Technological Forecasting & Social Change 169 (2021) 120799

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Technological Forecasting & Social Change

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/techfore

Crisis-driven innovation and fundamental human needs: A typological

framework of rapid-response COVID-19 innovations
Johannes Dahlke a, *, Kristina Bogner a, Maike Becker a, Michael P. Schlaile b, Andreas Pyka b,
Bernd Ebersberger a
a
Department of Innovation Management (570F), University of Hohenheim, Schloss Hohenheim 1, 70599 Stuttgart, Germany
b
Department of Innovation Economics (520I), University of Hohenheim, Schloss Hohenheim 1, 70599 Stuttgart, Germany

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: As a microcosm for future challenges, the COVID-19 pandemic exhibits increasingly transboundary dynamics,
COVID-19 causing interconnected problems across multiple societal systems. To examine the role of innovations as a social
Human needs mechanism to reconcile these arising challenges, we view the unfolding of the pandemic through the lens of a
Innovation systems
content analysis of 707 innovation projects that address the fundamental human needs of consumers and
Topic modeling
businesses. This study proposes a novel procedure to characterize large-scale innovative activities via text mining
Content analysis
and employs a theoretical framework for identifying the pressing societal needs amidst crises. Our typology of
rapid-response COVID-19 innovations exhibits a diverse set of domains ranging from technological innovations
to what may be described as frugal and social innovations. We provide evidence for the growing prevalence of
social needs beyond the basic notion of safety during the early months of the crisis. Our contributions show that a
structural model of innovation activities and their latent drivers may help policy makers and innovators to move
toward achieving a systemic reaction to such crises.

1. Introduction ignore short-term reactions to such events. The severity of immediate

impacts may affect our economy by inducing lasting recessions (World
As the worst pandemic in the age of globalization, COVID-19 has Bank, 2020) and our environment by causing ecological rebound effects
confronted our societies with unprecedented threats and challenges. The (Barreiro-Gen et al., 2020). Such impacts may even shape our societal
virus has taken many lives and destroyed livelihoods worldwide. The perception of future crises and the reaction toward them.
current pandemic has been described as a microcosm for future societal In the short term, the interconnected effects of the COVID-19
challenges (Engler et al., 2020). Boin (2009) argues that the shapes and pandemic are attacking physical health, societal institutions, and eco­
impacts of modern crises generally extend over prolonged durations and nomic welfare at once—threatening how we live, work, and interact.
exhibit increasingly transboundary dynamics, simultaneously impacting Immediate responses to the crisis have been driven by top-down politics
multiple life-sustaining systems, sectors, and social functions. In hind­ imposing contact regulations to reduce the number of newly infected
sight, global actors reacted hesitantly to the early signs of the COVID-19 people and the rate of COVID-19 hospitalizations. This, in turn, has
pandemic. This may be indicative of societal systems not being prepared caused a plethora of other social issues ranging from economic costs to
for (or not even being aware of) what—in the face of arising wicked the lack of childcare or psychological harm (Bavel et al., 2020). How­
problems (Rittel and Webber, 1973)—has been described as a growing ever, allowing economic recovery through loosening lockdown regula­
systemic risk caused by increasingly frequent calamities (Norman et al., tions comes at the risk of increased rates of infections. Recent
2020). Although challenges such as climate change and other anthro­ social-scientific contributions have investigated the effects of the
pogenic problems of our time may best be met by sustainable, long-term pandemic on changes in pronounced human needs during the crisis. For
transitions within our society (Abson et al., 2017; Patterson et al., 2017; example, Matias et al. (2020) show that both the virus itself and the
Schlaile and Urmetzer, 2021), it is also of paramount importance to not measures undertaken to fight its propagation may simultaneously

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: johannes.dahlke@uni-hohenheim.de (J. Dahlke), kristina.bogner@uni-hohenheim.de (K. Bogner), maike.becker@uni-hohenheim.de
(M. Becker), schlaile@uni-hohenheim.de (M.P. Schlaile), a.pyka@uni-hohenheim.de (A. Pyka), ebersberger@uni-hohenheim.de (B. Ebersberger).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120799
Received 29 September 2020; Received in revised form 6 April 2021; Accepted 7 April 2021
Available online 28 April 2021
0040-1625/© 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
J. Dahlke et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 169 (2021) 120799

affect—as intended effects or as unintended side-effects—the satisfac­ and dynamics of innovative solutions emerging across multiple actors or
tion of various fundamental human needs, ranging from the need for about the guiding motives initiating these responses within innovation
physical health to the need for a living social environment. Suh et al. systems. However, crises affect collectives and are to be collectively
(2020) show that fundamental human needs for health and protection overcome (Engler et al., 2020; Hekkert et al., 2020). An insufficient
have severely increased during the pandemic. They also find that other systemic understanding of the emergence of novel solutions during this
needs for self-actualization, cognitive fulfillment, or love and belonging unprecedented crisis runs the risk of misconceiving the complexity of
have been more frequently expressed after lockdown regulations were both the innovation process and the ramifications of the current
imposed and as time went on, whereas other needs started to decline pandemic.
after an initial peak. These studies suggest that the dynamic monitoring Current social science population studies (Suh et al., 2020) identify
of the expression of unfulfilled human needs is necessary to guide pol­ human needs and the resulting societal problems during COVID-19 but
icies and relief efforts during the pandemic (Ryan et al., 2020; Suh et al., have not investigated the solutions to these problems. In contrast,
2020). Identifying prevalent needs is necessary but not sufficient for innovation research (Bacq et al., 2020; Ebersberger and Kuckertz, 2021;
supporting the fulfillment of these needs; however, these relatively Kraus et al., 2020; Kuckertz et al., 2020) has largely focused on the
descriptive population-scale studies do not offer an investigation into process of innovating during crises but not on the domains of in­
the concrete mechanisms of satisfaction for rising human needs. novations and whether they correspond to different and changing
To contribute a perspective on how rising needs are met by solutions, human needs. This is why our study aims to integrate the concepts of
we propose to follow Max-Neef et al. (1989) in understanding market fundamental human needs and innovation to derive a typological
demands as expressions of these fundamental human needs and in­ framework of rapid-response COVID-19 innovations and their latent
novations as provisions for the satisfaction of these needs, which emerge drivers. We contribute to both aforementioned streams of research by
on the side of both consumers and producers. Crisis-driven innovations offering an exploration of the solution space corresponding to the
may be understood as a crucial way of addressing these complex or even prevalent and dynamically changing human needs, which is emerging
competing societal needs during times of dire straits (Bessant et al., through a crisis-driven innovation system. This perspective contributes a
2015). This proposition naturally leads to considering the emerging better understanding of the collective response and of how the search for
stream of research focused on innovation activities during COVID-19. solutions is guided within crisis-driven innovation systems and may
Recent contributions in innovation research focus on an organizational inform practical implications for consumers, practitioners, and policy­
or a firm-level perspective to present a techno-economic interpretation makers as well as their responses to the current crisis. Finally, our
of the innovation process, which mainly centers on a procedural and analysis reveals the possibilities of embedding rapid-response in­
technical framing of innovation activities for and in times of need (Biron novations into a socio-ethically guided and dedicated innovation system
et al., 2020; Kraus et al., 2020; Kuckertz et al., 2020). They explain how attuned to future challenges (Ghazinoory et al., 2020; Hekkert et al.,
firms cope to survive the economic fallout of the pandemic and how 2020; Pyka, 2017; Schlaile et al., 2017).
innovation processes are structured and conducted. These contributions To examine the domains of rapid-response COVID-19 innovations
show that firms respond to emerging challenges by accelerating digiti­ and the human needs they correspond to, we adopt a two-stage
zation (Kraus et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2020), rethinking corporate approach. First, we identify the arising innovation trends during the
practices (Biron et al., 2020; Juergensen et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2020), first two months of the COVID-19 crisis utilizing machine learning to
or developing frugal solutions (Cankurtaran and Beverland, 2020). construct a topic model (Maier et al., 2018) based on web-scraped text
Startups rely on a bricolage approach (Kuckertz et al., 2020) and out­ data of 707 innovation projects related to the COVID-19 crisis (hence­
pace other actors in their responses to emerging challenges (Ebersberger forth, COVID innovations). In doing so, we contribute a novel procedure
and Kuckertz, 2021). Chesbrough (2020) particularly highlights the for characterizing large-scale innovation activities by employing the text
importance of open innovation (Chesbrough, 2003; Enkel et al., 2009): mining technique of topic modeling using text data of innovation pro­
scientists, pharmaceuticals, governmental institutions, jects. Subsequently, we estimate the time trend of the identified domains
non-governmental organizations (NGO), communities, and individuals of innovations over the two-month observation span using simple
should join forces to mobilize knowledge, to speed up the creation, regression analysis to identify the rising and falling dynamics of the
launch, and testing of possible solutions, and to eventually combat the rapid-response COVID innovations. Second, and based on the derived
pandemic. Similarly, Crick and Crick (2020) point out how coopeti­ structural model of innovation activities, we connect the different
tion—that is, strategic cooperation with competitors—can effectively identified domains of innovations to a more latent classification of
contribute to the global effort to mitigate the impact of the pandemic fundamental human needs, which is based on the contribution of
through the sharing of resources and capabilities. Another relevant Max-Neef et al. (1989). Employing this two-stage approach, each
strand of literature highlights the importance of—and the opportunity crisis-driven domain of innovations is thematically characterized, and
for—more collaborative and prosocial action (Bacq et al., 2020; Bou­ its occurrence is estimated over time. Each domain is also classified
man et al., 2020; He and Harris, 2020). These studies suggest that crises according to the needs it addresses on the side of the consumers and
may increase the needs of businesses and entrepreneurs for economic producers of the innovations. Our results show that this perspective may
subsistence, collaboration, and creation activities; they also make sub­ help to identify points of intervention to move toward achieving a sys­
stantial contributions to the understanding of firm-level innovation temic reaction to such crises.
processes during crises. However, thus far, this strand of literature has This paper is structured as follows. Section 2 substantiates our
been biased toward an organizational and techno-economic perspective. theoretical underpinning by connecting crisis-driven innovations with
It is only implictly acknowledged whether innovations respond to the notion of fundamental human needs and a perspective on innovation
emerging human needs in society and are, therefore,actually useful in systems. Section 3 presents our data and methodology, including our
contributing solutions to crisis-induced problems. Some studies feature topic modeling process, the regressions to estimate time trends, and the
rather limited technological examples, such as the severe shortage of classification scheme to map fundamental human needs to our sample of
ventilators as an example for cross-industry cooperation to accelerate innovations. Section 4 presents a synthesis of the derived clusters of our
the provision of these desperately needed devices (Chesbrough, 2020). topic model, describing the time trends as well as human needs
Although the above-mentioned contributions help to understand how addressed by various domains of innovations. Section 5 discusses our
crisis-driven innovations are created, they tell us little about the breadth findings against the backdrop of the unfolding crisis and dedicated

2
J. Dahlke et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 169 (2021) 120799

innovation systems. Section 6 offers some concrete practical implica­ and Gough (1984, 1991) differentiate between individual needs—such
tions of our results. Finally, Section 7 concludes the study and presents as survival, health, autonomy, or learning—and societal needs, such as
some limitations and promising avenues for future research. production, culture, and communication. Likewise, Max-Neef et al.
(1989) reject the hierarchical structure of needs: “Human needs must be
2. Theoretical considerations understood as a system: that is, all human needs are interrelated and
interactive. With the sole exception of the need of subsistence, that is, to
The COVID-19 pandemic significantly differs from previous disasters remain alive, no hierarchies exist within the system. On the contrary,
such as the global financial crisis of 2008. From a mainstream economics simultaneities, complementarities and trade-offs are characteristics of
perspective, the global financial crisis represented an exogenous shock the process of needs satisfaction” (p. 19). Max-Neef et al. (1989) present
predominantly affecting market dynamics through decreased demand. a matrix of needs and potential satisfiers. The nine axiological needs are
Direct effects on the supply side were mainly limited to the finance and subsistence (e.g., being healthy, having food and shelter, or acting in a
banking sectors. Disruptions on the industry level occurred as a conse­ social environment), protection (e.g., having social security and health
quence of the gradually unfolding recession rather than as a conse­ systems), affection (e.g., having friends and expressing emotions), un­
quence of the crisis itself (Mandel and Veetil, 2020). In this sense, the derstanding (e.g., having teachers and learning materials and interact­
global financial crisis represented an economic shock that was to be ing in schools or universities), participation (e.g., interacting in churches
absorbed by the economic system, which subsequently reverted to an and communities), leisure or idleness (e.g., having games or parties),
old normal (for an analysis of the recovery pattern, see Reinhart and creation (e.g., being able to work and invent), identity (e.g., having
Rogoff, 2014). The COVID-19 pandemic, in contrast, has immediate symbols and religion and interacting in everyday setting), and freedom
effects on economic welfare but also on physical health and the entire (e.g., having equal rights or developing awareness for equality). This
socioeconomic system. Owing to highly interconnected societies, the presentation of needs and their different categories is arguably one of
virus is rapidly transcending geographical borders, distorting global the most comprehensive ones that considers not only different kinds of
markets, disrupting corporate and social networks, and ultimately needs but also how these needs can be addressed or satisfied (Cruz et al.,
threatening human lives and livelihoods worldwide (Norman et al., 2009).
2020). Such crises pose enormous pressure on—and can cause drastic Max-Neef et al. (1989) introduce five different types of satisfiers for
changes in—socio-technical regimes, which may include “technology, human needs, based on their relation to the satisfaction of other needs
user practices and application domains (markets), symbolic meaning of (see also Cruz et al., 2009): violators or destroyers seem to satisfy one
technology, infrastructure, industry structure, policy and need, potentially linked to protection, but at the same time—and
techno-scientific knowledge” (Geels, 2002, p. 1262). They may also somewhat paradoxically—they make the satisfaction of this very same
result in severe shortages of resources and, thus, fundamentally need and/or other needs impossible. Often, the employment of these
endanger the satisfaction of society’s demands and needs. Lockdown types of satisfiers is motivated by fear and displays a dynamic of sup­
measures cause supply chains to collapse, rendering an uninterrupted posed short-term benefits being outweighed by longer term negative
provision of—in some cases lifesaving—goods and services impossible consequences (e.g., gun ownership contributing to an immediate sense
(at least through traditional ways). In this sense, both the virus itself and of protection leading to an arms culture that impairs the fulfillment of
the lockdown measures installed to slow down its spread inhibit the the need for protection in the long run). Being slightly less detrimental,
satisfaction of fundamental human needs. At the beginning of the so-called inhibiting satisfiers do not render the fulfillment of other needs
pandemic, the soaring fear of unfulfilled needs triggered largely irra­ impossible, but they seriously inhibit their satisfaction. In general,
tional consumption decisions, leading to the stockpiling of durable inhibiting satisfiers are created when over-emphasized singular needs
goods, toilet paper, and other hygiene products (Garbe et al., 2020; He exert a crowding out effect on the potential to fulfill other needs.
and Harris, 2020). Thus, identifying the system of human needs and Pseudo-satisfiers pretend to satisfy a need, provide a false sense of
integrating this perspective into response and decision-making strate­ satisfaction, and might, in the medium term, hamper the real satisfac­
gies is crucial for preventing societal harm and instability during crises. tion of the need they initially targeted. Returning to the example of gun
Similarly, Ryan et al. (2020) remind us that considering human needs is ownership, one may argue that the possession of a firearm may actually
an important approach to designing adequate crisis management increase the likelihood of harm while allowing a false perception of
policies. safety. Singular satisfiers address one single need and are neutral toward
the satisfaction of other needs. Finally, synergetic satisfiers satisfy a
given need and simultaneously support the satisfaction of other needs
2.1. Human needs and satisfiers (for more explanation and examples see Max-Neef et al., 1989, pp.
34–37).
With regard to the notion of fundamental human needs, various
disciplines and schools of thought offer quite different understandings,
definitions, and approaches (Cruz et al., 2009; Doyal and Gough, 1984, 2.2. Three propositions on innovation in times of need
1991; Maslow, 1943; Max-Neef et al., 1989). The word “need” is used in
many ways, and human needs are frequently confused with human Based on the interpretation of different satisfiers offered by Max-­
“aims,” “goals,” or “wants” (Doyal and Gough, 1984, 1991). One of the Neef et al. (1989), the COVID-19 pandemic and the imposed lockdown
most-cited approaches to structure human need systems is Maslow’s measures act as inhibiting satisfiers for various needs of both consumers
(1943) hierarchy of needs. In his theory of human motivation, Maslow and businesses. Although these satisfiers clearly seek to fulfill the need
identifies three different kinds of needs following a hierarchical struc­ for subsistence and/or protection of physical health, they simulta­
ture: basic needs (entailing physiological and safety needs), followed by neously impair the common way of satisfying almost all other needs,
psychological needs (entailing belonging and love as well as esteem ranging from affection, participation, and leisure to freedom. Beyond
needs), and, on top, self-actualization needs. Criticizing Maslow, that, these satisfiers may even be violators in the sense that they address
scholars such as Doyal and Gough (1984) argue against such a hierar­ the need for physical subsistence but exert a negative effect on other
chical presentation and state that, in fact, “human needs are systematic dimensions of subsistence (e.g., mental health). Under these restrictions,
or interwoven like a web” (p. 11). In their theory of human needs, Doyal the virus compels society to change the traditional ways of seeking to

