This PhD research project is about how Dutch development NGOs use social media for their development projects. For this, the following research question has been investigated: how do Dutch development NGOs use social media to further the development activities of their organisations? The purpose of this study is to understand how development NGOs are trying to get to grips with social media. Given the exploratory nature of this research, a qualitative research approach was adopted. Both case studies and the grounded theory method were used for this study. This combination is ideal because with a case study one tries to understand, or explore a phenomenon, whereas, in grounded theory studies, one tries to build theory. Given that this study is concerned with how Dutch development NGOs perceive social media for their development projects, an interpretive paradigm seems appropriate. The grounded theory methodology for this research is consistent with the epistemology of interpretivism. The combination of case study research and grounded theory works well for theory building and has been applied in Information Systems and ICT for Development studies before. As the use of theory before data collection is in opposition to the principle idea of the grounded theory methodology, in which theory emerges from the data, this needs to be addressed when combining case studies and grounded theory. This issue was resolved by using an initial highlevel conceptual framework as a guiding instrument for both the noncommittal literature research and for the conceptualisation of the research problem, whilst not distorting the emergence of theory from the data. This study focuses on formally organised development NGOs who receive funding from the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs for their development projects. From the approximately 100 organisations, fourteen NGOs were selected for this study. The choice of fourteen NGOs was driven by a theoretical sampling strategy. Data was collected via semi-structured interviews with 18 respondents and field-notes of meetings or events of 14 development NGOs. The data was analysed using the Glaserian coding procedure of grounded theory, starting with open coding, followed by selective coding, and ending with theoretical coding. Three major themes (or core categories as they are called in the grounded theory method), were identified. This study's first contribution is captured in the theme ‘NGO Enacting Values in Development’. This is about how an organisation’s values are enacted in the context of international development. The organisational mixture of development mind-sets influences organisational activities in development. The ideological trends that are stimulated by societal and technological changes have an impact on the organisation’s development strategy and the strategic collaboration network of development NGOs. The second contribution of this study is captured in the theme ‘NGO’s Views on Social Media Use’. This core category discusses the organisation’s view on the meaning of social media and includes the four following categories: technological, individual, collective and contextual views attributed to organisational social media. The four categories empirically demonstrate the concept of affordance clusters and the connections between them. The study’s third contribution is captured in the theme ‘NGO’s Use of Social Media in Development’, encompassing the social media activities of the studied development NGOs in their development projects. This has led to an assessment framework of organisational social media use by development NGOs, constructed by cross-referencing the organisational goals of development NGOs to the social media activity areas in the context of development. These themes represented by three core categories are inter-related. Feedback loops between NGO’s values in development, views on social media, and the actual uses of social media for development purposes have been discerned. This grounded theory study aims to build an initial theory of how NGOs might approach the use of social media in a development context. This qualitative study has produced some new concepts. This study has led to a substantive theory in the context of international development. Furthermore, this substantive theory is compared with three theory lenses, when applied on the data collected for this PhD research, in their ability to identify similar concepts as reached with the substantive theory following the grounded theory method. Finally, the thesis presents some avenues for future research that may help expand the substantive theory that has been developed under this research to formal theory
LINK
This study examines the motives of employees to engage in workrelated social media use – i.e. the use of personal social mediaaccounts to communicate about work-related issues. The theory ofplanned behavior (TPB) was used to explain this behavior.Because social media can enable users to express theiridentities, social identity expressiveness and self-identityexpressiveness were added to the TPB model. Through an onlinequestionnaire, using purposive sampling technique, 514 Dutchemployees were asked about their social media use and motivationto do so. We used structural equation modelling (SEM) to testour hypotheses. Results indicate that these identity constructsenhance the predictive ability of the TPB. As such, workrelationsocial media use is likely to take place spontaneouslyrather than deliberately and consciously planned.
Turkey has received consistent criticism from international media for having many naturalized athletes in its national squad, both in the Olympic Games and other major international sporting events. Similar criticisms have also been a feature of debates for a long time in domestic media, varying in views toward these athletes. This research focuses on media representations of naturalized athletes in Turkey between 2008 and 2020. We investigated the sentiments of news items from four major Turkish newspapers (Milliyet, Cumhuriyet, Sabah and Fanatik) on their stances toward naturalized athletes over the timespan of 2008–2020. Beside analyzing the sentiment of the media content both cumulatively and fragmentedly, we also identified the yearly trends and most featured sports in this context, combining qualitative and quantitative techniques. Our findings showed that sentiments in Turkish media toward naturalized athletes are mostly neutral and negative as well as with differences varying on the basis of the newspapers and news item types. The most criticism underlined pursuing “shortcut” success with naturalized athletes representing Turkey in the international arena. Among the featured sports, basketball, football, and track and field have been the most discussed ones in the naturalization context.
