The STIS Co-creation Model

Co-creating and Co-developing together sustainable STISs Worldwide

The tragedy of global commons is not inevitable

For sustainable development to happen and SDGs to be met by 2030 and and climate targets by 2050, countries, local governments, universities, enterprises, civil societies and citizens need to collaborate and join hands to thrive together within sustainable sociotechnical innovation systems (STISs). Like natural ecosystems, STISs do not sprout and develop off the ground spontaneously. Systems must be scientifically and expertly constructed. “The future cannot be foreseen, it is constructed“.

We aim at mobilizing the global collective intelligence in order to Co-strengthen, construct and Co-develop sustainable STISs with deep roots in the “genius of life” and as a conscious emulation of those innovations which have the spark of true insight because they have evolved in response to Earth’s mandates. The real genius of such STISs is how innovations would contribute to the continuation (Sustainability!) of not just one local or national innovation ecosystem, but all ecosystems on earth. Therefore, the “Business Models” that we collectively put in place must be submitted to the validation process of the “genius of life”.

The Four Dimensions
of the Co-Creation Model

The collaborative construction and development of sustainable “Socio-Technical Innovation Systems” is carried out according to the following four dimensional model.

One of the underpinning outputs of this global effort is the inception of a “Sustainable Development and Climate Action Body of Knowledge” co-created and validated by the collective intelligence of global stakeholders. 

Sustainable Development Goals
Read More
Innovation Systems Functions
Read More
Innovation Methodologies
Read More
Core Principals and Values
Read More
Twitter Facebook-f Linkedin-in
Scroll to Top

Innovation Systems Functions (SI)

The innovation systems approach considers the ‘business ecosystem’ of an innovating organisation and analyses the flow of information and technology as well as the interactions and relationships between the actors involved, such as enterprises, research institutions and the central and local governments.

A number of key functions have been identified that are essential for the proper operating of an IS. Several variations of IS frameworks have been developed by different authors, ranging from models that differentiate seven key processes to models that identify nine key processes. However, in essence these models have all been based on the same set of seven dynamic functions which are described by Bergek et al., (2008) :

1- Knowledge development and diffusion
This is the function that is normally placed at the heart of an innovation system in that it is concerned with the knowledge base of the global system and how well the local system performs in terms of its knowledge base and, of course, its evolution. The function captures the breadth and depth of the current knowledge base of the innovation system, and how that changes over time, including how that knowledge is diffused and combined in the system.
2- Influence on the direction of search
If a TIS is to develop, a whole range of firms and other organizations have to choose to enter it. There must then be sufficient incentives and/or pressures for the organizations to be induced to do so. The second function is the combined strength of such factors. It also covers the mechanisms having an influence on the direction of search within the TIS, in terms of different competing technologies, applications, markets, business models etc…
3- Entrepreneurial experimentation
An IS evolves under considerable uncertainty in terms of technologies, applications and markets. This uncertainty is a fundamental feature of technological and industrial development and is not limited to early phases in the evolution of an IS but is a characteristic of later phases as well. From a social perspective, the main source of uncertainty reduction is entrepreneurial experimentation, which implies a probing into new technologies and applications, where many will fail, some will succeed and a social learning process will unfold.
4- Market formation
For an emerging IS, or one in a period of transformation, markets may not exist, or be greatly underdeveloped. Marketplaces may not exist, potential customers may not have articulated their demand, or have the capability to do so, price/performance of the new technology may be poor, uncertainties may prevail in many dimensions. Institutional change, e.g. the formation of standards, is often a prerequisite for markets to evolve from “nursing markets” to a “bridging market” up to mass markets.
5- Legitimation
Legitimacy is a matter of social acceptance and compliance with relevant institutions: The new technology and its proponents need to be considered appropriate and desirable by relevant actors in order for resources to be mobilized, for demand to form and for actors in the new IS to acquire political strength.
6- Resource mobilization
As an IS evolves, a range of different resources needs to be mobilized. Hence, we need to understand the extent to which the IS is able to mobilize competence/human capital through education in specific scientific and technological fields as well as in entrepreneurship, management and finance, financial capital (seed and venture capital, diversifying firms, etc.), and complementary assets such as complementary products, services, network infrastructure, etc.
7- Development of positive externalities
The systemic nature of the innovation and diffusion process strongly suggests that the generation of positive external economies is a key process in the formation and growth of an IS. These external economies, or free utilities, may be both pecuniary and non pecuniary.

Bergek, Anna, Staffan Jacobsson, Bo Carlsson, Sven Lindmark, and Annika Rickne. 2008. “Analyzing the Functional Dynamics of Technological Innovation Systems: A Scheme of Analysis.” Research Policy 37 (3): 407–429. 

