Convergent Innovation Platform to Address Complex Social Problems: A Tiered Governance Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Solutions at scale to complex social problems such as poverty, malnutrition and affordable healthcare require the collective capability of businesses, civil society and government actors in a variety of industrial sectors. Convergent innovation (Dubé et al., 2014; Jha et al., 2014), a solution- oriented approach to address complex problems, proposes the creation of a platform for collective action that facilitates the simultaneous pursuit of social and economic value through a portfolio of time-bound, goal-oriented projects that align with each actor’s interests and capabilities. In this paper, we develop a conceptual framework to guide the governance of the creation and operation of such a platform that strives to achieve a delicate balance between convergence and conflict of interests of participating actors. Drawing on the theoretical lenses of modularity, interdependence and network brokerage, we propose a two- tiered governance model: platform governance and project governance. We posit that the platform carries out three functions: platform management, portfolio management and integration management, each requiring a different type of brokered governance. For individual projects, we propose governance mechanisms based on the type of value being created by the project and the mix of actors involved in implementing it. These propositions together provide guidance for the tiered governance architecture of a modular multi-actor network to address complex societal problems.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".