Lecture for 'Shaping the future of employment in Europe: social innovation as a driver for social change', Bilbao, 15 December 2017, organised by Universidad de Deusto (Bilbao, Spain)

1. SI‐DRIVE Project
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme
for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no 612870.
SI‐DRIVE Project
Learnings of the SI-Drive project on
employment, related to social innovation &
workplace innovation
Shaping the future of employment in Europe:
social innovation as a driver for social change
Bilbao, 15 December 2017,
Sala Ellacuria, Biblioteca -CRAI. Universidad de Deusto
Dr Peter Oeij, TNO,
Project leader Work Package Employment in SI DRIVE
Netherlands
Social Innovation: Driving force of social change

2. SI‐DRIVE Project
‐ 1. Social Innovation: SI Drive project
‐ 2. Employment & Workplace Innovation: SI Drive project
and beyond
Content of my presentation

3. SI‐DRIVE Project
Sociology
History
Psychology
PhD in
Management
Science &
Psychology
Senior Research
Scientist &
Consultant,
Project Manager
Rotterdam
Leiden
Heerlen (south)

4. SI‐DRIVE Project
What is SI drive and Social
Innovation?

5. SI‐DRIVE Project
© European Union/The Young Foundation
2010

6. SI‐DRIVE Project
Social Innovation – drivers of social change
‐ a project of the European Commission
‐ must contribute to 1] social cohesion, and 2] economic growth
‐ a social innovation is a new solution for a social problem that is experienced by persons and
communities
‐ often it is difficult to acquire financial resources to solve these problems; often enterprises
see no business in it; often government has limited financial possibilities; often communities
and civilians take the initiative
‐ Why is social innovation important?
‐ Technological innovation and business innovation alone are not enough to solve social
problems like climate change, pollution, shortage of natural resources, poverty, refugee‐
issue, ageing population, etc.
‐ Human talents and resources must be better used and applied to develop solutions on a
human scale and for which humans are motivated to contribute.
‐ Public sectors and welfare states are under pressure in many countries (cutting
expenditures). A shift in governance is needed and new actors should emerge (citizens
and communities are to play a larger role as self reliant social innovators).

7. SI‐DRIVE Project
Social Innovation will play an important role in the
Europe 2020 Strategy
"Creativity and innovation in
general and social innovation in
particular are essential factors for
fostering sustainable growth,
securing jobs and increasing
competitive abilities, especially in
the midst of the economic and
financial markets crisis."
(former EC president Barroso)
7

8. SI‐DRIVE Project
Social Innovation moves from the margins to
the mainstream
At the start of 2009 (former) US President Obama announced the establishment of a
new “Office for Social Innovation at the White House“ and allocated USD 50million
to a fund for social innovation. The Fund will focus on priority policy areas, including
education, health care, and economic opportunity.
8

9. SI‐DRIVE Project
Social Innovation –
(very) Comprehensive Working Definition
Social innovation is seen as:
• a new combination or figuration of practices in areas of social action;
• prompted by certain actors or constellations of actors;
• with the goal of better coping with needs and problems than is possible by use of
existing practices.
• An innovation is therefore social to the extent that it varies social action, and is
socially accepted and diffused in society.
• Depending on circumstances of social change, interests, policies and power,
social ideas as well as successfully implemented SI may be transformed and
ultimately institutionalised as regular social practice or made routine.

10. SI‐DRIVE Project
"Social Innovations are innovations that are social both in their ends and in their means.
Specifically, we define social innovations as new ideas (products, services and models) that
simultaneously meet social needs (more effectively than alternatives) and create new social
relationships or collaborations“
(Young Foundation, 2010; Caulier‐Grice et al, 2012)
When social innovations lead to social change and become part of society (‘institutionalized’) we
can speak of sustainable innovations.
(simpler) Basic definition

11. SI‐DRIVE Project
 Integrating theories and research methodologies to advance understanding of SI leading
to a comprehensive new paradigm of innovation.
 Undertaking European and global mapping of SI, thereby addressing different social,
economic, cultural, historical and religious contexts in eight major world regions.
 Ensuring relevance for policy makers and practitioners through in-depth analyses and case
studies in seven policy fields, with cross European and world region comparisons,
foresight and policy round tables.
SI-DRIVE – Objectives
Extending knowledge about social innovation
Seven Major Policy Fields….