3
J. Dahlke et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 169 (2021) 120799

satisfy needs for subsistence and protection and calls for innovative 2019). In other words, innovations are not simply brought forth by firms
medical goods and services such as pharmaceuticals, vaccines, and or the “production side” of an economy, which implies an important role
medical devices. At the same time, lockdown regulations prioritize the for other system actors, including users and consumers. Although con­
satisfaction of the need for (physical) protection but render society’s old sumers may indeed exhibit panic buying and a herd mentality, espe­
ways of fulfilling other cognitive, emotional, societal, and no less, eco­ cially in times of crises (Loxton et al., 2020), it is unjustified to color the
nomic needs infeasible (Matias et al., 2020; He and Harris, 2020). entire “demand side” with the same brush (Schlaile et al., 2018). In
However, history has shown that if a crisis is pervasively endangering particular, against the backdrop of so-called wicked problems (Rittel
the fulfillment of human needs, human ingenuity finds new ways to and Webber, 1973), which cause trans-systemic crises, dedicated and
reach satisfaction (Pyka et al., 2019). These new ways may come in the challenge-driven efforts of entire innovation systems have been argued
form of innovations that alleviate the pressure resulting from the threat, to become increasingly important (Ghazinoory et al., 2020; Hekkert
restrictions, and regulations (Mowery and Rosenberg, 1993). In their et al., 2020; Pyka, 2017; Schlaile et al., 2017). In other words, partic­
seminal paper, Mowery and Rosenberg thoroughly discuss research on ularly in times of crises, the significance of temporary networks of highly
the relationships between (user and producer) needs, demand, and adaptive actors cooperating for the development of innovative solutions
innovation. They conclude that both producers’ and consumers’ needs to these systemic challenges and instigating new chains of commitment
simultaneously influence and guide the innovation process (in terms of increases, thus further highlighting the interconnectedness and systemic
supply push and demand pull). “[N]eeds manifest themselves through nature of innovative endeavors (Schlaile et al., 2020).
demand which, in turn, is determined by individual preferences for the Before mapping the crisis-driven internal dynamics within innova­
goods produced. To include satisfiers within the framework of economic tion systems comprising individuals, entrepreneurial actors, firms and
analysis involves vindicating the world of the ‘subjective’, over and other organizations, communities, and institutions, we have to be more
above mere preferences for objects and artifacts” (Max-Neef et al., 1989, specific about our understanding of “systems.” For a general working
p. 27). According to Yu (2018), fundamental human needs always have definition of systems, we follow Meadows (2008), who proposed a
the potential to engage, motivate, and mobilize people. A need always functional notion of systems as comprising “three kinds of things: ele­
offers the potential for different satisfiers to emerge, creating the op­ ments, interconnections, and a function or purpose” (p. 11). Although
portunity for actors in the system to provide a heterogeneous set of the functions of systems are frequently highly non-obvious and may only
potential satisfiers (Cruz et al., 2009). In economic terms, the satisfac­ be revealed over time (or in hindsight), it is important to note that
tion of human needs creates value, whereas the probability of not various functional elements have been proposed and developed in the
satisfying these needs relates to risk. Thus, identifying and under­ innovation systems literature (Bergek et al., 2008; Hekkert et al., 2007;
standing fundamental human needs is essential for effectively managing Schlaile et al., 2020). Hekkert et al. (2007), for example, describe the
innovations (Yu, 2018). As Hekkert et al. (2007) argue, preferences (as connection between entrepreneurial activities, allocation of resources,
an expression of needs) may influence the direction of (technological) and the development and diffusion of knowledge related to a particular
innovations if they are “strong and visible” (p. 423). In times of crises, technology. For the purposes of this study, we consider a general func­
the endeavor to identify needs may thus be of crucial importance to tional element of an innovation system—or an economic system more
provide guidance of search to innovative and other endeavors seeking to broadly—by drawing upon human needs. Human needs can arguably be
alleviate the fallout of the pandemic. This leads us to our first understood as an important system of individual and societal functions
proposition: that can be satisfied in particular ways (Cruz et al., 2009). In this
connection, note that human needs and their satisfaction may even link
Proposition 1. (P1): Crisis-driven innovations address multi-dimensional
to the innovation system function that Bergek et al. (2008) and Hekkert
human needs.
et al. (2007) have called the direction or guidance of search (in the sense
The pivotal role of innovations in times of crises has been extensively of incentives or selection pressures acting on the individuals and orga­
discussed against the backdrop of previous disasters (Archibugi et al., nizations within an innovation system). This is attributable to the po­
2013; Bessant et al., 2012; Hausman and Johnston, 2014). Typically, tential cascading effects of the needs and their satisfaction on other
fast-growing and highly innovative firms can effectively harness win­ actors (firms, consumers, etc.) within the system or—as Schumpeter
dows of opportunity to exploit unmet market needs (Giotopoulos et al., puts it—the observation “that needs and their visible satisfaction
2017). In particular, small companies and startups appear to be capable immediately lead to a contagious effect on the economic agents in the
of rapidly responding to crises. They actively use their relational capa­ vicinity” (Schumpeter, 2002, p. 104). Owing to the trans-boundary dy­
bilities and creatively develop solutions using existing resources namics of the COVID-19 crisis and the imposed lockdown regulations,
(Weick, 1993). Following Bessant et al. (2012) and their concept of different pronounced human needs emerged in society, leading us to the
crisis-driven innovations, these innovations often take the form of proposition that we observe different domains of innovations emerging
simplified, low-cost adaptations of existing solutions (which we may call in a system of heterogeneous actors.
frugal innovations; Weyrauch and Herstatt, 2017) and are characterized
Proposition 2. (P2): Different pronounced human needs drive the emer­
by creative recombinations stemming from very different, even unre­
gence of different domains of innovations during crises.
lated, fields. Entrepreneurs, in particular, seem to act as brokers
combining and assimilating knowledge (Bessant et al., 2012). Archibugi Whereas fundamental human needs are universal, the satisfiers and
et al. (2013) argue that firms following a more explorative approach the economic goods we use as satisfiers differ between cultures and
toward new solutions are better able to cope with crises and that market change over time and owing to certain circumstances (Max-Neef et al.,
incumbents, which have already been heavily engaged in pre-crisis cu­ 1989). Ryan et al. (2020) note that individuals’ willingness to accept the
mulative innovation activities or cooperated with fast-growing new cost for additional risk reduction during the COVID-19 pandemic is not
firms, exhibit increases in R&D investments during crises. A static but changes over time. Based on a study of the U.S. population,
wide-ranging consensus in innovation studies is that any innovation Suh et al. (2020) show that the frequency of expressions of different
process is a “multiplayer game” involving a complex network of multiple human needs changes over time (from January to August 2020) owing to
actors and institutions within an innovation system (Rakas and Hain, seasonal effects or to major events such as the current pandemic.
2019) or innovation ecosystem (Fransman, 2018; Phillips and Ritala, Fundamental human needs seem to become more urgent when the crisis

4
J. Dahlke et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 169 (2021) 120799

itself and the different measures undertaken to address it inhibit their 3.1. Data retrieval
satisfaction. More precisely, Suh et al. (2020) differentiate among the
five hierarchical dimensions of needs according to Maslow and show In our analysis, we use data on the innovation level, thus following
that expressions of physiological needs peaked in early March 2020, and the object-oriented approach and presenting an alternative to the so-
subsequently dropped and remained at an extremely heightened level. called subject-oriented approach, which, for example, analyzes firms
Expressions of safety needs exhibited a similar but lagged trajectory, on the micro level. Using the object-oriented approach, innovations can
with their peak in early April. The authors document expressions of be identified in two different ways. First, innovations can be identified
cognitive needs to be highly pronounced from March to May but through expert assessments, by scrutinizing publications in trade jour­
continuously decreasing subsequently, likely owing to the deescalating nals, or through a combination of both. This approach has been used for
dynamic of the pandemic in the early summer months. Expressions of building the Science Policy Research Unit (SPRU) innovation database
needs for love and belonging exhibit a steady climb until mid-April and (Pavitt et al., 1987, 1989; Townsend, 1981), the database of Finnish
remain on a slightly heightened level after that, compared with innovations (Patel et al., 2014), and the database of Swedish innovations
pre-crisis levels. Expressions of the need for self-actualization display a (Sjöö et al., 2014). Second, one can identify the sample of innovations
steep rise until April and remain on a comparatively high level but through online sources, which is the approach we follow. In this study,
steadily decrease through the summer months. Based on these obser­ the data originate from a joint initiative of the consumer foresight firm
vations and our previous propositions, we further propose that the TrendWatching and the impact consulting firm Business of Purpose. The
changing urgency of the different human needs expressed in society two providers have collaborated for crowdsourcing, curating, and pub­
during the course of a crisis may also correspond with the changing lishing a collection of innovations induced by the COVID-19 pandemic
trends for domains of innovations over time. and by the subsequent lockdown measures. We used the publicly
available information on their joint web-platform COVID Innovations1
Proposition 3. (P3): Crisis-driven innovations respond to the changes in
mainly for two reasons: First, the companies build their reporting ac­
human needs over the course of a crisis.
tivities on the framework of “purpose-driven innovation” (Trend­
Watching BV, 2021), which lends itself for the classification of human
3. Methods
needs. Second, we found that their reporting on innovation projects
related to COVID-19 was more exhaustive and reliable compared to the
To provide evidence for the three aforementioned propositions, we
reporting of other market foresight companies. In the first two months,
conduct a content analysis on text data describing 707 innovations
from March 22 to May 20 of 2020, we identified 707 unique crowd­
during and for the COVID-19 pandemic with the aim of producing a
sourced innovations that build the body of our data set. The curated
typological framework of rapid-response COVID-19 innovations. Our
information provided on the platform contains a brief descriptive title of
methodology seeks to produce this framework through a modern
the innovation, a short text explaining the innovation, an industrial
interpretation of what Kracauer (1952) describes as a valuable overlap
classification, the date the innovation was first introduced into the data
between quantitative and qualitative techniques of content analyses.
set, and a link for further information linking to the innovation’s web­
Aiming to investigate P2, we employ a machine learning algorithm
site. We extract all of these information from their joint web platform
designed for topic modeling. Topic modeling produces a quantitative
using automated web scraping and compile a dataset for further pro­
and descriptive picture of the latent thematic structures in large amounts
cessing. We validate the extracted data by cleaning faulty entries,
of text data (Maier et al., 2018). Our calculated topic model identifies
removing duplicates and checking for the relevance of each entry (i.e.,
unique domains of COVID innovations by grouping the 707 individual
checking the respective project websites for determining whether or not
innovation projects based on the semantic (dis-)similarities of textual
this innovation is directly related to COVID-19).
project descriptions. Each domain is characterized by a set of frequently
occurring keywords, which helps us to develop an understanding of the
3.2. Tracking domains of COVID-19 innovations
types of innovations emerging in response to the first wave of COVID-19
infections. We can also measure the diversity of the domains of in­
Topic modeling is a machine learning technique used to efficiently
novations using semantic distance scores. Finally, we confirm the
parse vast text data to obtain latent thematic structures. This technique
quantitative characterization of the identified domains of innovations of
is described as “an inductive approach with quantitative measurements,
our topic model through a qualitative assessment of the contents of the
making it particularly suitable for exploratory and descriptive analyses”
10 most representative innovations for each of the 16 domains (160
(Maier et al., 2018, p. 93) and starts with extensive data preprocessing.
innovations in total).
We use the text segments of the collected data described above and
Although the identification of domains of innovations addresses our
merge the title and description for each innovation entry. We transform
second proposition before the first one, we can work backward from this
all characters to lowercase and remove punctuation and special char­
point to investigate P1. We integrate our derived structural model of
acters. We also remove the so-called stop words that are grammatical
innovation domains with an assessment of the human needs addressed
structures but do not carry meaning (e.g., “and”) and lemmatize
by different domains of innovations. Accordingly, we apply a coding
inflected expressions. Next, we identify significant co-locations of words
scheme (Krippendorff, 2004) to the contents of the identified 160 most
(terms closely co-occurring at high frequency) and compound these
representative innovation projects to differentiate between the 9
words into multi-word expressions (e.g., “face_mask”). Finally, we
fundamental human needs based on the theoretical framework proposed
remove outliers in the form of terms occurring in less than 0.1% of the
by Max-Neef et al. (1989). This coding procedure helps to identify which
documents and three terms most frequently occurring across all docu­
types of innovations emerge as satisfiers for which types of latent
ments, not adding distinct meaning between documents (“COVID,”
fundamental human needs during the COVID-19 crisis. To address P3,
“launch”, and “people”).
we statistically test the occurrence of each of the 16 identified domains
Our topic modeling algorithm is based on the latent Dirichlet allo­
of innovations over time. This allows us to create a more dynamic pic­
cation (LDA) (Blei et al., 2003; Blei and Lafferty, 2007), which is an
ture of the trajectories of domains of innovations, which helps us to
unsupervised machine learning procedure for parsing text data for
understand how market demands and innovative offerings have
co-occurrences of words and word patterns to derive latent structures.
changed in response to emerging societal needs over the first two
The algorithm delineates a distinct number of topics represented in our
months (after lockdown measures had been widely introduced). The
following sub-sections will expand on each step of the methodological
procedure. 1
See https://www.COVIDinnovations.com.

