Driving innovation at the base of the pyramid: The impact of NGOs and the quadruple helix approach

References

1. Cai, Y. (2014), ‘Implementing the triple helix model in a non-western context: An institutional logics perspective’, Triple Helix, 1:1, pp. 1–20.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Cai, Y. and Lattu, A. (2022), ‘Triple helix or quadruple helix: Which model of innovation to choose for empirical studies?’, Minerva, 60:2, pp. 257–80.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Caldwell, N. D., Roehrich, J. K. and George, G. (2017), ‘Social value creation and relational coordination in public–private collaborations’, Journal of Management Studies, 54:6, pp. 906–28.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Carayannis, E. G., Grigoroudis, E., Campbell, D. F. J., Meissner, D. and Stamati, D. (2018), ‘The ecosystem as helix: An exploratory theory-building study of regional co-opetitive entrepreneurial ecosystems as quadruple/quintuple helix innovation models’, R&D Management, 48:1, pp. 148–62.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Carter, N., Bryant-Lukosius, D., DiCenso, A., Blythe, J. and Neville, A. J. (2014), ‘The use of triangulation in qualitative research’, Oncology Nursing Forum, 41:5, pp. 545–47.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Colapinto, C. and Porlezza, C. (2012), ‘Innovation in creative industries: From the quadruple helix model to the systems theory’, Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 3:4, pp. 343–53.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Dembek, K. and Sivasubramaniam, N. (2019), ‘Examining base of the pyramid (BoP) venture success through the mutual value CARD approach’, in R. Grosse and K. E. Meyer (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Management in Emerging Markets, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 241–66.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Dembek, K., Sivasubramaniam, N. and Chmielewski, D. A. (2020), ‘A systematic review of the bottom/base of the pyramid literature: Cumulative evidence and future directions’, Journal of Business Ethics, 165:3, pp. 365–82.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Drucker, P. F. (1994), Managing the Non-Profit Organization, Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1991), ‘Better stories and better constructs: The case for rigor and comparative logic’, Academy of Management Review, 16:3, pp. 620–27.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Ernst, H., Kahle, H. N., Dubiel, A., Prabhu, J. and Subramaniam, M. (2015), ‘The antecedents and consequences of affordable value innovations for emerging markets’, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32:1, pp. 65–79.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Esposito, M., Kapoor, A. and Goyal, S. (2012), ‘Enabling healthcare services for the rural and semi-urban segments in India: When shared value meets the bottom of the pyramid’, Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 12:4, pp. 514–33.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Etzkowitz, H. and Leydesdorff, L. (2000), ‘The dynamics of innovation: From national systems and “mode 2” to a triple helix of university–industry–government relations’, Research Policy, 29:2, pp. 109–23.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Foster, C. and Heeks, R. (2013), ‘Conceptualising inclusive innovation: Modifying systems of innovation frameworks to understand diffusion of new technology to low-income consumers’, The European Journal of Development Research, 25:3, pp. 333–55.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Fyvie, C. and Ager, A. (1999), ‘NGOs and innovation: Organizational characteristics and constraints in development assistance work in the Gambia’, World Development, 27:8, pp. 1383–95.
    [Google Scholar]
16. George, G., McGahan, A. M. and Prabhu, J. (2012), ‘Innovation for inclusive growth: Towards a theoretical framework and a research agenda’, Journal of Management Studies, 49:4, pp. 661–83.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Gerring, J. (2011), Social Science Methodology: A Unified Framework, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Gioia, D. A., Corley, K. G. and Hamilton, A. L. (2013), ‘Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology’, Organizational Research Methods, 16:1, pp. 15–31.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Gonzalez-Martinez, P., García-Pérez-De-Lema, D., Castillo-Vergara, M. and Hansen, P. B. (2021), ‘Systematic review of the literature on the concept of civil society in the quadruple helix framework’, Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 16:4, pp. 85–95.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Gupta, A. D. (2021), ‘Some recent cases in the bottom of the pyramid concept: Lessons from India’, Global Business Review, 22:5, pp. 1232–43.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Halme, M., Lindeman, S. and Linna, P. (2012), ‘Innovation for inclusive business: Intrapreneurial bricolage in multinational corporations’, Journal of Management Studies, 49:4, pp. 743–84.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Hasche, N., Höglund, L. and Linton, G. (2019), ‘Quadruple helix as a network of relationships: Creating value within a Swedish regional innovation system’, Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship, 32:6, pp. 523–44.