Innovation Processes

For the past fifty years, new methods promoting innovative design have flourished: CK theory, Project management by issues, Design Thinking, Lean Startup, Business Model Canvas, Lean Canvas, Outcome Driven Innovation among others…

The methodological diversity of concepts promoting innovation offers the possibility, depending on the problem to be dealt with and its environment, to favor a particular method or to draw from their complementarities.

Obviously other factors such as the organisation’s culture or the saturation of the relevant market come into consideration in making the most judicious methodological choice. The choice to be made from this range of solutions also applies to managers. Depending on the strengths and weaknesses of their department, they can choose the method (s) that will make their team more efficient and its results more relevant for the entire organisation.

Louis Bouwer from the Innovation Management Research Institute (IMRI) published in 2017 the “Innovation Management Theory Evolution Map” to help innovation managers take note of existing fundamental innovation management theories, how they evolved through the past few decades and which theories are best suited to solve specific corporate innovation management challenges.

Louis Bouwer (Innovation Management Research Institute, IMRI); The Innovation Management Theory Evolution Map. 

Accountability

The traditional accountability mechanisms no longer seem adequate to ensure implementation of the 2030 Agenda and will have to be made fit for purpose so as not to become mere political rhetoric without practical meaning. In the context of the 2030 Agenda, the OECD suggested that mutual accountability means “everyone is accountable to each other” (OECD, 2015a, p. 78). Indeed, the complex 2030 Agenda stipulates a move beyond the bi-partisan or “mutual” relationship between providers and recipients within a development relationship, and towards “collective” accountability relations that encompass a broader variety of actors.

The global collaborative character of the present initiative will help in shaping out a global framework for collective accountability.

Collaboration

The importance of partnership has been recognized fully by the UN, by business and by all leading institutions in international development. With a strong emphasis on policy coherence and integration, the Agenda 2030 resolution “Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” states that “Governments and public institutions will also work closely on implementation with regional and local authorities, sub-regional institutions, international institutions, academia, philanthropic organisations, volunteer groups and others“.

The 2030 SDGs represent a fundamental shift in thinking, explicitly acknowledging the interconnectedness of prosperous business, a thriving society and a healthy environment. They name all societal sectors as key development actors and require an unprecedented level of cooperation and collaboration among civil society, business, government, NGOs, foundations and others for their achievement. The “gotit.network” platform has been designed to serve and catalyse such purpose.

Ethics

Sustainability has always been deeply grounded in ethics. Each of the seventeen proposed goals in the SDGs relate to a different morally relevant aspect of life, such as equal rights, safety, justice, well-being, education, good health and more. As such, sustainability has become a comprehensive notion that should guide us in living a good life on the planet. The present initiative aims at fostering collaboration among academics, practitioners, policy-makers, civil society and the the private sector in order to spell out the ethical aspects of each of the SDGs and the challenges associated with measuring and reporting of the performances associated with them.

Inclusiveness

Leaving no one behind lies at the heart of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. This principle is mentioned at least seven times in the Agenda itself, and has been a recurrent theme in documents, pledges, call to actions, interventions and statements delivered since – by Member States, the UN and civil society. A clear commitment to inclusiveness is made in the text of the Agenda when Member States “pledge that no one will be left behind” while at the same time recognizing that the dignity of the human person is fundamental, and by pledging that all goals and targets be met for all nations, peoples and societies committing to also reach those furthest behind. However, in spite of the frequent use and reference to this principle, focused efforts to leave no one behind remain insufficient, in terms of policy design, implementation and review. Studies show that only 14% of stakeholders regarded the most vulnerable and marginalized groups as being included in national SDG reviews. The “gotit.network” platform is intended for engaging citizens and other stakeholders, and catalyzing partnerships for the SDGs at the regional, national and local levels where implementation truly takes form.

Systems Thinking

The systemic approach applies de facto to sustainable development because of its complexity and its multidimensional, multi-actor and multidisciplinary nature.

The SDGs integrate and balance the fundamental dimensions and complex dynamics of interconnected economic, social and environmentally sustainable development, both on a global and local scale. These goals are challenging due to an increasingly interconnected world, characterized by a global web of ecological, economic, social, cultural and political dynamic processes. Hence, these complex challenges cannot be addressed and solved in isolation and with single dimensional mindsets anymore. Achieving the objectives proposed by the various SDGs requires a systems approach in line with the holistic vision of the Agenda, so to promote proper and efficient actions aimed at hitting those ambitious targets.

We are therefore in an approach that essentially aims to develop and use tools that will allow all stakeholders to get involved in the operationalization of the Agenda 2030, and this, in a systemic approach.

The “ROADMAPS 2030 OPEN INNOVATION LABS” are an interdisciplinary systemic and dynamic instrument intended to solve social, technical, managerial, engineering, and decision-making problems in order to achieve the vision of the Agenda. They will allow to explore strategies and inform policy design to overcome or remove the obstacles to pursuing integrated SDGs, hence efficiently accomplishing the 2030 Agenda.