ABSTRACT
Social innovation and social entrepreneurship usually follow a bottom-up pattern. Companies and entrepreneurs decide to focus their business effort on meeting critical and urgent social needs. However, what happens when institutions promote or push top-down initiatives? The outbreak of COVID-19 is redefining, for many aspects, entrepreneurial dynamics. By creating a critical shortage of resources and medical supplies, the pandemic drew central and local institutions to push companies to cover the increasing social and medical needs. This study explores how companies reacted to top-down-initiated social innovation and social entrepreneurship activities. In doing so, the study focuses on the first heavily hit country, China, and it collects data from companies involved in the production of medical masks and the provision of solutions for nucleic acid tests. Our findings reveal that companies answer to top-down pushes by implementing two main strategies in a time of crisis. First, the social bricolage by exploiting available and local resources. Second, companies react with agility by re-thinking their internal innovation, relying on past similar experiences, and making their resource fluid. Our study adds the literature regarding social innovation and entrepreneurship in a crisis time by providing implications for institutions and organizations in setting and responding to strategies for future crises.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Non-pharmaceutical measures to facilitate a response to the COVID-19 pandemic, a disease caused by novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, are urgently needed. Using the World Health Organization (WHO) health emergency and disaster risk management (health-EDRM) framework, behavioural measures for droplet-borne communicable diseases and their enabling and limiting factors at various implementation levels were evaluated. SOURCES OF DATA: Keyword search was conducted in PubMed, Google Scholar, Embase, Medline, Science Direct, WHO and CDC online publication databases. Using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine review criteria, 10 bottom-up, non-pharmaceutical prevention measures from 104 English-language articles, which published between January 2000 and May 2020, were identified and examined. AREAS OF AGREEMENT: Evidence-guided behavioural measures against transmission of COVID-19 in global at-risk communities were identified, including regular handwashing, wearing face masks and avoiding crowds and gatherings. AREAS OF CONCERN: Strong evidence-based systematic behavioural studies for COVID-19 prevention are lacking. GROWING POINTS: Very limited research publications are available for non-pharmaceutical measures to facilitate pandemic response. AREAS TIMELY FOR RESEARCH: Research with strong implementation feasibility that targets resource-poor settings with low baseline health-EDRM capacity is urgently needed.