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Huab, C. and Sharma, O. P. (2010), What Is Poverty, Really? The Case of India, Washington, DC: Population Reference Bureau.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Janda, S. V., Kuester, S. and Schuhmacher, M. C. (2021), ‘A configurational perspective on BoP innovation capability’, International Journal of Innovation Management, 25:5, pp. 1–37.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Karnani, A. (2011), Fighting Poverty Together: Rethinking Strategies for Business, Governments, and Civil Society to Reduce Poverty, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Khiavi, P. T. (2019), ‘Inclusive innovation process from NGOs perspective’, master’s thesis, Lappeenranta: LUT University.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Khieng, S. and Dahles, H. (2014), ‘Commercialization in the non-profit sector: The emergence of social enterprise in Cambodia’, Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 6:2, pp. 218–43.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Kolehmainen, J., Irvine, J., Stewart, L., Karacsonyi, Z., Szabó, T., Alarinta, J. and Norberg, A. (2016), ‘Quadruple helix, innovation and the knowledge-based development: Lessons from remote, rural and less-favoured regions’, Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 7:1, pp. 23–42.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Kolk, A., Rivera-Santos, M. and Rufín, C. (2014), ‘Reviewing a decade of research on the “base/bottom of the pyramid” (BOP) concept’, Business & Society, 53:3, pp. 338–77.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Kriz, A., Bankins, S. and Molloy, C. (2018), ‘Readying a region: Temporally exploring the development of an Australian regional quadruple helix’, R&D Management, 48:1, pp. 25–43.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Lambell, R., Ramia, G., Nyland, C. and Michelotti, M. (2008), ‘NGOs and international business research: Progress, prospects and problems’, International Journal of Management Reviews, 10:1, pp. 75–92.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Leydesdorff, L. and Etzkowitz, H. (2003), ‘Can “the public” be considered as a fourth helix in university–industry–government relations? Report on the Fourth Triple Helix Conference, 2002’, Science and Public Policy, 30:1, pp. 55–61.
    [Google Scholar]
33. London, T., Hart, S. and Barney, J. (2011), ‘Next generation base of the pyramid strategy’, Academy of Management Conference (Session # 420), San Antonio, TX, 14 August.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Luxmore, S. R. and Hull, C. E. (2011), ‘Innovation and NGOs: A framework of interaction’, The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 12:1, pp. 17–27.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Mathur, M., Mehta, R. and Swami, S. (2020), ‘Developing a marketing framework for the bottom of the pyramid consumers’, Journal of Advances in Management Research, 17:3, pp. 455–71.
    [Google Scholar]
36. McAdam, M., Miller, K. and McAdam, R. (2018), ‘Understanding quadruple helix relationships of university technology commercialisation: A micro-level approach’, Studies in Higher Education, 43:6, pp. 1058–73.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Meetei, L. A., Bhattacharjya, B. R. and Bhowmick, B. (2024), ‘The role of universities in the innovation systems in the developing countries’, Foresight and STI Governance, 18:1, pp. 58–67.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Meetei, L. A. and Kelvin, M. (2023), ‘University-community engagement for inclusive innovation: A quadruple helix perspective’, Corporate Management Review, 43:2, pp. 83–116.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Miles, M. B. and Huberman, A. M. (1994), Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
40. Naderi, N., Khosravi, E., Azadi, H., Karamian, F., Viira, A. H. and Nadiri, H. (2020), ‘Barriers to developing social entrepreneurship in NGOs: Application of grounded theory in Western Iran’, Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 13:2, pp. 221–43.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Nobre, F. S. and Morais-da-Silva, R. L. (2022), ‘Capabilities of bottom of the pyramid organizations’, Business & Society, 61:8, pp. 2115–55.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Nordberg, K. (2015), ‘Enabling regional growth in peripheral non-university regions: The impact of a quadruple helix intermediate organisation’, Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 6:2, pp. 334–56.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Nordberg, K., Mariussen, A. and Virkkala, S. (2020), ‘Community-driven social innovation and quadruple helix coordination in rural development: Case study on LEADER group Aktion “Osterbotten”’, Journal of Rural Studies, 79:1, pp. 157–68.
    [Google Scholar]
44. Pansera, M. and Martinez, F. (2017), ‘Innovation for development and poverty reduction: An integrative literature review’, Journal of Management Development, 36:1, pp. 2–13.
    [Google Scholar]
45. Pansera, M. and Sarkar, S. (2016), ‘Crafting sustainable development solutions: Frugal innovations of grassroots entrepreneurs’, Sustainability, 8:1, 51, https://doi.org/10.3390/su8010051.