5
J. Dahlke et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 169 (2021) 120799

sample of innovation projects, which we call “domains of innovations.” Table 1

Each domain is characterized by a list of frequently occurring keywords, Distribution of COVID innovations across sectors.
and each of the 707 individual innovation projects receives posterior Sector Percent Sector (cont’d) Percent
scores (from 0 to 1), indicating its coherence to the 16 identified do­
Health & fitness 19.1 Government 3.1
mains (henceforth, coherence score) (Blei and Lafferty, 2009). Media & entertainment 16.0 Marketing 2.7
Following Maier et al. (2018), we compute a number of different Food & beverage 15.3 Consulting 2.4
candidate models based on differing prior parameters defining the shape Information technology 14.4 Materials & packaging 2.4
of the posterior distributions. Based on our data, we calculate the Retail 9.9 Financial services 2.0
Electronics & robotics 8.2 Beauty & wellness 1.6
optimal number of topics considering the metrics proposed by Cao et al. Non-profit 7.8 Automotive 1.4
(2009) and Griffiths and Steyvers (2004). We find that a final model Travel 6.6 Construction 1.4
with 16 topics optimally captures the heterogeneity of our text data Apparel & fashion 5.7 Real estate 1.3
using a prior alpha value of 0.25 to shape the posterior distribution. We Education 5.7 Architecture 1.0
Transportation 5.5 Energy & utilities 0.7
run this final specification of our topic model for 10,000 iterations to
Home & garden 4.5
ensure the reliability of our model results.
To assign a label to each domain, we consider the 10 most frequently Note: Each of the N = 707 observations is assigned to one or more industries.
occurring keywords that characterize a domain of innovations as well as
the 10 most representative innovations featuring the highest coherence For coding that is conducted by more than one expert, literature
scores for a given domain. Although the number of unique domains of suggests ensuring that a sufficient coding quality and consistency is
innovations (16) maximizes the thematic heterogeneity between do­ reached among the coders (O’Connor and Joffe, 2020). Therefore,
mains and homogeneity within domains, we can further cluster these coding needs to be performed by experts with a high level of expertise
domains based on their similarity. The clustering simply helps to report and common understanding of the subject (O’Connor and Joffe, 2020).
our results in a coherent manner—that is, to report the results of do­ Taking this into account, we choose four authors of this study with the
mains that are similar to each other together. To aggregate the 16 do­ highest expertise relevant for coding these particular features. This set of
mains into overarching clusters, we employ a hierarchical clustering coders has extensive experience in working with (textual) data on
algorithm (Miller and McCoy, 2017; Bui et al., 2016) using Hellinger innovation activities and is highly educated in firm-level innovation
distance, which is commonly applied to calculate the (dis-)similarity of processes, as well as the socio-systemic perspective on innovation. The
topics in topic models (Beykikhoshk et al., 2018). The hierarchical coding is based on the title and descriptions of the COVID innovations.
clustering algorithm produces six overall clusters encompassing the 16 Following O’Connor and Joffe (2020), our coding process follows a
domains of innovations. Again, we assign general labels for the six three-step procedure. First, before coding, all coders study the relevant
overall clusters and use these as headings to lend structure to the pre­ literature on fundamental human needs and discuss their definitions and
sentation of results in the next section. interpretations. This procedure is especially justified in our case, as
We intend to not only show a static picture of the topics related to the coding latent features often leaves room for interpretation and as our
COVID-19–induced innovations but also analyze the dynamics of topic coding frame calls for a high level of expertise and prior training
development over the two-month period of observation. For each of the (O’Connor and Joffe, 2020). To ensure that the training is successful and
16 domains of innovations and for each of the 51 days in the observation that all coders have the needed common understanding, we divide and
period, we compute the average coherence score based on a 3-day code the data in a way that allows us to calculate the inter-rater reli­
rolling window. Like Antons et al. (2016), we estimate both a linear ability between the coders (Fleiss, 1971). We equally divide the sample
time trend and a quadratic time trend model for each topic. If the esti­ between all coders such that every coder has their own sub-sample to
mate of the quadratic time trend is significant, we base our analysis on code. The coded sample comprises the top 10 most representative in­
the quadratic time trend model. If the estimate of the quadratic time novations (highest coherence scores) of the 16 domains of innovations,
trend is insignificant, the significant linear time trend estimation forms leading to 160 innovations in total. In addition, and to be able to assess
the basis of our discussion. Neither a significant linear nor a significant the inter-rater reliability later, we distribute a small amount of addi­
quadratic trend indicate a rather constant coverage of the topic across tional data to all coders to check whether they can code with consis­
time as captured by the annual average coherence score. In this case, we tency. There seems to be no consensus on the optimal amount of data
check whether the mean coherence score is above or below the average needed to credibly assess the inter-rater reliability (Campbell et al.,
across all topics (0.0625). 2013), but 10% seem to be sufficient (O’Connor and Joffe, 2020).
Therefore, we base our calculation on 10% of the shared data points
3.3. Theoretical framework for coding human needs coded by all coders. Before beginning the coding of the full sample,
following the suggestions of O’Connor and Joffe (2020), we undertake a
For a deeper understanding of the different (domains of) in­ second step to ensure common understanding among all coders. In this
novations, we classify the top 10 innovations featuring the highest step, all coders hold conceptual discussions, code a pre-defined test
coherence scores (see a small selection of these innovations in Table A.5) sample, and compare the results to develop a more aligned, common
for each of the 16 domains according to the fundamental human needs, understanding of each category and to avoid any misinterpretations.
which these innovations address. We differentiate between the needs of This procedure prevents coders from simply assuming the “obvious”
the users of the innovation and the needs of the innovators producing (MacQueen et al., 1998) and helps develop explicitly defined codes,
and offering the innovation. For the classification procedure, we return which we then record in a coding manual. The coding manual includes
to our theoretical basis and follow the definition of the nine fundamental examples of particularly complex codes and specifies their features and
axiological human needs by Max-Neef et al. (1989) because their exclusions (O’Connor and Joffe, 2020). Finally, all coders begin to code
“schema proposed can be used for purposes of diagnosis, planning, their sub-sample of 40 innovation projects as well as the additional data
assessment and evaluation” (p. 37). The schema presents a matrix of the needed for calculating reliability measures. We calculate the reliability
nine axiological human needs (subsistence, protection, affection, un­ between coders using Fleiss’ kappa, which constitutes an appropriate
derstanding, participation, leisure, creation, identity, and freedom), measure considering that there are more than two coders and that cat­
which we use for our classification procedure. Max-Neef et al. (1989) egories are assigned based on latent characteristics, which are neither
also present specific examples for potential satisfiers belonging to each quantifiable and weighted nor ordered (Fleiss, 1971). For the final round
category, which provide guiding references for the classification of the of coding, we achieve a Fleiss’ kappa of 0.63, which can be interpreted
sampled innovations. as substantial agreement (Landis and Koch, 1977), showing our

6
J. Dahlke et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 169 (2021) 120799

Fig. 1. Hierarchical Clustering of Domains of Innovations.

Note: This figure illustrates the results of hierarchical cluster analysis using the Hellinger metric, depicting semantic distance on a scale from 0 to 1. Clusters of
domains of innovations are based on semantical commonalities and differences among the domains.

consistency and reliability in coding. After coding the innovations, we constitutes cluster three (C3), entailing the domains of Hospitality (D5),
calculate a final measure for the diversity of needs addressed by each Home Delivery (D12), and Gastro (D15). Cluster four (C4) is labeled
domain with respect to consumers and producers. We use the Herfin­ Online Platforms and branches off into the domains of Virtual Space
dahl–Hirschman index (HHI) as a concentration measure (Laine, 1995) (D9), Information (D2), and Support Your Local (D11). Acts of Solidarity
to assess whether the needs addressed by a given domain of innovations is the fifth cluster (C5) and includes the domains of Heroes (D16), Pro-
concentrate around a few needs or cover a wide range of needs. Origi­ Bono (D3), and Donations (D4). Cluster six (C6) is called Self-Sufficiency
nally conceived for measuring market concentration, the HHI has no and covers the domains of DIY (D1) and Child Care (D10). Table 2
fixed thresholds for this purpose; thus, we only compare relatively low presents an overview of the 6 clusters and their respective 16 domains of
(low HHI) to relatively high concentration (high HHI) of needs. innovations in addition to the 15 most frequently occurring terms per
domain. For example, D8 (Protectives) belongs to C1 (Repurposing) and
4. Results is represented by the following 15 most frequently occurring terms (in
descending order of frequency): mask, make, hand, produce, face shield,
After extraction and cleaning of data, our final sample comprises 707 company, plastic, face mask, hand sanitizer, filter, manufacture, face, pro­
innovation projects related to COVID-19. The innovations originate in tective, medical worker, and material. Whereas these lists of keywords
various industrial sectors, intuitively concentrating in sectors revolving already give an initial impression of the kinds of innovations grouped
around health and food provisions as well as media and information. into a domain of innovations, Table A.6 in the Appendix provides a
The industry breakdown is shown in Table 1. Based on this data, our condensed selection of the top five innovations per domain of in­
topic model identifies 16 distinct domains of innovations, covering a novations ordered by coherence scores. For each of these innovations,
wide range of innovations from medical equipment to delivery services the table exhibits a descriptive title, the publication date, and the
and solutions for stay-at-home parenting. coherence score for the respective domain.
The hierarchical clustering reveals that these 16 domains are spread Table 3 is the contingency table for all domains of innovations across
across 6 overarching clusters. Fig. 1 depicts all six clusters branching off the nine dimensions of human needs (grouped by cluster) and differ­
into unique domains of innovations. The distance between domains of entiates between consumers’ and producers’ needs. Each domain has
innovations is a measure for thematic (dis-)similarity. Cluster one (C1) is been evaluated based on its 10 most representative innovations (highest
labeled Repurposing and encompasses the two domains of Medical coherence scores) and the needs served by them. For individual do­
Equipment (D7) and Protectives (D8). Cluster two (C2) is entitled Digital mains, the share of the top 10 innovations addressing a specific need is
Innovations and comprises the domains of Contact Tracing (D6), indicated in-text as a fraction (x/10) or stated in percent when aggre­
Monitoring (D13), and High Technology (D14). Curing Cabin Fever gating the frequency of addressed needs all domains of one cluster. In

7
J. Dahlke et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 169 (2021) 120799

Table 2 Table 2 (continued )

