besides, the researchers might
report their outcomes in a selective way. This selective outcome reporting can lead to ORB or
“outcome reporting bias”. This generates from opting with results for publishing various results.
3. Results:
3.1. Study selection:
Here 8 articles are screened. The eligibility is assessed as per gaining more efficiency,
effectiveness, customer satisfaction and rise in citizen involvement. As far as exclusions in every

8SOCIAL INNOVATION AND INDUSTRY
stage are involved, the society side actions are mentioned repeatedly. This includes lowering of
various thresholds. Thus it led to dropping of the cost of participation and provide finical support.
Besides, as the industry 4.0 and officials approach multiple individuals for the society to participate,
they provide plebiscitary choices. This is asking about complex issues with policies. This is peculiar
as the liability to consider the actions to lie with private companies. Here all the mentioned activities
indicate to do anything that the industries must do.
3.2. Study characteristics:
Study Study size PICOS Follow-up
period
Citations
Ivory tower and
industrial
innovation-
University-industry
technology transfer
before and after
the Bayh-Dole Act
4 pages Population 2019 Mowery et al.,
(2019)
Technological
collaboration in
industry- strategy,
policy and
internationalization
in innovation
12 pages Comparison 2019 Dodgson,
(2018)
A systematic
review of co-
20 pages Comparison 2019 Voorberg,
Bekkers &

9SOCIAL INNOVATION AND INDUSTRY
creation and co-
production-
Embarking on the
social innovation
journey
Tummers,
(2015)
Responsible
innovation in
industry- a
cautionary note on
corporate social
responsibility
4 pages Comaprison 2019 Hemphill,
(2016)
Industrial
Technological
Development
(Routledge
Revivals)- A
Network Approach
8 pages Outcomes 2019 Hakansson,
(2015)
Social Innovation
and Sustainable
Entrepreneurship
15 pages Intervention 2019 Espina, Phan &
Markman,
(2018)
Technological
Devolution, Social
Innovation-
Attitudes Toward
12 pages Outcomes 2019 Weiser, (2017)

10SOCIAL INNOVATION AND INDUSTRY
Industry
Creating
competitive
advantage by
institutionalizing
corporate social
innovation
6 pages Outcomes 2019 Herrera, (2015)
3.3. Synthesis of results of individual studies:
Mowery et al. (2019) mentions that the study analyses the system to understand the relation
between social innovation and service industries. However, this is different from the other studies as
it demonstrates two previous disconnected areas of research. Next, Dodgson (2018) explores the
methods in which service innovations are turning to be in terms of social innovation. However, this
is unique in terms of social roles, social means, social goals and multi agent provision. Further,
Voorberg, Bekkers and Tummers (2015) puts forward the social idea of social innovation. Here the
result of interaction competencies and various preferences of different providers and policy makers
are used. Hemphill (2016) delivers the basis of discussion of primary avenues for further research.
This is public policy, performance measurement, appropriation, organization, measurement and
theory. This delivers the context for papers that is highlighted in this specific issue.
Hakansson (2015) examined that he worldwide apparel industry 4.0 has been rising notably
from the last decade. This is at a social cost and heavy environment. However, the study shows how
social innovation is healthier and holistic for further growth. Espina, Phan and Markman (2018)
helps in understanding that embedding initiatives that are socially conscious to company’s strategy

11SOCIAL INNOVATION AND INDUSTRY
positively affects the society. The study discusses the idea of change-maker leadership. Apart from
this, Weiser (2017), investigated that latest value propositions is an effective idea for business. This
is to collaborate with various social entrepreneurs. It focusses on responsive and transparent supply
chain. Moreover, as per Herrera (2015), there is high potential for collaboration among social
innovators to rise the transparency of world-wide supply chains. However, It focusses on responsive
and transparent supply chain.
Thus the above synthesis of results shows that social innovation and industry 4.0 are the twin
forces feeding off each other at work. The current world is facing is higher disruption and rise in
innovation pace. Industry 4.0 standards and social innovation has been constantly assimilating. They
have been relentlessly incorporating new shapes to the future. Besides, the days of simple product
innovation has been dwindling. This is done through 4th industrial revolution known to be
undertaken that talent, technology and new innovation ecosystems has been emerging. They have
creating higher complexity to the ultimate offerings of innovations. Further, smart technology and
automation has been fuelling the new industrial revolution. Moreover, this exponential and
unprecedented speed of change has been rousingly reliant on various collaborative platforms for
understanding the outcomes or more radical type of innovations.
4. Discussion:
4.1. Summary of evidence:
The effect of technology has made an effect beyond financial and industrial perspectives.
This has been playing a vital role to speed up the understanding of paradigm shift. Social innovation
in the broader sense of the key towards solutions. This drive to innovate the technologies for rising
productivity to develop social and welfare needs of the global marketplace.

12SOCIAL INNOVATION AND INDUSTRY
4.2. Limitations of the study:
There is the necessity to identify different, unexpected results of the fast pace of
technological developments. Besides, the limitations are to be addressed through innovative and
complementary approaches. This is to anticipate the future emerging technologies and their effects.
The gaps can be bridged through adopting the democratic view-points. This is allows to consider and
support the particularly forms of innovation especially in services. Through determining the ahead of
time of questions one can track systems needed to answer and develop requirement lists for various
traceable processes and parts. Through cataloging the capability of the parts, processes and machines
has been providing information to answer the queries and resulted gap analysis to guide the
following steps. Then, tracking and traceability is to vital to track various relevant part, process and
ultimate product for isolate defects very fast. Next, there are automated work instructions.
5. Conclusions:
The above research confirms the significance of duality between technological and social
innovations. This is gained as the industry 4.0 is identified merely as social or technical innovation.
Further, the analysis on social innovation sheds light on the brighter side of the potentials apart from
drawbacks due to loss of human control, end of privacy and technical innovations.

13SOCIAL INNOVATION AND INDUSTRY
6. Bibliography:
Dodgson, M. (2018). Technological collaboration in industry: strategy, policy and
internationalization in innovation. Routledge.
Espina, M. I., Phan, P. H., & Markman, G. D. (Eds.). (2018). Social Innovation and Sustainable
Entrepreneurship. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Hakansson, H. (2015). Industrial Technological Development (Routledge Revivals): A Network
Approach. Routledge.
Hemphill, T. A. (2016). Responsible innovation in industry: a cautionary note on corporate social
responsibility. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 3(1), 81-87.
Herrera, M. E. B. (2015). Creating competitive advantage by institutionalizing corporate social
innovation. Journal of Business Research, 68(7), 1468-1474.
Mowery, D. C., Nelson, R. R., Sampat, B. N., & Ziedonis, A. A. (2015). Ivory tower and industrial
innovation: University-industry technology transfer before and after the Bayh-Dole Act.
Stanford University Press.
Voorberg, W. H., Bekkers, V. J., & Tummers, L. G. (2015). A systematic review of co-creation and
co-production: Embarking on the social innovation journey. Public Management Review,
17(9), 1333-1357.
Weiser, M. E. (2017). Technological Devolution, Social Innovation: Attitudes Toward Industry. KB
Journal, 12(2).