12. SI‐DRIVE Project
Policy Field Areas
Environment & climate
change
Transport/ mobility
Energy Supply
Poverty reduction &
sustainable development

13. SI‐DRIVE Project
Policy Field Areas
Education Employment
Health & social care
includes
Workplace
Innovation

14. SI‐DRIVE Project
 SI‐DRIVE involves 15 partners from 12 EU Member States, 10 partners from other parts of the
world, and 14 high level advisory board members: all in all 31 countries.
International SI‐DRIVE Consortium Members
blue: EU research partner
red: non‐EU research partner
green: Advisory Board
14

15. SI‐DRIVE Project

16. SI‐DRIVE Project
See:
www.si‐drive.eu

17. SI‐DRIVE Project
New role for government
social
innovation
initiatives
more
power to
citizens
Bourgon, 2011

18. SI‐DRIVE Project
‐1.focus/driver of social innovations are social needs and societal
challenges
‐2.new practices are highly varied in form and dynamics
‐3.backbone are manifold of actors and cross sector collaboration
‐4.core elements are empowerment and user involvement
‐5.different modes of government are needed: bigger role for citizens
‐6.social innovation ‘ecosystems’ emerge: collaboration public‐private
partners and science
‐7.drivers and barriers are highly varied
‐8.there is no ‘one simple model’
‐9.social innovation friendly environment still has to be developed
Overview study 1000 cases of social innovation
Main conclusions comparative analysis (Howaldt ea, 2016)

19. SI‐DRIVE Project
1. Active society / Entrepreneurial and inspired
individuals
2. Funding / willingness to invest in Social Innovation
3. Use of new technologies / social media
4. Networks / platforms for cooperation stakeholders
5. Legislative support
6. Sense of urgency for social needs among politicians
7. Political change: new governance, space for civil
society
What are framework conditions and enabling factors
for success? (Howaldt ea, 2016)

20. SOCIAL INNOVATION OF
EMPLOYMENT

21. WP 11 Foresight & Policy
 UNEMPLOYMENT > YOUTH, LONG TERM UNEMPLOYED, VULNERABLE GROUPS
 LABOUR FORCE PARTICIPATION (ELDERLY, WOMEN, DISABLED)
 MODERNIZE AND IMPROVE PERFORMANCE OF PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT SERVICES
 IMPROVING QUALITY OF WORK & CREATE MORE INNOVATIVE ORGANIZATIONS
 GENDER INEQUALITIES
 IN ADDITION:
 INVEST IN EDUCATION
 INVEST IN TECHNOLOGY & INNOVATION
 MORE ENTREPRENEURSHIP
 FIGHT POVERTY AND IMPROVE SOCIAL INCLUSION
Main employment challenges in Europe (Oeij et al, june 2017)

22. WP 11 Foresight & Policy
Design of the research
‐ Literature study
‐ 1000 case mappings (136 Employment) via a survey
‐ 82 in‐depth case studies (10 employment)

23. WP 11 Foresight & Policy
Policy field
Employment
Case= a Social Innovation initiative
Youth
unemployment &
vulnerable groups
Social
entrepreneurship
& self‐creating
opportunities
Workplace
innovation &
working
conditions

24. WP 11 Foresight & Policy
Table 1 The 136 cases of Employment form Mapping 1
Project practice field
Absolute
number
Percent
Valid
percent
Cumulative
percent
1. Job search support & matching 43 31.6 31.6 31.6
2. Training & education 31 22.8 22.8 54.4
3. Workplace innovation & organisational innovation 20 14.7 14.7 69.1
4. Social entrepreneurship 26 19.1 19.1 100.0
Total 136 100.0 100.0
Youth
unemployment &
vulnerable groups
Social
entrepreneurship
& self‐creating
opportunities
Workplace
innovation &
working
conditions
Compressed into 3 practice fields;
Oeij et al., June 2017)

25. WP 11 Foresight & Policy
Youth unemployment and other vulnerable groups (elderly, women, minorities):
The practice field evolves around labour market participation, training and education and dis‐
crimination/inequality issues. The purpose is to improve individual competencies and to institutionalize
equal opportunities;
Social entrepreneurship & self‐creating opportunities:
It concerns entrepreneurship with limited profit goals but focus on participation of groups with limited
opportunities and resources; and self‐organizing initiatives of businesses (including self‐employed
persons) that create jobs in niches with low and irregular income and job security and much flexibility
(risks);
Workplace innovation & working conditions:
Entrepreneurs and employers seek new ways of working and innovation through novel ways of
employing persons, using talents, and organizing work processes, including application of new
technology. This leads to changing of job (content), team formation, role differentiation and more
dialogue and autonomy for employees. The purpose is to also improve sustainable employability (not
per se with the same employer).
Practice fields within Employment