Innovation Domains and Top 15 Associated Terms. Cluster Cluster Label Domain Domain Top 15 Associated Terms
Cluster Cluster Label Domain Domain Top 15 Associated Terms ID ID Label
ID ID Label
house, community,
C1 Repurposing D7 Medical hospital, ventilator, initiative, worker
Equipment design, company, D3 Pro-Bono company, free, business,
develop, startup, service, provide, custom,
produce, supply, employee, support,
medical, government, project, retail, product,
facility, university, make, transport, offer free, give,
build, solution program
D8 Protectives mask, make, hand, D16 Heroes campaign, uk, hero,
produce, face shield, worker, start, nhs, team,
company, plastic, face frontline, give, fight
mask, hand sanitizer, covid, provide, million,
filter, manufacture, face, donation, work, reach
protective, medical C6 Self- D1 DIY create, home, design,
worker, material Sufficiency brand, kit, include,
C2 Digital D6 Contact app, user, social distance, travel, model, collection,
Innovations Tracing safe, contact, distance, fashion, studio, diy,
feature, device, track, designer, dutch, artist
data, date, close, D10 Child Care quarantine, family, child,
develop, make, google kid, online, book,
D13 Monitoring health, patient, provide, creative, home, parent,
care, medical, create, idea, free, time,
information, doctor, lockdown, activity
covid patient, network,
Note: This table presents the resulting topic model of the latent Dirichlet allo­
real-time, remote,
professional, healthcare, cation algorithm based on textual descriptions for all innovations. The domains
organization, startup of innovations are grouped by overarching clusters (as identified through hier­
D14 High robot, company, archical clustering) and presented with the 15 most frequently occurring terms
Technology technology, test, virus, for each domain of innovations.
symptom, area, airport,
detect, partner, light,
artificial intelligence,
addition, we report the HHI, which measures the concentration of needs
temperature, screen, addressed by each domain, again differentiating between consumers’
train and producers’ needs. The closer the HHI is to the value of 1, the more
C3 Curing Cabin D5 Hospitality offer, service, room, concentrated is the distribution of needs addressed by a given domain.
Fever germany, office,
Addressing P3, the estimated dynamics for each domain of innovations
quarantine, hotel,
restaurant, open, over time are presented in Table 4. Predicting the variance in average
include, coffee, space, coherence scores per domain, the table reports the estimates for the
day, work, city independent time variables measured in days (and days squared) as well
D12 Home shop, store, grocery,
as the measures of fit (R2) and model significance (F). The last two
Delivery offer, supermarket,
delivery, home, good,
columns indicate whether we interpret the model as linear or quadratic
essential, toilet paper, and how the trajectory (slope of regression line) may be described. In the
elderly, custom, following subsections, we briefly synthesize the contents for each cluster
lockdown, buy, phone by providing examples of representative COVID innovations from each
D15 Gastro deliver, restaurant, food,
domain within a cluster. We also present our classification of human
local, beer, meal,
delivery, home, order, needs addressed by the top innovations representing distinct topics in a
sell, bar, week, box, given cluster. To illustrate the dynamics over time, we provide a visual
brewery, start impression of the time dynamics through scatterplots with estimated
C4 Online D2 Information share, website, world, regression lines for all 16 domains of innovations.
Platforms community, story,
message, send, show,
time, information, good,
4.1. Cluster 1: Repurposing production capabilities
company, platform,
whatsapp, isolation
D9 Virtual online, virtual, video, The first cluster (C1) encompasses the domains of Medical Equip­
Space live, enable, student, set, ment (D7) and Protectives (D8), with the former describing innovations
school, class, tour, meet, for equipment used in hospitals, mainly centering around the production
game, experience, event,
zoom
of ventilators for intensive care units. It includes companies from
D11 Support platform, connect, different industries dynamically repurposing their manufacturing ca­
Your Local initiative, support, find, pabilities to produce ventilators or startups developing new types of
volunteer, offer, ventilators. The innovation with the highest coherence score describes a
business, enable people,
new design for a low-cost ventilator that is easily scalable in
website, tech, local
business, time, non- manufacturing processes. In a similar vein, D8 describes the production
profit, movement of protective gear such as face masks, hand sanitizers, and visors. The
C5 Acts of D4 Donations support, donate, provide, innovation with the highest coherence score describes the furniture
Solidarity project, create, relief, manufacturer IKEA switching production to offer these types of pro­
organization, fund,
impact, work, artist,
tectives to medical workers free of charge.
In terms of classified needs, we find that both topics within this
cluster mainly address consumer needs related to protection in the sense
of preventing the spread of the disease to protect themselves, others, and

8
 J. Dahlke et al.
Table 3
Innovation Domains and Respective Classification of Consumers’ and Producers’ Needs.
Consumers’ Needs Producers’ Needs
ID Clusters & N Subsistence Protection Affection Understanding Participation Leisure Creation Identity Freedom HHI Subsistence Protection Affection Understanding Participation Leisure Creation Identity Freedom HHI
Domains

C1 Repurposing 20 60% 90% 5% 0% 5% 5% 10% 5% 0% 15% 70% 45% 0% 80% 0% 65% 20% 0%
D7 Medical 10 9 8 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 0.418 1 8 7 0 8 0 7 1 0 0.632
Equipment
D8 Protectives 10 3 10 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0.307 2 6 2 0 8 0 6 3 0 0.424
C2 Digital 30 40% 77% 7% 43% 7% 10% 10% 0% 0% 17% 77% 27% 10% 57% 0% 47% 13% 0%
Innovations
D6 Contact 10 2 7 2 1 2 3 0 0 0 0.197 1 5 5 1 5 0 5 1 0 0.285
Tracing
D13 Monitoring 10 6 6 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0.424 0 9 3 2 8 0 4 2 0 0.493
D14 High 10 4 10 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0.346 4 9 0 0 4 0 5 1 0 0.385
Technology
C3 Curing Cabin 30 50% 33% 7% 0% 30% 30% 10% 7% 0% 47% 27% 40% 0% 57% 0% 37% 27% 0%
Fever
D5 Hospitality 10 4 2 1 0 3 4 1 1 0 0.133 6 0 3 0 6 0 4 3 0 0.294
D12 Home Delivery 10 7 6 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0.241 5 4 4 0 4 0 2 2 0 0.224
9

D15 Gastro 10 4 2 1 0 5 4 2 1 0 0.186 3 4 5 0 7 0 5 3 0 0.368

C4 Online 30 30% 23% 23% 57% 30% 30% 10% 7% 0% 7% 23% 47% 30% 97% 0% 30% 27% 0%
Platforms
D2 Information 10 1 2 4 8 4 1 2 1 0 0.296 0 2 5 6 10 0 5 2 0 0.537
D9 Virtual Space 10 2 0 0 4 4 8 0 0 0 0.277 2 2 5 1 9 0 4 5 0 0.432
D11 Support Your 10 6 5 3 5 1 0 1 1 0 0.271 0 3 4 2 10 0 0 1 0 0.360
Local
C5 Acts of 30 30% 33% 37% 23% 37% 13% 13% 20% 0% 7% 40% 67% 10% 83% 0% 23% 37% 0%
Solidarity
D4 Donations 10 4 4 4 1 5 1 1 1 0 0.213 0 4 6 1 8 0 1 1 0 0.330
D3 Pro-Bono 10 4 4 0 5 4 1 3 1 0 0.233 1 5 5 2 8 0 2 6 0 0.440

Technological Forecasting & Social Change 169 (2021) 120799

D16 Heroes 10 1 2 7 1 2 2 0 4 0 0.219 1 3 9 0 9 0 4 4 0 0.565
C6 Self- 20 5% 15% 25% 20% 25% 65% 25% 20% 0% 5% 15% 35% 5% 85% 0% 65% 35% 0%
sufficiency
D1 DIY 10 1 2 2 0 3 6 3 2 0 0.186 1 2 0 0 8 0 8 4 0 0.413
D10 Child Care 10 0 1 3 4 2 7 2 2 0 0.241 0 1 7 1 9 0 5 3 0 0.460

Note: This table presents the results of the qualitative classification of human needs, as proposed by Max-Neef et al. (1989), satisfied through the top 10 innovations representative for each innovation domain. Results are
differentiated between consumers and producers. N is the number of innovations classified per innovation domain. The HHI reports concentration measures for addressed human needs by each domain of innovation,
higher values indicate a more concentrated distribution of addressed needs.
J. Dahlke et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 169 (2021) 120799

Table 4
Statistical Tests for Linear or Quadratic Time Trends of Innovation Domains.
Cluster Domain Days Days2 Constant R2 N F Mean Interpretation Dynamics

C1 D7 − 0.0013*** (− 5.760) 0.0989*** (− 13.99) 0.4038 51 33.182*** linear negative

C1 D8 − 0.0006* (− 2.544) 0.0782*** (− 9.568) 0.1167 51 6.474** linear negative
C2 D6 − 0.0104** (− 3.145) 0.0001* (− 2.509) 0.2262*** (− 5.4) 0.2231 51 6.891*** quadratic u-shape
C2 D13 − 0,0004 (− 1.868) 0.0714*** (− 10.715) 0.0665 51 3.491* 0.000 avg.
C2 D14 − 0.0051*** (− 4.113) 0.0001*** (− 4.827) 0.1111*** (− 7.074) 0.3641 51 13.742*** quadratic u-shape
C3 D5 0.0001 (− 0.505) 0.0499*** (− 11.44) 0.0052 51 0.255 0.052*** below avg.
C3 D12 0.0030** (− 3.505) − 0.0001*** (− 3.883) 0.0371** (− 3.371) 0.2487 51 7.944*** quadratic inverted u
C3 D15 0.0018* (− 2.104) − 0.0000** (− 2.732) 0.0572*** (− 5.374) 0.1929 51 5.735*** quadratic inverted u
C4 D2 0.0043*** (− 4.71) − 0.0001*** (− 3.725) 0,0074 (− 0.635) 0.3975 51 15.84*** quadratic inverted u
C4 D9 0.0005** (− 3.109) 0.0530*** (− 9.382) 0.1647 51 9.665*** linear positive
C4 D11 0.0005* (− 2.392) 0.0462*** (− 7.437) 0.1045 51 5.721** linear positive
C5 D4 0.0007** (− 2.173) 0.0481*** (− 4.93) 0.0879 51 4.72** linear positive
C5 D3 0.0033*** (− 5713) − 0.0000*** (− 10.715) 0.0167** (− 2268) 0.4369 51 18.62*** quadratic inverted u
C5 D16 0.0033*** (− 7.185) − 0.0001*** (− 6.909) 0.0163** (− 2.782) 0.5182 51 25.82*** quadratic inverted u
C6 D1 0.0009*** (− 5.012) 0.0262*** (− 4.539) 0.3389 51 25.11*** linear positive
C6 D10 0,0002 (− 1.588) 0.0480*** (− 10.703) 0.049 51 2.523 0.054*** below avg.

Note: This table presents the results of the statistical model testing for linear and quadratic time trends in the occurrence of each innovation domain over the early
months (51 days) of the pandemic. We measure occurrence over time using the average coherence scores (the average representation of a domain) for each domain per
day. Significance levels are reported in the following order: *p < 0.10; **p < 0.05; ***p < 0.01.

Fig. 2. Mean Coherence Scores in Cluster 1 (Repurposing Production Capabilities).

Note: Panels a) and b) display a scatterplot of mean coherence scores per day and estimated regression lines for D7 (Medical Equipment) and D8 (Protectives),
respectively.

the public health system itself (C1: 90%), with 9/10 innovations in D7 underlining the focus of these innovations on subsistence and protection
heavily satisfying the need for subsistence (e.g., physical health). Like­ needs.
wise, in terms of needs of the innovators offering these novel goods and For both topics, we identify a significant and negative linear devel­
services, we see a strong drive for protecting consumers and employees opment over time (see Fig. 2, a–b), hinting that the demand for change
as well as supporting the public health system (C1: 70%). Moreover, for was highest when hospitals, households, and producers of such equip­
D7, our classification shows acts of affection connected to supplying not- ment were blindsided by the early dynamics of the pandemic.
for-profit devices (D7: 7/10). An omnipresent theme, which is true for
almost all observed topics across clusters, is a documented innovation 4.2. Cluster 2: Catalyzing digital innovations
behavior strongly driven by the need for participation on the part of the
innovators (80%). More precisely, innovators attempt to find ways of The second cluster (C2) comprises three domains revolving around
serving customers in a receding market under imposed restrictions, thus the use of digital technologies. The first domain addresses the issues
participating in the sense of offering solutions to the present crisis and, connected to social distancing and describes the development of apps for
most strikingly, participating in terms of cooperating and engaging in Contact Tracing (D6). The innovation with the highest coherence score
co-creation activities even in collaboration with unlikely partners from for this domain describes such an app developed by researchers at the
other sectors. More than half of the classified innovations in this cluster Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The domain of Monitoring (D13)
(C1: 65%) exhibit an intrinsic need of the innovators for creation—that captures two types of innovations, providing information either to
is, to be inventive and design novel solutions for reasons other than monitor the spread of the pandemic in a quantitative manner or to
simply increasing sales or brand reputation. The calculated HHI for both monitor individual health conditions of (potential) COVID-19 patients.
domains exhibit relatively high values (0.418 for D7 and 0.307 for D8), The innovation with the highest coherence score is a website created by

10
J. Dahlke et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 169 (2021) 120799

Fig. 3. Mean Coherence Scores in Cluster 2 (Catalyzing Digital Innovations).

Note: Panels a), b), and c) display a scatterplot of mean coherence scores per day and estimated regression lines for D6 (Contact Tracing), D13 (Monitoring), and D14
(High Technology), respectively.

a Brazilian foundation to monitor active COVID-19 cases across Brazil­ 57%); we also see a stream of innovations satisfying creation needs on
ian regions. Finally, the domain High Technology (D14) describes in­ the part of the innovators (C2: 47%). Overall, the similarity between C1
novations involving new and emerging technologies ranging from and C2 is intuitive, as all domains in these two clusters center around
simple software systems to robots and artificial intelligence, mostly used technological innovations. Although the range of addressed needs is
for diagnosing COVID-19 infections but also for purposes of logistics and relatively concentrated for D13 and D14, a lower value of HHI for D6
transportation or autonomous cleaning of facilities. The innovation with (0.197) indicates the synergetic effects of solutions for contact tracing,
the highest coherence score describes Etihad airways launching a self- which not only facilitate safety but also allow to return to having social
service touchpoint with automatic symptom detection for pre-flight interactions.
procedures at airports. Within this cluster, whereas D13 exhibits no significant time trend
Comparing our analysis of addressed needs to C1, we see a slightly and is constantly represented across time, D6 and D14 exhibit a u-sha­
less pronounced prevalence of subsistence (C2: 40%) and protection ped development in occurrences over the two-month observation period
needs (C2: 77%) that innovations across these three domains aim to (see Fig. 3, a–c). A detailed investigation of the innovations within D14
satisfy for the users. In this aspect, C2 diverges when focusing on D13. shows an early first wave of innovations attributable to the development
Here, we document a strong focus on satisfying the need for under­ of portable testing equipment and a second, later wave of innovations
standing (D13: 9/10) the current situation in terms of dynamics of the that may have been caused by the reaction of airways and traveling
pandemic and individual symptoms by offering analytical tools and companies introducing technological safety measures at the end of April
making detailed information available for everyone to access via the and the beginning of May 2020 in their preparation for re-starting their
internet. From the perspective of the innovators themselves, the needs businesses and in their attempt to highlight that airlines are part of the
landscape of C2 is similar to that of C1 but with an emphasized need for solution and not (only) part of the problem.
the protection of consumers and employees as well as for preventing the
spread of the disease (C2: 77%). Likewise, we see the need for partici­
pation and cooperation strongly represented within this cluster (C2:

11
J. Dahlke et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 169 (2021) 120799

Fig. 4. Mean Coherence Scores in Cluster 3 (Curing Cabin Fever).