De afgelopen twee decennia is er veel meer aandacht ontstaan bij onderzoekers en beleidsmakers voor het begrip co-creatie. Bijna altijd wordt de rol van co-creatie als positief en essentieel gezien in een proces waarin maatschappelijke of publieke uitdagingen worden onderzocht en opgelost (zogenaamde sociale innovatie). Het meeste onderzoek naar deze twee begrippen is kwalitatief van aard en gebaseerd op ‘case studies’.In zijn promotieonderzoek kijkt Peter Broekema naar de rol van co-creatie binnen sociale innovatie in Europese samenwerkingsprojecten. In zijn eerste artikel heeft hij de begrippen co-creatie en sociale innovatie tussen 1995 en 2018 binnen de EU geanalyseerd en geconcludeerd dat beide begrippen steeds breder gebruikt worden en samen met het begrip impact zijn getransformeerd tot een beleidsparadigma.In het tweede artikel keek Peter Broekema hoe beide begrippen doorwerken in specifieke subsidieoproepen en hoe consortia deze begrippen toepassen en samenwerken. Hierbij bleek dat er weliswaar verschillende typen consortia bestaan, maar dat zij geen specifieke co-creatiestrategie hadden.In zijn laatste twee artikelen zal hij gedetailleerd kijken naar een aantal EU projecten en vaststellen hoe de samenwerking is verlopen en hoe tevreden de verschillende partners zijn met het resultaat. Peter Broekema maakt hiervoor gebruik van projecten waarin hij zelf participeert (ACCOMPLISSH, INEDIT en SHIINE).EU beleidsparadigma van sociale innovatie in combinatie met co-creatie en impact. Co-creatie vindt vaak binnen eigen type stakehodlers plaatsAbstractSocial innovation and co-creation are both relatively new concepts, that have been studied by scholars for roughly twenty years and are still heavily contested. The former emerged as a response to the more technologically focused concept of innovation and the latter originally solely described the collaboration of end-users in the development of new products, processes or services. Between 2010-2015, both concepts have been adapted and started to be used more widely by for example EU policymakers in their effort to tackle so called ‘grand societal challenges’. Within this narrative – which could be called co-creation for social innovation, it is almost a prerequisite that partners – especially citizens - from different backgrounds and sectors actively work together towards specific societal challenges. Relevance and aimHowever, the exact contribution of co-creation to social innovation projects is still unclear. Most research on co-creation has been focussing on the involvement of end-users in the development of products, processes and services. In general, scholars conclude that the involvement of end-users is effective and leads to a higher level of customer satisfaction. Only recently, research into the involvement of citizens in social innovation projects has started to emerge. However, the majority of research on co-creation for social innovation has been focusing on collaborations between two types of partners in the quadruple helix (citizens, governments, enterprises and universities). Because of this, it is still unclear what co-creation in social innovation projects with more different type of partners entails exactly. More importantly however, is that most research has been based on national case studies in which partners from different sectors collaborate in a familiar ‘national’ setting. Normally institutional and/or cultural contexts influence co-creation (for example the ‘poldermodel’in the Netherlands or the more confrontational model in France), so by looking at projects in a central EU and different local contexts it becomes clear how context effects co-creation for social innovation.Therefore this project will analyse a number of international co-creation projects that aim for social innovation with different types of stakeholders in a European and multi-stakeholder setting.With this research we will find out what people in different contexts believe is co-creation and social innovation, how this process works in different contexts and how co-creation contributes to social innovation.Research question and - sub questionsThe project will answer the following question: “What is the added value of co-creation in European funded collaboration projects that aim for social innovation?” To answer the main question, the research has been subdivided into four sub questions:1) What is the assumed added value of co-creation for social innovation?2) How is the added value of co-creation for social innovation being expressed ex ante and ex post in EU projects that aim specifically for social innovation by co-creation?3) How do partners and stakeholders envision the co-creation process beforehand and continuously shape this process in EU projects to maximise social innovation?4) How do partners and stakeholders regard the added value of co-creation for social innovation in EU projects that that aim for social innovation?Key conceptsThe research will focus on the interplay between the two main concepts a) co-creation and b) social innovation. For now, we are using the following working definitions:a) co-creation is a non-linear process that involves multiple actors and stakeholders in the ideation, implementation and assessment of products, services, policies and systems with the aim of improving their efficiency and effectiveness, and the satisfaction of those who take part in the process.b) social innovation is the invention, development and implementation of new ideas with the purpose to (immediately) relieve and (eventually) solve social problems, which are in the long run directed at the social inclusion of individuals, groups or communities.It is clear that both definitions are quite opaque, but also distinguish roughly the same phases (ideation/invention, development, implementation and assessment) and also distinguish different levels (products/services, policies and systems). Both concepts will be studied within the policy framework of the EU, in which a specific value to both concepts has been attributed, mostly because policymakers regard co-creation with universities and end-users almost as a prerequisite for social innovation. Based on preliminary research, EU policies seem to define social innovation in close reation with ‘societal impact’, which could defined as: “the long lasting effect of an activity on society, because it is aimed at solving social