"Innovation which is social in both its goals and its means"

Geoff Mulgan is the CEO of NESTA in the UK (National Endowment on the Sciences, Technology and the Arts). Geoff's newest and preferred definition of social innovation is "innovation which is social in both its goals and its means".

I like this formulation. It requires social means (relationships, exchanges, coalitions, transfers of information and power) between social actors (organisations, individuals, governments) to achieve social goals (social well-being and social change). 

This is a good, well-rounded and socially balanced approach to the field. It is a good antidote to the notion that social innovation is a practice or discipline that belongs to government and the public sector. Indeed, a lot of activity that is currently called social innovation is certainly not "social in both its goals and its means".

Public sector initiatives that "consult:" with citizens do not constitute social innovation. Nor are policy recommendations to government that arise from consultants or design labs. A collaboration between a charity and government may often have a social goal in mind, but very often the means will be conventional service delivery.

The "social" component will require a segment of society to be engaged in processes that alter existing power relationships and the design of transfers of information or services. Charities and not-for-profit peak bodies are not enough to constitute the "social". All too commonly, service delivery instruments in the "community sector" are no more attached to or embedded in segments of society such as communities or families than are governments or corporations. 

The "social" component will also require new relationships that comprise individuals, families, and communities. Only human persons do relationships. Businesses and governments do contracts; governments can coerce, but only persons do social relationships.An arrangement between a charity and a government department is not a social relationship. A service delivery contract is not a social relationship. A relationship between a management or design consultant and a charity or government  is not a social relationship.

The amount of public debate in Australia about social innovation is miniscule. I hope Geoff's formulation is subjected to some open and critical discussion.

Vern Hughes