Note: Panels a), b), and c) display a scatterplot of mean coherence scores per day and estimated regression lines for D5 (Hospitality), D12 (Home Delivery), and D15
(Gastro), respectively.

4.3. Cluster 3: Curing cabin fever The difference between C3 and previous clusters is that the innovations
do not focus on curing or preventing illness but on enabling the satis­
The third cluster (C3) encompasses the domains of Hospitality (D5), faction of basic needs such as having food and other groceries needed to
Home Delivery (D12), and Gastro (D15) and mainly describes services sustain the basic standard of living in a situation of (perceived) supply
addressing issues of living in isolation within a household. For D5, we shortages, lockdowns, and social distancing. Moreover, D5 and D15
see a large stream of service innovations of hotels and hotel chains point toward a societal need for participation (C3: 30%) and leisure
repurposing their resources to offer their rooms as isolated offices for activities (C3: 30%). Participation may involve adapting to the situation
people who cannot work from home, such as the Amsterdam-based hotel to continue having certain privileges and the possibility for interaction.
Zoku, or using the 24-hour room service as delivery service. Home de­ Leisure may involve curing cabin fever by creating spaces for relaxation
livery, however, is at the center of D12, mainly focusing on delivery or participative interaction outside the own four walls in the form of
services for groceries, such as the most representative innovation of hotel rooms being used as private rooms for families or small groups to
Uber Eats partnering with Delivery Hero. Centering around the product enjoy a restaurant dinner together. On the side of the innovators, this
of toilet paper, we see some innovations addressing the issue of cluster showcases subsistence needs driving innovation behavior, espe­
responsible consumption and supply shortages, for example, by helping cially for the domains of Hospitality (D5: 6/10) and Home Delivery
people assess a realistic amount of needed toilet paper per household. (D12: 5/10), signaling that businesses in these sectors are struggling to
D15 describes food and beverage home deliveries through gastronomic survive and are seeking ways to generate revenues. The HHI for these
establishments, sometimes with a little extra twinkle. The innovation three domains of innovations are notably low (especially for D5 and
with the highest coherence score describes employees of a public cafe­ D15), indicating a wide range of needs covered on both sides of market
teria cooking meals from home for a food assistance center. interactions.
For domains within C3, we see subsistence needs on the side of the Whereas D5 is constantly represented below average, D12 and D15
consumers being served by half of the examined innovations (C3: 50%) exhibit a significant quadratic time trend following an inverted u-shape
and strongly emphasized by the domain of Home Delivery (D12: 7/10). (see Fig. 4, a-c). This may hint at a lagged reaction by gastronomic

12
J. Dahlke et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 169 (2021) 120799

Fig. 5. Mean Coherence Scores in Cluster 4 (Online Platforms Help Coping & Connecting).
Note: Panels a), b), and c) display a scatterplot of mean coherence scores per day and estimated regression lines for D2 (Information), D9 (Virtual Space), and D11
(Support Your Local), respectively.

establishments and a process of adaptation in society, with people Considering these examples, it becomes very plausible that this
coming to terms with the situation and resuming their normal con­ cluster also features the highest share of innovations addressing the need
sumption habits. for understanding (C4: 57%) among all clusters. Here, understanding
also relates to the nature of the crisis itself and how to best deal with it.
Other consumer needs addressed by the innovations in this cluster are
4.4. Cluster 4: Online platforms help coping & connecting
quite equally distributed. Strikingly, D9 heavily addresses the need for
leisure (D9: 8/10), as real-world events from sports tournaments,
The innovations found in the fourth cluster (C4) broadly revolve
parties, museums, or tourist attractions try to reach consumers through
around the use of digital platform technology for supporting commu­
digital channels and virtual environments. Looking at the innovators’
nication and interactions between individuals and communities affected
needs, almost all innovations in this cluster satisfy the need for partic­
by lockdowns. The cluster features the three domains of Virtual Space
ipation (C4: 97%), which may be explained by businesses actively
(D9), Information (D2), and Support Your Local (D11). Innovations
engaging with communities and communal actors supporting each
strongly coherent with D9 center around bringing real-life interactions
other. This is mirrored via the comparably high share of innovations
to the digital sphere, including sports tournaments, live events, or
serving the need for innovators to show affection toward the people and
tutoring sessions. D2 encompasses endearing ventures of spreading
organizations in need of support (C4: 47%, second highest among all
positive news about/amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, such as the inno­
clusters). The HHI for all domains within this cluster indicate that
vation “Something Positive” (highest coherence score). The domain also
consumers’ needs addressed are neither heavily concentrated nor highly
includes innovations offering outlets for people to share their struggles
diverse, whereas innovators’ needs seem to heavily concentrate on
of coping with isolation and innovations countering negligence or
participation and affection.
misinformation (i.e., “fake news”) by educating society or condemning
Domains D9 and D11 exhibit a significant positive growth in repre­
the spread of misinformation. Domain D11 centers around the idea of
sentation within our sample over the time period of observation, doc­
supporting local businesses by connecting them with local consumers or
umenting the realization of local communities and businesses to prepare
by offering them technical support to set up digital sales platforms.

13
J. Dahlke et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 169 (2021) 120799

Fig. 6. Mean Coherence Scores in Cluster 5 (Acts of Solidarity).

Note: Panels a), b), and c) display a scatterplot of mean coherence scores per day and estimated regression lines for D4 (Donations), D3 (Pro-Bono), and D16 (Heroes),
respectively.

for long-term solutions to deal with the new normal. Domain D2 exhibits artists, frontline workers, or small businesses that were hit hard during
a significant negative quadratic time trend, with a drop-off in in­ the crisis.
novations toward the very end of our period of observation (see Fig. 5, Consumers’ needs being addressed by the innovations in this cluster
a–c). mainly revolve around subsistence or protection needs for the domains
of Donations (D4: 4/10 for both needs) and Pro-Bono (D3: 4/10 for both
needs), providing resources to those who need it. Domain D16 adds a
4.5. Cluster 5: Acts of solidarity
less tangible notion of showing gratitude and affection to those on the
frontlines of battling the pandemic (D16: 7/10). In terms of innovators’
The fifth cluster (C5) comprises the three domains of Heroes (D16),
needs, we see a prevalence of participation (C5: 83%) and showing
Pro-Bono (D3), and Donations (D4) and describes acts of solidarity and
affection (C5: 67%). The need for identity being served on the part of the
thankfulness to people hit hard during the crisis or helping to mount the
innovators is slightly less pronounced over the whole cluster but is still
immediate impacts of the pandemic. Domain D16 describes different
the highest among all clusters (C5: 37%) and is especially represented in
types of campaigns ranging from collecting monetary donations to
the domain of Pro-Bono (D3: 6/10). We find two possible explanations
remembering and thanking the “frontline heroes” for the fight against
through our classification. First, doing good through non-profit in­
COVID-19, which mainly include healthcare workers, supermarket
novations may help businesses to grow in terms of their self-perception
clerks, and staff in public transport. Domain D3 describes the consul­
and role in society. Second, although many represented innovations may
tancies offering free services to suffering businesses to help guide their
rightfully be described as philanthropic acts, they may simultaneously
strategic decisions, human resource management, and efforts in pivoting
(and for some innovations, purely) be motivated by improving brand
business models and brand identity during COVID-19. The domain
image through differentiation. This is a theme we will return to for
documents another phenomenon that occurred during the crisis:
marketing innovations featured in cluster six. The HHI indicate that the
employee sharing of businesses otherwise unable to keep their staff
needs addressed on both sides of interactions cover a medium range.
employed with businesses (e.g., supermarkets) in need of helping hands.
Our time trends show that D4 features a significant positive linear
Domain D4 describes the companies collecting or donating money to

14
J. Dahlke et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 169 (2021) 120799

Fig. 7. Mean Coherence Scores in Cluster 6 (Self-Sufficiency).

Note: Panels a) and b) display a scatterplot of mean coherence scores per day and estimated regression lines for D1 (DIY) and D10 (Child Care), respectively.

trend, highlighting the growing concern of helping those in grave needs somewhat useful but ultimately non-essential tools to use at home. This
(see Fig. 6, a). For D3 and D16, we estimate a significant negative may partly be true for innovations from D10, but the domain exhibits a
quadratic time trend, resulting in a regression line that is inverted u- wide range of innovations that effectively help families to connect, help
shaped; this documents a decline in the number of innovations centering children to develop an understanding for the current situation, and offer
around the notions of thankfulness and free offers (see Figs. 6, b–c). tools for parents to somewhat lighten the logistical burden of juggling a
Speculating about this falling trajectory, it may be conceivable that fast, job and stay-at-home parenting. Both domains, however, entail in­
modern-day news cycles and short societal attention spans have resulted novations addressing issues that mainly need to be taken care of inde­
in societal fatigue for being receptive to these themes after being over­ pendently. The HHI reveal a disparity of needs covered by these
exposed to COVID-19 news. innovations between consumers and producers. Although a wide range
of consumers’ needs are addressed (especially for D1), the addressed
4.6. Cluster 6: Self-sufficiency needs on the side of producers are highly concentrated on the di­
mensions of participation and creation.
The sixth cluster (C6) includes the domains of DIY (D1) and Child Whereas D1 exhibits a significant positive linear time trend, indi­
Care (D10). Domain D1 comprises businesses offering toolkits and in­ cating a growing need of households to perform certain tasks themselves
structions for “do it yourself” products and services, ranging from face and for businesses to acknowledge the current situation of consumers,
masks and cooking tutorials to DIY haircuts. Domain D10 exhibits in­ innovations coherent to D10 are evenly represented across the two
novations addressing the need of families to care for and entertain their months and are constantly below the sample-wide average occurrence of
offspring sheltered at home. A high number of innovations encourage a domain (see Figs. 7, a–b). This highlights the fact that child care has
and support families to read to their children, with the innovation been a constant topic of conversation from the very start of the crisis to
having the highest coherence score introducing a children’s book to help the end of our window of observation but that businesses may only have
children understand the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, we see com­ had limited interest or tools to help alleviate the arising issues of shel­
panies offering online tools for homeschooling, teaching chores in the tering, schooling, and entertaining children at home.
household, or simply playing.
This cluster scores highest among all clusters in the dimensions of 5. Discussion
leisure (C6: 65%) and creation (C6: 25%) needs of consumers. For the
former need, both domains offer solutions to keep individuals enter­ In line with Max-Neef et al. (1989) and Cruz et al. (2009), we have
tained; considering the domain of Child Care (D10: 7/10), the solutions interpreted the imposed lockdown measures against the spread of
keep children busy during lockdown-induced down times by offering COVID-19 as an inhibiting satisfier or even as a violator, securing
games and, indirectly, some peace of mind for parents. The latter need is physical health but impeding the fulfillment of various other funda­
mainly addressed by DIY innovations. Considering the innovators’ mental human needs (from mental health to lack of social participation).
needs, we see that subsistence (C6: 5%) and protection (C6: 15%) needs Examining the evidence in support of our first proposition, which is that
have the lowest values among all clusters. At the same time, the in­ crisis-driven innovations address multi-dimensional human needs (P1),
novators’ needs for creation (C6: 65%) and identity (C6: 35%) are our analysis shows that innovations hold the potential of (counter-)
relatively pronounced. However, we see a clear divide between the two acting as singular and even synergetic satisfiers during crises, facilitating
domains encompassed in this cluster. Although none of the top in­ the individual or simultaneous satisfaction of a wide range of funda­
novations in D1 can be connected to the innovators’ need to give mental human needs. For consumers, the needs addressed by in­
affection or be affectious, seven out of ten innovations take on this novations are relatively diverse. Whereas technological innovations
characteristic for D10. Considering the actual innovations across these seem to be more concentrated toward physiological subsistence and
two domains, this may lead to the conclusion that innovations for D1 are protection (see C1 and C2), we see diverse domains of innovations
mainly marketing innovations and oftentimes gimmicky ways for busi­ addressing various social needs (see, e.g., C3 and C6). On the side of the
nesses to showcase an awareness of the crisis by offering customers producers, the addressed needs are slightly more concentrated. We see