26. WP 11 Foresight & Policy
Youth
unem‐
ployment
Social
entrepre‐
neurship
Workpace
innovation
Public Market
Value driven Profit driven
Traditional SI Newer forms
Share ideas Competition
PPP’s Individual businesses
Intention to scale up No intention

27. SOCIAL INNOVATION OF
EMPLOYMENT: EXAMPLES

28. WP 11 Foresight & PolicyYouth unemployment &
vulnerable groups
SSI Servicios Sociales Integrados [Spain]
Goal Cooperation: to make people self‐employed in the realm of social care.
Background: a task that could not be fulfilled by public body is replaced to this cooperation;
otherwise 300 women would become jobless
Main drivers (push and pull) High unemployment (also of the husbands of those women); conflict between Bilbao City
Council and Bizkaia Provincial government (about workers and care); sharing interests of
women workers and administration representatives; contracts awarded to SSI by the city of
Bilbao (paid with capitalisation of unemployment subsidies); training to enhance
employability; [later:] diversification and broadening of the scope and functions of the
cooperation (scaling out and up)
Main barriers Losing contracts in competition; newness of cooperatives; restrictive Spanish labour
regulations
Role Policy SSI has strong relations with public entities; PPP with Bilbao City Hall
Main impacts Support for unemployed women, provide care clients, and cost‐efficiency for the city
council; imitation of cooperation across the country; stepping stone towards systemic
change
Main leverage factor Ms. Mendizabal, charismatic project leader, later Ms. Acedo; the need for survival created a
new market (niche) with both economic and public value and growing competition over the
contracts
Social change mechanisms Solving two problems in one solution with a ‘closed purse’ (state care and unemployed
women); it is a well imitable social business model
Effect on social change Cooperations like SSI became a PPP example al across Spain
Remaining/emerging
questions/issues
Is this social innovation (service innovation) or ‘bad governance’ ? Has economic
competition eventually become the main driver for sustainable growth and
institutionalisation of cooperatives (as a business model)?

29. WP 11 Foresight & Policy
Social Entrepreneurship &
self‐creating opportunities
Xiezhi Hotel (China)
Goal An organisation that helps university graduates to find employment and improve their labour
market competencies; started to provide job seekers a cheap place to sleep.
Background: owner Mr. Wen found out that public organisations to match employment do
not work well; his driver was social responsibility / altruism.
Main drivers (push and pull) Sustaining factors are the network of companies and the support of local public bodies (not
with money) for social entrepreneurship that help resolve social issues; attention of mass
media and winning prestigious prizes; the hotel owner can finance the activities from the
earnings (sustainable business model)
Main barriers Because the state supported this activity the biggest possible barrier was absent; no barriers
Role Policy The state and local government support social innovation and social entrepreneurship; the
general climate is supportive of innovation and combating unemployment; every activity
that fits is promoted by media coverage, prizes and awards, lip service from officials; this
stimulates others (like the companies involved) to step in.
Main impacts Public service of employment has become a social entrepreneurship business model, but
social entrepreneurship also became a practical value for alleviating social issues
Main leverage factor The charismatic endeavours of Mr. Wen; the state supporting social innovation and social
entrepreneurship (in China such support is more important than how the market operates);
the timing was very good.
Social change mechanisms Social responsible drive to help students and the drive of stakeholders (e.g. companies) to
better match demand and supply of student graduates.
Effect on social change Many students have been helped and many employers have been provided proper
candidates in 8 years (8.000 students got jobs; 10.000 students were recruited for
companies; partnerships were built with 300 companies; 30.000 students resided at the
hotel).
Remaining/emerging
questions/issues
The social enterprise initiatives take place in a mixed‐economy, which require a specific
business model; in China social entrepreneurship is seen as a way to create employment and
to solve unemployment. Is this a viable model for EU countries?