problems”, and therefore in this specific context social innovation seems to encompasses societal impact. For now, I will use this working definition of social innovation and will closely look at the entanglement with impact in the first outlined paper.MethodologyIn general, I will use a qualitative mixed method approach and grounded theory to answer the main research question (mRQ). In order to better understand the added value of co-creation for social innovation in an EU policy setting, the research will:SubRQ1) start with an analysis of academic literature on co-creation and social impact. This analysis will be followed by and confronted with an analysis of EU policy documents. SubRQ2) use a qualitative data analysis at nineteen EU funded projects to understand how co-creation is envisoned within social innovation projects by using the quintuple helix approach (knowledge flows between partners and stakeholders in an EU setting) and the proposed social innovation journey model. By contrasting the findings from the QDA phase of the project with other research on social innovation we will be able to find arachetypes of social innovation in relation with the (perceived) added value of co-creation within social innovation. SubRQ3) These archetypes will be used to understand the process of co-creation for social innovation by looking closely at behavioural interactions within two social innovation projects. This close examination will be carried out by carrying out interviews with key stakeholders and partners and participant observation.SubRQ4) The archetypes will also be used to understand the perceived added value by looking closely at behavioural interactions within two social innovation projects. This close examination will be carried out by carrying out interviews with key stakeholders and partners and participant observation.ImpactThe project will contribute to a better understanding of the relationship between co-creation and social innovation on different levels:a) Theoretical: the research will analyse the concepts of co-creation and social innovation in relation to each other by looking at the origins of the concepts, the adaptation in different fields and the uptake within EU policies;b) Methodological: a model will be developed to study and understand the non-lineair process of co-creation within social innovation, by focusing on social innovation pathways and social innovation strategies within a quintuple helix setting (i) academia, ii) enterprises and iii) governments that work together to improve iv) society in an v) EU setting);c) Empirical: the project will (for the first time) collect data on behavioural interactions and the satisfaction levels of these interactions between stakeholders and partners in an EU project.d) Societal: the results of the research could be used to optimize the support for social innovation projects and also for the development of specific funding calls.
The PhD research by Joris Weijdom studies the impact of collective embodied design techniques in collaborative mixed-reality environments (CMRE) in art- and engineering design practice and education. He aims to stimulate invention and innovation from an early stage of the collective design process.Joris combines theory and practice from the performing arts, human-computer interaction, and engineering to develop CMRE configurations, strategies for its creative implementation, and an embodied immersive learning pedagogy for students and professionals.This lecture was given at the Transmedia Arts seminar of the Mahindra Humanities Center of Harvard University. In this lecture, Joris Weijdom discusses critical concepts, such as embodiment, presence, and immersion, that concern mixed-reality design in the performing arts. He introduces examples from his practice and interdisciplinary projects of other artists.About the researchMultiple research areas now support the idea that embodiment is an underpinning of cognition, suggesting new discovery and learning approaches through full-body engagement with the virtual environment. Furthermore, improvisation and immediate reflection on the experience itself, common creative strategies in artist training and practice, are central when inventing something new. In this research, a new embodied design method, entitled Performative prototyping, has been developed to enable interdisciplinary collective design processes in CMRE’s and offers a vocabulary of multiple perspectives to reflect on its outcomes.Studies also find that engineering education values creativity in design processes, but often disregards the potential of full-body improvisation in generating and refining ideas. Conversely, artists lack the technical know-how to utilize mixed-reality technologies in their design process. This know-how from multiple disciplines is thus combined and explored in this research, connecting concepts and discourse from human-computer interaction and media- and performance studies.This research is a collaboration of the University of Twente, Utrecht University, and HKU University of the Arts Utrecht. This research is partly financed by the Dutch Research Council (NWO).Mixed-reality experiences merge real and virtual environments in which physical and digital spaces, objects, and actors co-exist and interact in real-time. Collaborative Mix-Reality Environments, or CMRE's, enable creative design- and learning processes through full-body interaction with spatial manifestations of mediated ideas and concepts, as live-puppeteered or automated real-time computer-generated content. It employs large-scale projection mapping techniques, motion-capture, augmented- and virtual reality technologies, and networked real-time 3D environments in various inter-connected configurations.This keynote was given at the IETM Plenary meeting in Amsterdam for more than 500 theatre and performing arts professionals. It addresses the following questions in a roller coaster ride of thought-provoking ideas and examples from the world of technology, media, and theatre:What do current developments like Mixed Reality, Transmedia, and The Internet of Things mean for telling stories and creating theatrical experiences? How do we design performances on multiple "stages" and relate to our audiences when they become co-creators?Contactjoris.weijdom@hku.nl / LinkedIn profileThis research is part of the professorship Performative Processes