15
J. Dahlke et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 169 (2021) 120799

potential satisfiers for the needs of economic subsistence of businesses see businesses and other actors in the system largely dedicating and
and protection of employees and customers (see C1–C3) as well as committing themselves to a social mission during the current crisis. The
affection expressed through generous offers to individuals and organi­ crisis thus presents an unprecedented window of opportunity to capture
zations heavily affected by the crisis (see C4 and C5). We also document and foster this dedication by embedding initiatives in a more systemic
a pronounced satisfaction of the need for creation among producers of fashion (Bogner et al., 2020).
innovations (see, e.g., C1 and C6), even if this creation is not directly We also see that different pronounced human needs drive the
connected to the economic subsistence of the producer. Although society emergence of different domains of innovations during crises (P2).
at large may have been shell shocked in the very early days of the crisis, Hekkert et al. (2007) underline the function of guidance of search as a
the growing need for businesses and communities to participate in potent starting point for initiating virtuous cycles in innovation,
contributing to solutions and interact with each other becomes evident requiring special scrutiny against the backdrop of a crisis such as the
in our typology of innovation behavior (see C3–C6 for consumers and all current pandemic. Human needs themselves can be considered as cen­
clusters for producers). Akin to Kraus et al. (2020), we observe a large tral functions relevant both on an individual level and a collective level
share of multi-directional solidarity between companies, communities, (Cruz et al., 2009), thus also influencing the innovation system’s guid­
and consumers, often underlined by not-for-profit innovations. In line ance of search function and therefore creating conditions conducive to
with Laperche et al. (2011), we witness otherwise unusual, but now the selection of appropriate solutions to be prioritized. This is only partly
valuable, collaborative strategies to innovate. We see private actors, a technological argument and must also be regarded through a
partly spurred by financial restrictions, cooperating from the beginning socio-cultural lens, bearing potential for various different satisfiers for
of the crisis to share needed resources, often in the form of non-financial various different needs. With regard to our second proposition, our
offerings by scrapping price tags off of now pro bono (D3) services. The analysis clearly provides evidence for the presence of heterogeneous
need for participation is also observed in more detailed examples of entrepreneurial activity and innovators in various market segments.
open innovation during crises (Chesbrough, 2020). These come in the Heterogeneous actors engaging in novel forms of cooperation thus
form of (unlikely) alliances ranging from large-scale collaborations afford new and trans-disciplinary ways of fulfilling systemic functions by
across industries (e.g., to build ventilators) to local businesses finding addressing or satisfying fundamental needs. Each collaborative
creative solutions (such as church services in drive-in cinemas) and endeavor by innovators—as reflected by the high relevance of partici­
business–community engagements (such as joggers delivering food from pation needs for innovators in all observed clusters—expands the pos­
local restaurants to isolated people). Similarly, we observe collabora­ sibility space of potential satisfiers by providing new combinations of
tions among companies and even competitors, as well as other private, knowledge that enable new and previously unavailable evolutionary
public, and communal (local) actors supporting each other. To varying trajectories (Müller et al., 2020). Our analysis provides evidence for the
degrees, these collaborations may prove beneficial in the future, and aspects that Bessant et al. (2015) postulate as being characteristic of
with participation shown to be a dominant driver (need) of innovation crisis-driven innovations, which are conceived under extreme condi­
activities, the dire situation also presents a unique opportunity for tions that cause shifts in focus within the search space for solutions. Our
companies to change toward more responsible behavior (in the sense of identification of diverse domains of innovations provide evidence for a
corporate social responsibility), as previously alluded to by He and high degree of entrepreneurial experimentation based on a user-centric
Harris (2020). Especially against the backdrop of transsystemic crises, perspective and a recombination of existing parts of previous solutions.
the character of innovation as a collective action problem calling for Our findings are also in line with Kraus et al. (2020), as we see a rapid
transdisciplinary alliances becomes ever more palpable, as lucidly diffusion of digital technologies, such as online platforms to inform and
illustrated by Potts (2019): “The innovation problem is a knowledge connect people, or more advanced technologies, such as artificial in­
problem of recombining distributed specialized knowledge in order to telligence software solutions to detect potentially infectious individuals.
discover new opportunities and sources of value, including discovery of Our identified technological domains of innovations (see C1 and C2)
which bits of knowledge need to be combined” (Potts, 2019, pp. 47–48). partly represent the type of low-cost solutions that Cankurtaran and
Across all domains of innovations as well as for most individual Beverland (2020) identify as emerging frugal innovations. We also
innovation projects, we identify at least two (and often more) needs observe the swift re-purposing of products or production processes not
addressed, both for consumers and producers. In line with Max-Neef only within the pharmaceutical industry (Bryan et al., 2020) but also in
et al. (1989), this points toward a possibility to interpret the observed other industries aiming to satisfy various needs beyond (but including)
innovative solutions as synergetic satisfiers, simultaneously fulfilling a health. Notably, our domains of innovations specify what previous
set of needs during crises—as opposed to only singular needs. Surely, studies have identified as having potential for increased prosocial col­
presenting entrepreneurs and companies as pure philanthropists is also a lective actions (Bacq et al., 2020; Bouman et al., 2020; He and Harris,
misguided notion. As described above, we find many examples that hint 2020). We identify that these prosocial actions may come in the form of
toward what Max-Neef et al. (1989) describe as the true development of technological advances (see C1 and C2), business model innovations
businesses during the crisis (e.g., discovering and satisfying altruistic (see C3), provision of information and exchange platforms (see C4), and
tendencies). However, on the business side of our observed innovations, donations as direct acts of solidarity (see C5). We also find two domains
the motivations behind producing these satisfiers are opaque, and we of innovations contributing tools to support individuals in helping
cannot make claims about it with certainty. For example, our results are themselves (see C6), wherein direct interactions required to fulfill
in line with Naidoo (2010), as we find a large share of marketing in­ certain needs are impossible. We will revisit the question of the effec­
novations showing businesses re-framing the advertisement of their of­ tiveness of the offered satisfiers at the end of this section.
ferings to fit the situation. Whereas in some cases, these activities may In investigating our third proposition, which is that crisis-driven
genuinely address the need for identity, some other cases of opportu­ innovations respond to the changes in human needs over the course of
nistic brand building activities may rather be described as a crisis (P3), our analysis suggests that non-governmental innovators
pseudo-satisfaction for the needs of participation, identity, and affec­ within our society such as companies, entrepreneurs, or citizen initia­
tion. Max-Neef et al. (1989) precisely outline the examples of propa­ tives were able to quickly react to the early signs of the pandemic by
ganda and advertisement as indicators for such behavior. Although the providing communities and hospitals with clinical and community
question of motivation is not easily answered, it is of tremendous masks as well as protective visors in times the need for subsistence and
importance to recognize that, regardless of the motivation behind it, we protection could not yet be met by traditional actors in the market. This

16
J. Dahlke et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 169 (2021) 120799

observation serves as a reminder to avoid a purely bureaucratic

perspective on managing crises. Instead, one might place trust and re­ Table 5
sources into non-governmental actors being part of a systemic effort to Objectives and Actionable Measures for Relevant Actors in Crisis-Driven Inno­
alleviate concerns during crises. After an early surge of innovations vation Systems.
addressing these basic needs, we document a negative trend of technical Objective Actors Actionable Measures
solutions for protective measures over time (see D7 and D8), hinting at a Expression of Consumers Be aware of changed needs, reflect on
quick innovation-driven satisfaction of the need for subsistence and changing needs changed needs during crises, and be
protection. This finding is in line with the observations of Suh et al. aware that the satisfaction of one
(2020), documenting a quick decline after an initial peak for very similar need might affect the satisfaction of
other needs.
need categories (physiological and safety needs). On the side of the
Businesses, Reflect on changed business needs,
producers, we witness a similar trajectory for the needs for subsistence organizations reflect on volatile regulations, be
and protection, which reach a peak amidst the periods of strict contact open toward changed needs of
restrictions and subsequently decrease in occurrence. This is especially consumers, and employ new search
strategies and horizon scanning.
well-illustrated for the domains encompassed within C3, representing an
Be aware that the satisfaction of one
industrial sector (gastronomy and hospitality) that was hit hard by the need might affect the satisfaction of
lockdown regulations. Presumably, the loosening of regulations during other needs.
the early summer months offered opportunities for these businesses to Be aware of the dynamics of changed
resume their normal operations. Going beyond the need for protecting needs during crises.
Policy Recognize that consumers and
the physical health of individuals or economic subsistence of businesses,
businesses have multiple different
our results show that in the midst of a fearsome pandemic, subsistence basic needs.
and protection needs do not seem to be the sole concern of people. So­ Observe changed needs reflected in
cietal acceptance of severe restrictions to “flatten the curve” was changed demand pattern to observe
the changed needs to attune policy
noticeably high early on, with people even self-regulating before re­
measures.
strictions were officially introduced. However, with passing time, an Recognize the systemic dynamics of
ever-increasing desire in society for relief could be witnessed, evidenced changing needs during crises.
by frequent protests and a mounting pressure on political actors to Support the Consumers Take new roles and responsibilities
reopen stores and bars and allow people to meet. To this point, we satisfaction of and contribute to the co-creation of
(changed) basic solutions.
witness dedicated domains of innovations (e.g., D1, D2, and D9) meeting
needs Maintain openness toward different
needs in the dimensions of understanding, leisure and creation, affec­ and novel approaches.
tion, understanding, participation, and leisure and identity. These Connect to local knowledge hubs.
human needs are present from the very beginning of our period of Businesses, Consider consumers and policy as
observation and exhibit a growing importance through the course of the organizations partners for the development of new
product and service offerings
crisis. This is in line with what Suh et al. (2020) have described as a addressing the changed needs.
surge of expressions for cognitive needs and self-actualization. Our Implement open innovation practices
analysis also features parallels to their evidence for a growing need for to do so.
love and belonging (i.e., expressed through searches for digital Search for solutions and partners in
unexpected places.
communication platforms). On the side of consumers, our domains of
Search for partners who can swiftly
innovations (e.g., D4, D9, and D11) represent the needs for affection and react to the changed environment.
participation and exhibit positive trajectories over the first two months Align given resources with new
of the lockdown regulations, whereas the producers’ need for partici­ objectives.
pation, in terms of collaboration and engaging with society, is highly Policy Foster and support transdisciplinary
collaboration within the innovation
pronounced for almost all domains of innovations. system.
We are able to neatly map the identification of the expressed needs of Support not only the “usual suspects.”
Suh et al. (2020) to potential innovative satisfiers represented in our Support startups and SMEs for the
domains of innovations. However, because our classification of needs is swift development and delivery of
innovations. Support entrepreneurial
based on a more granular scheme and simultaneously considers
projects with a collaborative angle.
respective satisfiers, we can contribute a more detailed picture of the Design challenge-led innovation
needs addressed by different domains of innovations. In particular, the policy mixes (on the regional,
domain of Child Care presents a somewhat counterintuitive case. Our national, and supranational level) to
HHI indicates that this domain potentially covers a rather large range of allocate resources to innovation
projects beyond technology-driven
needs for consumers; however, the respective occurrences of in­ ones.
novations belonging to this domain remain below average over the Augment subsidies for corporate
entire period of observation. Comparing this with our perception of survival with incentives to innovate.
what is actually a widespread societal issue for families, we are inclined Learn from the Consumers Reflect on the different changed needs
experience and their satisfaction.
to interpret this dynamic not as a lower urgency of this problem but
Reflect on the behavioral changes
rather as an inability of private actors within the innovation system to triggered by the crises.
truly satisfy this deficient need. Fittingly, this domain of innovations Businesses, Reflect on the changed set of
displays a thematic closeness to the domain of DIY solutions. organizations corporate goals during the crises and
the changed processes. Consider long-
term changes.
6. Practical implications Policy Identify unexpected actors in the
innovation system and build long-
In our globalized world, natural or anthropogenic hazards and their term relationships.
resulting crises increasingly exhibit rapid and transsystemic diffusion Support unexpected and effective
collaboration.
processes. Thus, by understanding societal responses to crises as a sys­
Reflect on the new role of policy
temic effort, we may be able to better leverage the abovementioned during the crises.
properties of crisis-driven innovations and find points of systemic (continued on next page)

17
J. Dahlke et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 169 (2021) 120799

Table 5 (continued ) observed changes in demand patterns as a kind of policy compass, which
Objective Actors Actionable Measures may be considered when directing relief measures toward societal
groups heavily affected by the crisis: it is consumers rather than (a loud
Explore new modes of polycentric
governance for innovation commons.
minority of) anti-corona protesters the socio-political discourse should
Research Include the theoretical developments be attuned to. Our analysis of crisis-driven innovations shows that
triggered by and the empirical innovation systems were able to quickly react to the shortage of tech­
evidence collected during the crises nological equipment in the early weeks of the pandemic gaining mo­
into changed research programs.
mentum, whereas other societal issues such as child care could only be
Let the new social and technical
reality inspire new research questions superficially addressed throughout the crisis. These observations show
and approaches. the necessity to closely monitor economic activity to provide solutions to
Support consumers, businesses, and societal problems and to support innovative activity. This is particularly
policy by monitoring crisis-driven relevant in domains that can effectively contribute to relief efforts while
innovations utilizing the approach
pioneered in this paper in
focusing governmental provision on issues that cannot be easily
combination with complementary addressed through the market. Contrasting this insight with the
methods as an early indicator for observed political measures to foster innovation during the crisis, it
urgent societal needs and their becomes evident that such measures can be seen as slightly biased to­
changes.
ward established actors such as multinational corporations. Although
the European Union announced additional research and innovation
intervention to foster long-term commitments of different actors. grants to companies providing innovative solutions for the COVID-19
Although the complexity and fundamental nature of human needs may pandemic, these grants have been attributed to about 36 large com­
complicate collective responses to crises, the silver lining here is the panies (approx. 8.7 million per company on average) (European Com­
decentralized interactions through which a wide range of (if not all) mission, 2020) mainly focused on providing technological solutions
needs find expression and achieve satisfaction: with businesses and connected to physical health. Nevertheless, our analysis suggests that
communities collaborating to seize opportunities through innovating governmental support may also be linked to a more systemic provision
and subsequently providing relief in times of crises. Our observations of resources in the sense of a challenge-led innovation policy (Raven and
help us to understand these innovations as a mechanism of satisfaction Walrave, 2020). The observed activities of increased cooperation (often
for interconnected systems of needs during crises. Notably, the collective at the local level) may be better fostered through more equally distrib­
nature of innovative efforts and the complex interplay between in­ uted crisis innovation funds, supporting a large number of entrepre­
novators and consumers highlight new roles for and responsibilities of neurial projects with small tranches of financial support while requiring
consumers. Transdisciplinary approaches and collective efforts by a certain degree of cooperation for eligibility and the allocation of re­
multiple innovation system actors create legitimate and responsible in­ sources. Provided by a system of (local) actors, we argue that this may
novations (Lubberink et al., 2017). Thus, we propose a careful assess­ enable a more diverse set of responses to what we have shown to be a
ment of market needs or demands and the respective innovation diverse set of societal needs inhibited or violated by lockdown regula­
behavior as an expression of socio-psychological needs of consumers and tions. More precisely, such challenge-led innovation policy mixes could
producers of innovations. This contributes to the identification of combine particular interventions that simultaneously target central
emerging points of intervention among actors and to a move toward a innovation system functions (e.g., guidance of search, market formation,
new paradigm of innovation systems dedicated to a larger societal and the creation of legitimacy) in response to the crisis (Raven and
mission. Arguably, many of the concrete collaborative activities identi­ Walrave, 2020).
fied by Lubberink et al. (2017) may also hold in the context of the The current crisis offers abundant evidence for the fact that funda­
crisis-driven innovation endeavor during the pandemic and should even mental human needs can be neither straightforwardly identified owing
be expanded in the near future to other actors not (yet) engaged in such to their complex and interconnected systemic nature—especially when
cross-fertilizing collaborations. Key activities for businesses and orga­ assessing them for a large collective of actors—nor sufficiently
nizations include (but are not limited to) stakeholder mapping, estab­ addressed through individual efforts or purely by technological ad­
lishing (social or living) labs for community involvement and vancements. Our analysis shows that decentralized, crisis-driven inno­
multi-stakeholder idea generation, crowdsourcing, as well as strategic vation systems can react to need deficiencies during crises. Considering
cross-sector partnerships (Lubberink et al., 2017). the recent shift toward normatively oriented innovation systems as a
The tension between preventing or slowing the rate of COVID-19 response to larger societal challenges (Ghazinoory et al., 2020; Hekkert
infections and, at the same time, protecting socioeconomic institutions et al., 2020; Pyka, 2017), we follow Schlaile et al. (2017) in arguing for
has been at the center of the discourse around the potential reactions to increased attention to the question of social responsibility and how so­
the crisis. Regulatory measures such as contact restrictions, calls for cietal systems can move toward desirable outcomes in the face of
sheltering at home, or lockdowns and curfews invoked to satisfy pro­ complex normativity and wicked problems. It is argued that the
tection and subsistence needs consistently create interconnected prob­ disruptive nature of the COVID-19 pandemic offers opportunities to not
lems for the satisfaction of other basic human needs. The examined only avoid recovery patterns that point toward an old normal but also
COVID innovations in our sample showcase the enormous opportunity motivate societal actors to retain their dedication to the collective
for innovators to create shared value in times of crises—as they may be problem solving of other societal issues beyond the crisis itself (Bogner
uniquely qualified to navigate the aforementioned tensions by providing et al., 2020; Wahl, 2020). Policy action could capture the heightened
an innovative way of conducting economic transactions that may attention and willingness to (collectively) participate in solution pro­
simultaneously fulfill the fundamental needs of consumers and busi­ cesses of consumers and businesses to embed these actors in dedicated
nesses alike. Our findings also show the value of closely screening the innovation systems. On that note, another policy implication stemming
from such decentralized and collective action is to take up polycentric