30. WP 11 Foresight & Policy
Workplace innovation &
working conditions
MGL Media Group Limburg (Netherlands)
Goal Goal: to redesign the work process into team work of good quality jobs and at the same
times create a viable business model
Background: MGL is a newspaper company with declining income and was forced to re‐
organise to remain competitive
Main drivers (push and pull) Employee‐driven innovation, meaning providing employees a role in the change process;
good cooperation between management, union representatives/works council, and
employees; bad business was a push factor; the city council and provincial authorities
promoted the job security which was helpful
Main barriers The owners are everchanging investment companies / venture capitalists with no long term
vision and no strong sympathy for employee interests; there were several rounds of
redundancies; a good business model was not developed (still is not); pressure coming top‐
down from the top of the holding
Role Policy Local and provincial policy officials support the preservation of work and company, but
have limited influence (they offered a financial guarantee against bankruptcy)
Main impacts Inside the company: many see worker engagement as crucial for success; regional effect:
limited preservation of jobs/employment
Main leverage factor Persistence of employees/woks council on quality; a charismatic CEO; a cost‐driven need
for change
Social change mechanisms Market position is a driver; but also the role taken up by employees/works council and the
‘progressive’ CEO
Effect on social change MGL is on the one hand an ‘isolated case’ of WPI; but it also is being described in the
literature as an example of employee‐driven innovation and what the risks are of top down
investment policies; in that sense it has some impact on the relevance of WPI
Remaining/emerging
questions/issues
Is workplace innovation really social innovation when changes are strongly determined by
economic circumstances and external powers (i.e. investment companies)?

31. WP 11 Foresight & Policy
Funding > self funding, partner funding, national public funding
Drivers > people (networks, individuals, groups, charismatic leadership)
Barriers > funding (also legislation)
Partners > NGO/NPO, public body, private company
Role actors > Knowledge provider, solution provider, funder
Governance mode > mostly part of policy programme
Outcome > increasing employability, (growing) number of beneficiaries,
integration
Social change
Mechanism > cooperation (and charismatic leadership)
Some overall findings SI in employment (Oeij et al., June 2017)

32. SI‐DRIVE Project
‐1.SI is very much connected to traditional policy (usual actors)
‐2.Employment is so important for governments they do not (cannot?) leave it up
to market forces alone
‐3.Not much coherence within the practice fields, cases function isolated
(scattered), not much crosspollination and upscaling
‐4.Social entrepreneurship offers possibilities for start‐ups and sustainable self‐
employment
‐5.SI in Youth Employment and Social Entrepreneurship shifts social security
responsibilities from the state to individuals
6.Workplace Innovation links to employability but is less scalable
7.Left wing criticism: SI is a neoliberal substitute for social security, reducing social
cohesion and individualising social risks
‐8. SI of Employment should not be limited to unemployment and vulnerable
groups, but include entrepreneurship and innovation of organisation and work
processes (as in WPI)
Main conclusions Employment as social innovations

33. WORKPLACE
INNOVATION (WPI)
Springer, 2017Eurofound, 2015

34. WORKPLACE INNOVATION: DEFINITION
AND PRACTICES (OEIJ ET AL., 2015)
A workplace innovation (WPI) is a developed and implemented practice or
combination of practices that structurally (division of labour) and/or
culturally (empowerment) enable employees to participate in organisational
change and renewal to improve quality of working life and organisational
performance.
‘structure orientation’ :
structure work organisation and job design; provide employees with
structural decision latitude or control capacity; can stimulate employee-
control or autonomy, and provide voice (operational employment relations).
‘culture orientation’ :
provide opportunities for employees to participate (e.g. in) organisational
decision-making; dialogue and collective bargaining: can stimulate
commitment and provide voice (social / contractual employment relations).34

35. WORKPLACE INNOVATION
35
Structure how production is
organised
Human work behaviour in
the organisation
Employee
engagement =
more voice
Goals:
1. Better
organisational
performance
2. Better quality
jobs

36. WHY IS WORKPLACE INNOVATION
IMPORTANT? (OEIJ, RUS & POT, 2017; OEIJ ET AL., 2016 ISPIM PAPER)
To remain competitive and control costs / efficiency
To improve the innovative capability of the organisation
To be an attractive employer on the labour market
To create a resilient workforce (see also Oeij, 2017)
To create healthy, safe and challenging work / jobs
To sustain employment and prevent McDonaldization of
work (Ritzer)
To contribute to a better world in terms of humanistic
work, and well-being and welfare for society at large
36

37. WORKPLACE INNOVATION: EXAMPLES
OF INTERVENTIONS
(OEIJ ET AL, 2015/EUROFOUND STUDY)
Introduction of self-managing teams
Minimising organisational levels
Job enlargement to broaden functions and build cross-functional teams
Partnership with unions to improve Occupational Health and Safety
Knowledge sharing to improve innovative capability
Regular information sharing between management and employees
Provide employees with a say in working tomes to better combine private life
Organise challenge for new ideas to stimulate innovation via commitment
In general: design the core work process (structure) in such a way that
employees have autonomy to co-decide (culture), in order to improve jobs,
organisation performance and innovative capability (outcome)
37