    [Google Scholar]
46. Parthasarathy, B., Aoyama, Y. and Menon, N. (2015), ‘Innovating for the bottom of the pyramid: Case studies in healthcare from India’, in S. Hostettler, E. Hazboun and J.-C. Bolay (eds), Technologies for Development: What Is Essential?, Paris, Heidelberg, New York, Dordrecht and London: Springer, pp. 55–69.
    [Google Scholar]
47. Pitelis, C. N. and Teece, D. J. (2018), ‘The new MNE: “Orchestration” theory as envelope of “Internalisation” theory’, Management International Review, 58:4, pp. 523–39.
    [Google Scholar]
48. Prahalad, C. K. (2010), The Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid: Eradicating Poverty through Profits, 2nd ed., Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
    [Google Scholar]
49. Prahalad, C. K. (2012), ‘Bottom of the pyramid as a source of breakthrough innovations’, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 29:1, pp. 6–12.
    [Google Scholar]
50. Prahalad, C. K. and Hammond, A. (2002), ‘Serving the world’s poor, profitably’, Harvard Business Review, 80:9, pp. 48–57.
    [Google Scholar]
51. Prahalad, C. K. and Hart, S. L. (1999), ‘Strategies for the bottom of the pyramid: Creating sustainable development’, working paper, Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, http://pdf.wri.org/2001summit_hartarticle.pdf. Accessed 20 March 2024.
    [Google Scholar]
52. Prahalad, C. K. and Hart, S. L. (2002), ‘The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid’, Strategy + Business, 1:2, pp. 1–26.
    [Google Scholar]
53. Prahalad, C. K. and Lieberthal, K. (1998), ‘The end of corporate imperialism’, Harvard Business Review, 76:4, pp. 68–79.
    [Google Scholar]
54. Purohit, S., Paul, J. and Mishra, R. (2021), ‘Rethinking the bottom of the pyramid: Towards a new marketing mix’, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 58:1, pp. 1–14.
    [Google Scholar]
55. Ramani, S. V., Athreye, S., Bruder, M. and Sengupta, A. (2023), ‘Inclusive innovation for the BoP: It’s a matter of survival!’, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 194:1, pp. 1–18.
    [Google Scholar]
56. Ramani, S. V. and Mukherjee, V. (2014), ‘Can breakthrough innovations serve the poor (bop) and create reputational (CSR) value? Indian case studies’, Technovation, 34:5–6, pp. 295–305.
    [Google Scholar]
57. Reich-Graefe, R. (2016), ‘Intermediation in intermediation: Triple helix innovation and intermediary legal organisation’, Triple Helix, 3:1, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40604-016-0041-x.
    [Google Scholar]
58. Roman, M., Varga, H., Cvijanovic, V. and Reid, A. (2020), ‘Quadruple helix models for sustainable regional innovation: Engaging and facilitating civil society participation’, Economies, 8:2, 48, https://doi.org/10.3390/economies8020048.
    [Google Scholar]
59. Schuster, T. and Holtbrügge, D. (2014), ‘Resource dependency, innovative strategies, and firm’s performance in BOP markets’, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31:S1, pp. 43–59.
    [Google Scholar]
60. Si, S., Ahlstrom, D., Wei, J. and Cullen, J. (2020), ‘Business, entrepreneurship and innovation toward poverty reduction’, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 32:1–2, pp. 1–20.
    [Google Scholar]
61. Singh, A. and Kathuria, L. M. (2017), ‘Role of innovation in social value creation at bottom of the pyramid’, International Journal of Business Innovation and Research, 13:1, pp. 68–91.
    [Google Scholar]
62. Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1998), Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
63. Verbeke, A., Simoes, S. and Grøgaard, B. (2024), ‘The role of multinational enterprises and formal institutions in BOP markets’, Journal of International Management, 30:4, 101171, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intman.2024.101171.
    [Google Scholar]
64. Weber, C., Weidner, K., Kroeger, A. and Wallace, J. (2017), ‘Social value creation in interorganizational collaborations in the not-for-profit sector: Give and take from a dyadic perspective’, Journal of Management Studies, 54:6, pp. 929–56.
    [Google Scholar]
65. Yang, Y. and Holgaard, J. E. (2012), ‘The important role of civil society groups in eco-innovation: A triple helix perspective’, Journal of Knowledge-Based Innovation in China, 4:2, pp. 132–48.
    [Google Scholar]
66. Yin, R. (2003), Case Study Research. Design and Methods, London: Sage Publications.
    [Google Scholar]