18
J. Dahlke et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 169 (2021) 120799

governance approaches (Carlisle and Gruby, 2019) for governing these curation processes of the platform and can neither claim an exhaustive
innovation commons (Potts, 2019). representation of innovation activities during COVID-19 nor compare
Finally, our article points to promising implications for researchers the degree of activity to pre-crisis time periods. The study is further
investigating crisis-driven innovation processes, which may support and limited by the short observation period, which may be extended in
affect the decisions of other innovation system actors (e.g., consumers, future studies benefiting from greater temporal distance. Unfortunately,
entrepreneurs, policy actors). First and foremost, the approach pio­ the developments regarding the pandemic have turned grim again
neered in this article provides a sound basis for future studies using topic during the winter months of 2020, and lockdown regulations are again
modeling and the needs-based classification for investigating in­ in effect. We argue that the expression and satisfaction of needs is sub­
novations. In this regard, follow-up work should also aim for a com­ jected to temporal changes owing to the unfolding events and adaption
parison of the changed dynamics of needs and innovations between the processes within society, therefore warranting another (comparative)
early phase of the pandemic and the so-called “second wave”. Our brief investigation into the needs and innovative satisfiers during the second
additional investigation into a later sample of innovation projects large wave of infections. This study opens up promising avenues for
(October-November of 2020), which is not reported, showed that a large future research in showing the value of an automated content analysis of
number of domains of innovation seem to have prevailed (e.g., Pro­ large-scale text data on innovation projects. More importantly, we show
tectives, Virtual Space, Home Delivery) and that the distribution of that a socio-psychological assessment of innovations as an expression of
addressed human needs seems to have remained largely unchanged. human needs may help us in better understanding the workings of
However, some new domains of innovations seem to have emerged due innovation (systems) and our market-based society, especially in such
to seasonal effects (such as holidays and colder temperatures) and the dire times. Future studies may focus on refining the classification of
importance of some needs seems to be more (e.g., leisure) or less (e.g., innovation projects for fundamental human needs or scrutinizing the
understanding) pronounced compared to the first wave. Moreover, workings of dedicated innovation systems in times of crises.
concomitant psychological research is advised to better understand how Above all, our results remind us that instead of pardoning an ill-
(and in which ways) the innovations identified actually act as effective prepared system, we may be well advised to remember the value of
(or rather pseudo-) satisfiers for certain human needs. innovative endeavors to provide immediate responses to the demands of
Based on our previous discussions, Table 5 summarizes a selection of a society in dire straits. The observed patterns in our sample of COVID
practical implications that can be drawn from our study. These practical innovations encourage us to understand these moments in history as
implications are categorized according to three objectives (expression of unique opportunities to change the world for the better. We may do so
changing needs, support the satisfaction of (changed) needs, and more by being conscious of our diverse societal needs, the broad range of
generally learn from the experience), central sets of actors (consumers, possibilities to fulfill these needs and willing to engage in creative col­
businesses/organizations, policymakers, and researchers), and the con­ laborations to turn over a new leaf. In times of crises, future societal
crete actionable measures. The entries in Table 5 should be read as responses may consider complementing regulatory measures through
important practical take-home messages, which should, however, not be systemically supporting innovation activities in society. After all, acting
regarded as exhaustive. After all, more longitudinal and comparative in unison is more powerful than acting in isolation.
data would be required to provide more targeted recommendations to
the sets of innovation system actors listed in Table 5. CRediT author statement

7. Conclusions and future research Johannes Dahlke: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal anal­
ysis, Software, Writing - original draft, Visualization, Project adminis­
In a procedure novel to the realm of innovation studies, we have tration, Kristina Bogner: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal
clustered emerging domains of crisis-driven innovations amidst the analysis, Software, Writing - original draft, Maike Becker: Conceptu­
COVID-19 pandemic and classified the innovations within our sample alization, Formal analysis, Writing- original draft, Michael P. Schlaile:
among nine dimensions of fundamental human needs. We find a diverse Writing - Original Draft, Writing - review & editing, Andreas Pyka:
set of domains of innovations ranging from technologically driven in­ Writing - review & editing, Supervision, Bernd Ebersberger: Data
novations to what may be described as frugal and social innovations. Curation, Methodology, Formal analysis, Investigation, Writing - review
The documented innovation behavior exhibits accelerated diffusion & editing, Supervision
processes of sophisticated (digital) technologies on the one hand and
accelerated provision of necessary resources to combat the diverse ef­ Acknowledgements
fects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the other hand. To this point, we
show that the needs of both consumers and innovators have to be un­ This research is a result from the Research Area “Innovation,
derstood as a more complex phenomenon during crises—as we witness Entrepreneurship, and Finance (INEF)” at the University of Hohen­
the immediate surge of non-exclusive needs going beyond the mere heim’s Faculty of Business, Economics, and Social Sciences.
notion of physical health (but emphasizing the need for affection, un­ Funding: In his work for this article, Johannes Dahlke was supported
derstanding, participation, and creation). We see this variety of needs by the Heinrich-Böll-Foundation [grant number P143003].
not only expressed through market dynamics but also satisfied through a
set of respective entrepreneurial reactions. From this perspective, we Appendix A. Selected Innovations
argue that a systemic societal response to the modern crises of our time
may build around and contribute to inducing dedication into systemic Table A.6.
innovation activities. The main limitation of this study is the source of
data. Although we ensure consistency within our sample by focusing on
the provision of data by a single website, we are subjected to the

19
J. Dahlke et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 169 (2021) 120799

Table A.6
Top 5 Innovations by Domain Ranked by Coherence Score.
ID Title Date Coherence Score

C1/D7 Medical Equipment

41 Vega Innovations develops new low-cost, easily scalable medical ventilator 22/04/20 0.792
515 Dyson designs new ventilator in only 10 days and will produce 15,000 units for UK hospitals 30/03/20 0.750
381 Italian startup Isinnova 3D prints copies of ventilator parts to help hospitals 25/03/20 0.740
357 LEO A DALY showcases Hotel2Hospital design concept to temporarily turn hotels into hospitals 05/05/20 0.683
113 UK based Nippy plans to use its NIPPY 3+ sleep apnea device to make ventilators 16/04/20 0.662
C1/D8 Protectives
418 IKEA launches production of masks, visors, aprons and hand sanitizer for medical workers 03/04/20 0.660
206 SafeHandFish repurposes soy sauce containers for hand sanitizer 30/04/20 0.661
575 Colombian brand Maaji is selling fashionable protective clothing made from recycled plastic 27/04/20 0.645
532 Dreamlab Industries in Michigan 3D prints antimicrobial masks and touchless door openers 01/04/20 0.635
361 LA-based AMASS distillery shifts production to make hand wash 01/04/20 0.589
C2/D6 Contact Tracing
677 App from MIT alerts you if you’ve crossed paths with someone who is infected 22/03/20 0.712
703 1.5 - Social Distancing App helps people keep a safe social distance 20/04/20 0.683
369 Keep Your Distance app by Eventgelist helps you and your loved ones keep the minimum distance 09/04/20 0.679
186 Singapore government launches community-driven contact tracing app Trace-Together 10/04/20 0.640
485 Fitness tracking app StepSetGo encourages users to walk indoors during quarantine 06/04/20 0.613
C2/D13 Monitoring
629 Brazilian Foundation Luis Eduardo Magalhaes launches website with real-time information about COVID 09/04/20 0.620
693 Alphabet’s Verily launches COVID screening tool to automate health systems’ frontline response 07/05/20 0.584
4 ZeSight helps organizations monitor the health of their workforces with real-time COVID symptoms 08/04/20 0.544
27 Website ‘Helmet-Based Ventilation’ provides information about helmet use for ventilation systems 19/04/20 0.483
391 Israeli startup Vocalis Health tries to identify COVID carriers using voice biometrics 01/04/20 0.481
C2/D14 High Technology
503 Etihad Airways tests new airport technology to identify travelers with COVID symptoms 13/04/20 0.791
530 Drone company DJI equips public safety agencies across the US with drone technology to fight COVID 09/04/20 0.726
630 Brazilian company ‘Hi Technologies’ produces portable COVID test that returns results in 15 min 09/04/20 0.645
694 Alibaba develops new algorithm able to identify COVID infections with 96% accuracy 03/04/20 0.635
342 Low-cost airline Cebu Pacific introduces ‘contactless flights’ in Philippines 11/05/20 0.631
C3/D5 Hospitality
680 Amsterdam-based hotel Zoku transforms its rooms into hideaway offices for at-home workers 29/04/20 0.703
460 German website ‘Home Office im Hotel’ shows hotels across Germany offering hotel rooms to work from 10/04/20 0.641
140 Swedish couple opens ‘Bord för En’, a COVID-safe outdoor restaurant for 1 person only 05/05/20 0.576
531 Drive-in cinema in Germany conducts unusual weddings amidst social distancing measures 07/05/20 0.569
433 Helsinki Hotel Kämp launches its 24-hour room service as takeaway or home delivery service 22/04/20 0.569
C3/D12 Home Delivery
116 Uber Eats and Delivery Hero branch out to supply groceries to customers stuck at home 06/04/20 0.664
333 Malaysian low-cost airline AirAsia provides in-flight food to people’s doorstep through new delivery 11/05/20 0.662
12 Woolworths turns a further 100 supermarkets into delivery hubs, introduces basic groceries boxes 25/04/20 0.631
97 UK volunteers launch Runnerdeliveries.com to help elderly people with their grocery shopping 23/04/20 0.602
207 Russian supermarket Vkusvill wants to install vending machines in residential buildings 13/04/20 0.568
C3/D15 Gastro
596 Chefs from UnitedHealth Group now cook from home for ‘Loaves And Fishes’ distribution site 16/04/20 0.681
39 Vermont Deli sells raw ingredients, mails gift packages and provides delivery services 01/04/20 0.625
148 Strippers from Lucky Devil Lounge Bar in Portland, Oregon will deliver food topless 16/04/20 0.616
348 London craft brewer The Five Points Brewering Co starts selling kegs of beer to create home pub experience 11/05/20 0.576
356 Leon restaurants in UK are transformed into mini-supermarkets to fix food shortages 08/04/20 0.532
C4/D2 Information
296 New website ‘Something Positive’ spreads positive COVID-related news only 03/04/20 0.732
561 CoVibes by Helen Huang publishes positive stories and good news for an 03/05/20 0.732
uplifting mindfulness break
22 WhatsApp fights COVID misinformation by limiting message forwarding to one person at a time 08/04/20 0.693
149 ‘Stories Of COVID’ documents the impact of COVID-19 for future generations through interviews 26/04/20 0.635
578 Collaborative platform Quarantine Stories collects stories of isolation from people around the world 20/04/20 0.620
C4/D9 Virtual Space
123 Topgolf partners with LPGA Tour to launch online golf tournament ‘LPGA eTour Live’ 18/05/20 0.856
489 Finnish museums step up their online game with video art and VR guided tours 29/04/20 0.726
591 Chinese e-commerce platforms offer online tours to popular tourist sites and museums 01/04/20 0.690
611 Budweiser, Rémy Martin, Carlsberg and Pernod Ricard launch partnership with JD for virtual clubbing 01/04/20 0.647
238 Prominent tennis players play Virtual Madrid Open on Playstation 4 06/05/20 0.645
C4/D11 Support your local
17 Wirecard launches ‘Innovation for Now’ platform where German merchants can find tech assistance 14/04/20 0.650
385 Italian initiative Torniamo Presto enables people to buy gift cards from their local businesses 21/04/20 0.645
556 Covid-19 Tech Support is a non-profit initiative launched by volunteers to give free tech support 23/04/20 0.602
382 Italian platform Uniti Possiamo connects local businesses with people living nearby 15/04/20 0.557
384 Italian local initiative ‘Spesa Sospesa’ connects people in need for support with those who can help 16/04/20 0.544
C5/D4 Donations
373 Jiggy Puzzles launches auction puzzle pieces to support artists during COVID 11/05/20 0.774
162 Spotify launches COVID Music Relief project to support artists 02/04/20 0.726
237 Proof of Impact unites organizations and donors through community-based 25/04/20 0.713
efforts to combat COVID-19
696 Airbnb launches global initiative to provide housing to healthcare professionals and relief workers 29/03/20 0.662
664 Australian stage and festival builder Stagekings creates affordable work-from-home desks 16/04/20 0.617
(continued on next page)

20
J. Dahlke et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 169 (2021) 120799

Table A.6 (continued )