38. POLICY POINTERS

39. SI‐DRIVE Project
Youth unemployment
(& other vulnerable
groups)
Social
entrepreneurship (SE)
(& self-creating
opportunities)
Workplace innovation
(WPI) (& working
conditions)
Main challenge,
goals, ambition
-participation via jobs and
other activities, social
cohesion, equality for all
-redistribution of work/jobs
(shorter working weeks)
-rebalance of power to give
vulnerable groups voice
(paradigm shift)
-let people improve their
skills in all possible ways
-use SE for solving social
problems
-let SE grow and scale up
-SE is seen as a possible
solution to improve
employment
-Support SE to grow and
scale up;
-inclusive companies
(social, environmental);
sustainable, no unneeded
hierarchy
-no more front runner
syndrome (WPI is more than
being in competition), less
polarisation
-more room for cooperation,
experimentation, bosses as
facilitators
-more engaged employees
and good quality jobs
(Oeij, Vander Torre & Enciso Santocildes, 2017)

40. SI‐DRIVE Project
Youth unemployment
(& other vulnerable
groups)
Social
entrepreneurship (SE)
(& self-creating
opportunities)
Workplace innovation
(WPI) (& working
conditions)
Crucial barriers to
overcome and drivers
-accept that there will be no
full employment- need for
mobility and refugee crisis
(competition for jobs) across
Europe
-tension between value-
creation and public value
-vulnerable groups are badly
presented by politics
-social innovators are in
conflict with rules and
regulations
-SE has a negative image as
‘not real’; improve the image
of SE
-‘scammers’ that abuse SE
to make quick wins
-unclear legal and fiscal
barriers between social
enterprise, social
entrepreneuring, civil society
initiatives
-limited funding leads to
unwanted competition and
hinders start-ups and
sustaining growth (scaling)
-start-ups cannot learn from
failures due to lack of
systematic learning
-Insufficient knowledge and
proof about good practices
-competition and
unwillingness to share
knowledge between
companies
-dilemma between WPI
(when efficiency driven) and
employment creation (too
strong focus on efficiency
gains)
(Oeij, Vander Torre & Enciso Santocildes, 2017)

41. SI‐DRIVE Project
Youth unemployment
(& other vulnerable
groups)
Social
entrepreneurship (SE)
(& self-creating
opportunities)
Workplace innovation
(WPI) (& working
conditions)
Leverage factor for
policy
-create social innovators
network as advisory body
-intersectoral cooperation to
avoid policy silos
-change perception of SI by
both public and policy
makers
-build an infrastructure,
institutionalisation, regulate
the field, create funding,
build an ecosystem
-improve ways in finding
jobs, and the functioning of
employment organisations
-reform platform, circular or
collaborative economy to
help to include the
‘outsiders’
-stimulate experimentation
with SI
-consider to use part of
private companies profit to
grow SE (CSR, taxes)
-improve SE by legislation,
taxes
-improve SE image via
education, dissemination of
good examples, quantify the
benefits
-support and empower
intermediaries and social
innovators who mediate
between business /
corporations and knowledge
institutes / universities
-disseminate good practices
and enhance awareness
and knowledge
-develop ways to stimulate
WPI, particularly bottom-up
-stress the combination of
economic welfare and social
well-being
(Oeij, Vander Torre & Enciso Santocildes, 2017)

42. SI‐DRIVE Project
Youth Employment = Entrance to the labour market
Education policy = Enhancing employability
Human resources = Enhancing mobility
Chain: youth employment policy > social entrepreneurship policy > workplace innovation policy
= f (adding up to social cohesions and social inclusion in a sustainable manner)
PAGE 42
Main message to policy makers regards Employment
Integral
perspective
e.g. SI eco‐
system

