Standing in Front of the Great Wall of China: Challenges of Social Innovation
I visited the Great Wall of China when I was five. Standing by the wall and looking up, I wondered what it would take to climb over it. This seemed like — and still is — an impossible task. The same intense intimidation surged when I read the introduction of “Agent of Change: Strategy and Tactic for Social Innovation” by Sanderijn Cels and team.
Cels outlined five major barriers of social innovation: a potential of destruction when creating value, difficulty in accounting for new value delivered, lack of immediate reward for innovators, fear of change if the innovation actual works, and the nature of a common bureaucratic structure [1]. With these inexorable barriers in front of us, innovating in the social space seems like a hopeless endeavor. Why do people keep trying? How did some idea break through the Great Wall and gain momentum? Why innovation seems more celebrated in private sector? I pondered these questions, then saw a glimpse of some answers in the work of Christian Bason.
Although there are no definitive answers to why people keep trying to innovate in the readings, I believe innovation is a reflection of our human nature: we want to survive and live better lives. Public sector policy decisions and services directly impact our chances of survival and quality of lives on a fundamental level. It is difficult to imagine, yet the reality is not too far away, that people cannot afford to buy food, pay for healthcare, or access better education. Perhaps, it is true that fear is a strong motivation; we are afraid of facing such harsh reality. Many innovations are driven by people in positions or with status. Do they feel empathetic for the rest? Or do they simply fear to lose their positions due to competition? Therefore, they need to do something extra to differentiate. Although it sounds very cynical, on the bright side, societies can benefit if innovations actually work regardless of the individual motivations. It is in our collective interest to keep making things better, and more importantly, understand how to do so productively.
For the innovations that gained momentum, Cels and Bason attributed the success to key factors of individuals and external contexts. According to Cels, successful innovators are obviously passionate, smart, and agile. However, most importantly, they are reflective and sensible like a chess master, who can develop deep strategy and quick acrobatic tactics. Having the right person is not enough. The external contexts — institutional surrounding, operational objectives, and citizen expectation — must also align [2]. One can imagine the chance of having both people and external contexts to synchronize can be decimal, despite it happens occasionally in the social space. Yet, innovation seems to happen a lot more often and celebrated in the private sector. Is there something missing the public sector?
Competition. This is the missing element in the public sector according to Bason [2]. Private companies need to stay afloat by offering differentiated products or services to win the hearts of customers. And it is accepted that some customers are valued more than others to increase profitability and productivity. However, it is fundamentally different for public organizations. Continuity, stability, and universal access to services despite demographic differences are the expectations from the citizens and obligations of public organizations. These are the reasons — some may argue they are excuses — why bureaucratic structure exists. In fact, the bureaucratic structure exists in both public and private organizations, but perhaps more prominent in the former. In my opinion, the existence of bureaucracy is justified and has merits. If we stand on the other side, we can see the original purpose of the Great Wall of China: it was to defend our homes from enemies. Many of us stand on the outside of the Wall looking in, just like when I visited. Now, if the creative space in the public sector is limited by strong constraints on operational consistency and overall objectives, where should we focus our innovative brainpower on?
At this point, there are more questions than answers. This is why social innovation is so fascinating, but intimidating at times. It is one of the toughest problems that impact all our lives and the ones of future generations. Why am I doing this? Perhaps it is because of curiosity and a sense of belonging — the not-so-cynical qualities many people share.
Readings Cited in this Post:
1. Cels and de Jong, Agents of Change: Strategy and Tactics for Social Innovation, Ch. 1
2. Bason, P. , Leading Public Sector Innovation: Co-Creating for a Better Society, 53–61
