Table 2 Hub components and mechanism overview, rationale and leverage

Research

Crowdsourcing contests

Case Study Research

A public contest soliciting applications for social innovations.

Qualitative case studies on selected social innovations identified in the crowdsourcing call. Rich descriptions of each social innovation’s components and drawing lessons of health systems relevance.

Social innovators

Academics

Government – policy makers

Conducting a review of published literature, revealed very limited examples on social innovation in health. Thus, to identify these grassroots projects, it was necessary to solicit it directly individuals and organisations working at grassroots level.

Case examples of social innovation formed the foundation for all further discussion, especially in a context / setting where social innovation is not yet a well understood phenomenon.

Descriptive case studies assisted in generating first-level evidence to highlight the presence of social innovation and the potential contribution it could make. These cases assisted in identifying areas of further research.

Universities are associated with new knowledge creation and have research expertise in multiple fields to draw upon. Social innovation research requires multi-disciplinary engagement.

Hubs are regarded as trustworthy platforms for innovators to share their work with, for the purpose of developing shared knowledge and learning that could benefit the health system as a whole.

Community-building

Convenings and communication

Conferences, meetings and workshops hosted to share research findings and showcase social innovation and invite collaboration on developing a shared future agenda.

Regular newsletters and personal communication.

Social innovators

Academics (faculty & students)

Government (policy makers & frontline workers)

Health implementers (not-for-profit & for-profit)

Fostering cross sectoral linkages with multi-sectoral actors engaged in social innovation at a national and international level, including the research participants.

All gatherings were hosted taking into consideration the mindset and culture – thus creating spaces for sharing and discussion where all voices have equal value. All spaces chosen for gatherings non-traditional meeting venues and detailed attention was paid to create a different experience for participants, that transcends content.

Universities are traditionally not-for-profit and non-politically affiliated.

Hubs were able to act as a neutral convener of different sectors, sharing the lessons and learning widely and facilitating dialogue across levels of the health system and sectors.

Storytelling

Film & media

Videos on social innovations.

Thematic short film.

Positive hope-filled photography.

Social innovators

Academics (faculty & students)

Government (policy makers& frontline workers)

Health implementers (not-for-profit & for-profit)

Visual media using a storytelling approach transcended disciplinary mental confines to first and foremost create a shared human experience. Stories enabled the viewer to personally relate and identify a truth for themselves. It created greater engagement in the research content and an openness to participate.

Universities have access to different skills expertise.

The pilot hub was able to train two staff members on film making and photography.

Institutional embedding

Cross-organisational activities

Engaging leaders

Activities to engage participation of other departments, or champions within an institution.

Heads of Department

Deans,

Vice-chancellors

To institutionalise social innovation beyond the hub into other areas of the organisations / institutions engaged.

Universities are able to bridge the divide between the grassroots and the top-levels of health decision-makers. By fostering relational engagement between them, social innovation goes transcends beyond theory to practical application at various levels of organisations and institutions, irrespective of their specific disease focus.