43. SI‐DRIVE Project
Forthcoming January 2018: Howaldt et al

44. SI‐DRIVE Project
Thank you very much.
www.si‐drive.eu
peter.oeij@tno.nl

45. SI‐DRIVE Project
-Bourgon, J. (2011). A new synthesis of public administration. Serving in the 21st century. Kingston, Ont.: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
-Caulier-Grice, J., Davies, A., Patrick, R. and Norman, W. (2012), Defining Social Innovation. A deliverable of the project: ‘The theoretical, empirical and policy
foundations for building social innovation in Europe’ (Tepsie), European Commission — 7th Framework Programme, Brussels: European Commission, DG Research.
-Franz, H. W., Hochgerner, J. & Howaldt, J. (eds.) (2012). Challenge Social Innovation. Potentials for Business, Entrepreneurship, Welfare and Civil Society. Berlin,
Germany: Springer.
-Howaldt, J., Butzin, A., Domanski, D., & Kaletka, C. (Eds) (2014). Theoretical Approaches to Social Innovation - A Critical Literature Review. A deliverable of the
project: ‘Social Innovation: Driving Force of Social Change’ (SI-DRIVE). Dortmund: Sozialforschungsstelle.
-Howaldt, Jürgen/ Kaletka, Christoph/ Schröder, Antonius/ Zirngiebel, Marthe (2018): Atlas of Social Innovation: New practices for a better future. SI DRIVE.
Forthcoming.
-Howaldt, Jürgen and Oeij, Peter R.A. (Eds.) (2016). Workplace innovation – Social innovation: Shaping work organisation and working life. Special issue of World
Review of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainability Vol. 12, Issue 1, 1-129
-Howaldt, Jürgen/ Schröder, Antonius/ Kaletka, Christoph/ Rehfeld, Dieter/ Terstriep, Judith (2016): Comparative Analysis (Mapping 1) - Mapping the World of
Social Innovation: A Global Comparative Analysis across Sectors and World Regions (D1.4). Internet: https://www.si-drive.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/SI-
DRIVE-D1-4-Comparative-Analysis-2016-08-15-final.pdf
-Oeij, P.R.A. (2017). The resilient innovation team. A study of teams coping with critical incidents during innovation projects. PhD dissertation Open University of
the Netherlands. http://publications.tno.nl/publication/34622536/QA3j9S/oeij-2017-resilient.pdf
-Oeij, Peter R.A., Steven Dhondt, Rita Žiauberytė-Jakštienė, Antonio Corral & Peter Totterdill (2016). Workplace innovation as social innovation in European
companies. Paper for The ISPIM Innovation Summit, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia on 4-7 December 2016.
-Oeij, P., Dhondt, S., Rehfeld, D., et al. (2017). Social Innovation in Employment: Summary Report. Policy Field Employment, D5.4_Employment: Final Draft. SI-
DRIVE, Social Innovation: Driving Force of Social Change; Dortmund etc. Dortmund: TUDO.
-Oeij, P., Van der Torre, W. & Enciso Santocildes, M. (2017). European Policybrief Social Innovation in Employment. [S.l.]: European Commission. SI-DRIVE,
Social Innovation: Driving Force of Social Change.
-Oeij, P., R. Žiauberytė-Jakštienė, D. Rehfeld, with S. Ecer, J. Eckardt, M. Enciso Santocildes, G. Henry Moreno, S. Kalac, K. Kapoor, M. Karzen, K. Lin, I. Kuzmin,
J. Millard, J. Welschhoff, A. Popov, T. Soloveva, S. Terebova, W. van der Torre, F. Vaas (January 2017). Social Innovation in Employment: Case Study Results.
Policy Field Employment. SI-DRIVE, Social Innovation: Driving Force of Social Change; Dortmund etc.
-Oeij, P., Žiauberytė-Jakštienė, R., Dhondt, S., Corral, A., Totterdill, P., Preenen, P. (2015). Workplace Innovation in European companies. Luxemburg: Publications
Office of the European Union. (Eurofound)
-Oeij, P.R.A., Rus, D., & Pot, F.D. (Eds) (2017). Workplace innovation: Theory, research and practice. Cham (Switzerland) : Springer
-Torre, van der W., P. Oeij, D. Rehfeld, A. Augustinaitis, D. Domanski, B. Elmadağ Baş, M. Enciso Santocildes, M. Golovchin, L. Gómez Urquijo, G. Henry
Moreno, C. Kaletka, K. Kapoor, I. Kuzmin, L. Labanauskas, K. Lin , S. Mukhacheva, I. López Pérez, J. Millard, J. Nordhause-Janz, A. Popov, A. Shabunova, S.
Terebova, A. Vladisavljevic, V. Weerakkody. (2015). Policy field Report Social innovation for Employment. SI-Drive project: Driving Force of Social Change. TNO /
IAT, Leiden / Gelsenkirchen.
References