ID Title Date Coherence Score

C5/D3 Pro-bono
309 Nashville-based marketing agency Reed provides free COVID strategy hotline for businesses in need 06/05/20 0.703
416 In Brazil, Hyundai gives free rides to safely transport healthcare professionals and the elderly 10/04/20 0.641
625 Brazilian platform Meiuca allows companies to temporarily exchange employees to avoid layoffs 09/04/20 0.576
560 COVID Canvas by LikeWise in Brasil offers free brand strategy resource to help businesses reinvent 05/50/20 0.569
359 LATAM ride-hailing company Beat launches free transfer services for medical workers 16/04/20 0.569
C5/D16 Heroes
32 Viral running challenge raises $6 million for health-care workers in the UK 29/04/20 0.779
628 Brazilian non-profit ‘Doe Pro-Gol’ connects charity campaigns with football fans to raise money 23/04/20 0.631
510 Elle launches ‘The Other Front Line’ campaign to put other every hero woman into spotlight 20/04/20 0.625
265 Palma-based travel technology company Hotelbeds launches ‘Holidays for Heroes’ campaign 30/04/20 0.569
105 UK energy startup Lifesaver supplies power banks to healthcare workers on the frontlines 11/05/20 0.569
C6/D1 DIY
444 Grooming brands release easy-to-use trimmers and scissor kits for DIY home haircuts 11/05/20 0.680
5 Zara models photograph themselves at home to promote the Spanish company’s new collection 23/04/20 0.663
120 Trojan Brand Condoms company launches free-for-all e-cookbook including sensual bread recipes 19/05/20 0.625
402 Influential US streetwear brand Sprayground launches innovative collection with 3D computer animated 11/05/20 0.617
346 London-based designer Paul Cocksedge creates ‘Here Comes the Sun’ social distancing picnic blanket 08/05/20 0.525
C6/D10 Child Care
701 ‘A Kids Book About COVID-19′ offers free online resources to help kids understand the global crisis 03/04/20 0.736
81 US celebrities read aloud to kids in quarantine on StorylineOnline’s Youtube channel 01/04/20 0.688
43 Utah family launches ‘Spring Break Chalk Challenge’ to cope with social distancing in a creative way 15/04/20 0.680
334 ‘Make Way for Books’ app encourages reading eBooks to children staying at home 14/04/20 0.677
594 Chicago-based SkyArt helps kids at home stay creative with creativity kits and online tutorials 01/04/20 0.663

References Bogner, K., Mueller, M., Pyka, A., Schlaile, M.P., Urmetzer, S., 2020. Why we can’t go
back to normal: 5 appeals for a sustainable post-pandemic economy. LSE Bus. Rev.
1–3.
Abson, D.J., Fischer, J., Leventon, J., Newig, J., Schomerus, T., Vilsmaier, U., von
Boin, A., 2009. The new world of crises and crisis management: implications for
Wehrden, H., Abernethy, P., Ives, C.D., Jager, N.W., Lang, D.J., 2017. Leverage
policymaking and research. Rev. Policy Res. 26 (4), 367–377. https://doi.org/
points for sustainability transformation. Ambio 46 (1), 30–39. https://doi.org/
10.1111/j.1541-1338.2009.00389.x.
10.1007/s13280-016-0800-y.
Bouman, T., Steg, L., Dietz, T., 2020. Insights from early COVID-19 responses about
Antons, D., Kleer, R., Salge, T.O., 2016. Mapping the topic landscape of JPIM,
promoting sustainable action. Nat. Sustain. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-
1984–2013: in search of hidden structures and development trajectories. J. Prod.
00626-x.
Innov. Manag. 33 (6), 726–749. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12300.
Bryan, K., Lemus, J., Marshall, G., 2020. Innovation during a crisis: evidence from Covid-
Archibugi, D., Filippetti, A., Frenz, M., 2013. Economic crisis and innovation: is
19. SSRN Electron. J. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3587973.
destruction prevailing over accumulation? Res. Policy 42 (2), 303–314. https://doi.
Bui, Q.V., Sayadi, K., Bui, M., 2016. A multi-criteria document clustering method based
org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.07.002.
on topic modeling and pseudoclosure function. Inform 40 (2), 169–180.
Bacq, S., Geoghegan, W., Josefy, M., Stevenson, R., Williams, T.A., 2020. The COVID-19
Campbell, J.L., Quincy, C., Osserman, J., Pedersen, O.K., 2013. Coding in-depth
virtual idea blitz: marshaling social entrepreneurship to rapidly respond to urgent
semistructured interviews: problems of unitization and intercoder reliability and
grand challenges. Bus. Horiz. 63 (6), 705–723. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
agreement. Sociol. Methods Res. 42 (3), 294–320. https://doi.org/10.1177/
bushor.2020.05.002.
0049124113500475.
Barreiro-Gen, M., Lozano, R., Zafar, A., 2020. Changes in sustainability priorities in
Cankurtaran, P., Beverland, M.B., 2020. Using design thinking to respond to crises: B2B
organisations due to the COVID-19 outbreak: averting environmental rebound
lessons from the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic. Ind. Mark. Manag. 88, 255–260. https://
effects on society. Sustain 12 (12). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12125031. Article
doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.05.030.
5031.
Cao, J., Xia, T., Li, J., Zhang, Y., Tang, S., 2009. A density-based method for adaptive
Bavel, J.J.V., Baicker, K., Boggio, P.S., Capraro, V., Cichocka, A., Cikara, M., Crockett, M.
LDA model selection. Neurocomputing 72 (7–9), 1775–1781. https://doi.org/
J., Crum, A.J., Douglas, K.M., Druckman, J.N., Drury, J., Dube, O., Ellemers, N.,
10.1016/j.neucom.2008.06.011.
Finkel, E.J., Fowler, J.H., Gelfand, M., Han, S., Haslam, S.A., Jetten, J., Kitayama, S.,
Carlisle, K., Gruby, R.L., 2019. Polycentric systems of governance: a theoretical model for
Mobbs, D., Napper, L.E., Packer, D.J., Pennycook, G., Peters, E., Petty, R.E., Rand, D.
the commons. Policy Stud. J. 47, 927–952. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12212.
G., Reicher, S.D., Schnall, S., Shariff, A., Skitka, L.J., Smith, S.S., Sunstein, C.R.,
Chesbrough, H., 2003. The era of open innovation. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 44 (3), 35–41.
Tabri, N., Tucker, J.A., van der Linden, S., van Lange, P.A.M., Weeden, K.A.,
Chesbrough, H., 2020. To recover faster from Covid-19, open up: managerial
Wohl, M.J.A., Zaki, J., Zion, S.R., Willer, R., 2020. Using social and behavioural
implications from an open innovation perspective. Ind. Mark. Manag. 88, 410–413.
science to support COVID-19 pandemic response. Nat. Hum. Behav. 4 (5), 460–471.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.04.010.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-0884-z.
Crick, J.M., Crick, D., 2020. Coopetition and COVID-19: collaborative business-to-
Bergek, A., Jacobsson, S., Carlsson, B., Lindmark, S., Rickne, A., 2008. Analyzing the
business marketing strategies in a pandemic crisis. Ind. Mark. Manag. 88, 206–213.
functional dynamics of technological innovation systems: a scheme of analysis. Res.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.05.016.
Policy 37 (3), 407–429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2007.12.003.
Cruz, I., Stahel, A., Max-Neef, M., 2009. Towards a systemic development approach:
Bessant, J., Rush, H., Trifilova, A., 2012. Jumping the tracks’: crisis-driven social
building on the human-scale development paradigm. Ecol. Econ. 68 (7), 2021–2030.
innovation and the development of novel trajectories. Die Unternehmung 66 (3),
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.02.004.
221–242. https://doi.org/10.5771/0042-059x-2012-3-221.
Doyal, L., Gough, I., 1984. Theory of human needs: critical analysis. Crit. Soc. Policy 4
Bessant, J., Rush, H., Trifilova, A., 2015. Crisis-driven innovation: the case of
(10), 6–38.
humanitarian innovation. Int. J. Innov. Manag. 19 (6), 1–17. https://doi.org/
Doyal, L., Gough, I., 1991. A Theory of Human Need. Palgrave Macmillan UK, London.
10.1142/S1363919615400149.
Ebersberger, B., Kuckertz, A., 2021. Hop to it! The impact of organization type on
Beykikhoshk, A., Arandjelović, O., Phung, D., Venkatesh, S., 2018. Discovering topic
innovation response time to the COVID-19 crisis. J. Bus. Res. 124, 126–135. https://
structures of a temporally evolving document corpus. Knowl. Inf. Syst. 55 (3),
doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.11.051.
599–632. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10115-017-1095-4.
Engler, J.O., Abson, D.J., Von Wehrden, H., 2020. The coronavirus pandemic as an
Biron, M., De Cieri, H., Fulmer, I., Lin (Veronica), C.H., Mayrhofer, W., Nyfoudi, M.,
analogy for future sustainability challenges. Sustain. Sci. https://doi.org/10.1007/
Sanders, K., Shipton, H., Sun (James), J.M., 2020. Structuring for innovative
s11625-020-00852-4.
responses to human resource challenges: a skunk works approach. Hum. Resour.
European Commission, 2020. Coronavirus: EU grants €314 million to innovative
Manag. Rev., Article 100768. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2020.100768.
companies to combat the virus and support recovery [Press release from 8th of June
Blei, D.M., Lafferty, J.D., 2007. A correlated topic model of science. Ann. Appl. Stat. 1,
2020, last accessed 23rd of December 2020], https://ec.europa.eu/commissio
17–35. https://doi.org/10.1214/07-aoas114.
n/presscorner/detail/en/IP_20_1007.
Blei, D.M., Ng, A.Y., Jordan, M.I., 2003. Latent Dirichlet allocation. J. Mach. Learn. Res.
Enkel, E., Gassmann, O., Chesbrough, H., 2009. Open R&D and open innovation:
3 (1), 993–1022.
Exploring the phenomenon. R D Manag. 39 (4), 311–316. https://doi.org/10.1111/
Blei, D., Lafferty, J., 2009. Topic models. In: Srivastava, A.N., Sahami, M. (Eds.), Text
j.1467-9310.2009.00570.x.
Mining - Classification, Clustering, and Applications. Chapman and Hall/CRC, New
Fleiss, J.L., 1971. Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychol. Bull.
York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420059458.ch4.
76 (5), 378–382. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0031619.

21
J. Dahlke et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 169 (2021) 120799

Fransman, M., 2018. Innovation Ecosystems: Increasing Competitiveness. Cambridge Mowery, D., Rosenberg, N., 1993. The influence of market demand upon innovation: a
University Press, Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108646789. critical review of some recent empirical studies. Res. Policy 22 (1), 107–108. https://
Garbe, L., Rau, R., Toppe, T., 2020. Influence of perceived threat of Covid-19 and doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(93)90051-i.
HEXACO personality traits on toilet paper stockpiling. PLoS ONE 15, 1–12. https:// Müller, M., Kudic, M., Vermeulen, B., 2020. The influence of the structure of
doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0234232. technological knowledge on inter-firm R&D collaboration and knowledge discovery:
Geels, F.W., 2002. Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a an agent-based simulation approach. J. Bus. Res. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
multi-level perspective and a case-study. Res. Policy 31 (8–9), 1257–1274. https:// jbusres.2020.01.067.
doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00062-8. Naidoo, V., 2010. Firm survival through a crisis: the influence of market orientation,
Ghazinoory, S., Nasri, S., Ameri, F., Montazer, G.A., Shayan, A., 2020. Why do we need marketing innovation and business strategy. Ind. Mark. Manag. 39 (8), 1311–1320.
‘Problem-oriented Innovation System (PIS)’ for solving macro-level societal https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2010.02.005.
problems? Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 150, 119749. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Norman, J., Bar-Yam, Y., Taleb, N.N., 2020. Systemic Risk of Pandemic Via Novel
techfore.2019.119749. Pathogens – Coronavirus: A Note. New England Complex Systems Institute (January
Giotopoulos, I., Kontolaimou, A., Tsakanikas, A., 2017. Drivers of high-quality 26, 2020).
entrepreneurship: what changes did the crisis bring about? Small. Bus. Econ. 48 (4), O’Connor, C., Joffe, H., 2020. Intercoder reliability in qualitative research: debates and
913–930. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.08.007. practical guidelines. Int. J. Qual. Methods 19, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/
Griffiths, T.L., Steyvers, M., 2004. Finding scientific topics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1609406919899220.
101, 5228–5235. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0307752101. Patel, P.C., Fernhaber, S.A., McDougall-Covin, P.P., Van Der Have, R.P., 2014. Beating
Hausman, A., Johnston, W.J., 2014. The role of innovation in driving the economy: competitors to international markets: the value of geographically balanced networks
lessons from the global financial crisis. J. Bus. Res. 67 (1), 2720–2726. https://doi. for innovation. Strateg. Manag. J. 35 (5), 691–711. https://doi.org/10.1002/
org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.03.021. smj.2114.
He, H., Harris, L., 2020. The impact of Covid-19 pandemic on corporate social Patterson, J., Schulz, K., Vervoort, J., van der Hel, S., Widerberg, O., Adler, C.,
responsibility and marketing philosophy. J. Bus. Res. 116, 176–182. https://doi.org/ Hurlbert, M., Anderton, K., Sethi, M., Barau, A., 2017. Exploring the governance and
10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.05.030. politics of transformations towards sustainability. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 24,
Hekkert, M.P., Janssen, M.J., Wesseling, J.H., Negro, S.O., 2020. Mission-oriented 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2016.09.001.
innovation systems. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transitions 34, 76–79. https://doi.org/ Pavitt, K., Robson, M., Townsend, J., 1987. The size distribution of innovating firms in
10.1016/j.eist.2019.11.011. the UK: 1945–1983. J. Ind. Econ. 35 (3), 297–316.
Hekkert, M.P., Suurs, R., Negro, S., Kuhlmann, S., Smits, R., 2007. Functions of Pavitt, K., Robson, M., Townsend, J., 1989. Technological accumulation, diversification
innovation systems: a new approach for analysing technological change. Technol. and organisation in UK companies, 1945–1983. Manage. Sci. 35 (1), 1–125. https://
Forecast. Soc. Change 74 (4), 413–432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.1.81.
techfore.2006.03.002. Phillips, M.A., Ritala, P., 2019. A complex adaptive systems agenda for ecosystem
Juergensen, J., Guimón, J., Narula, R., 2020. European SMEs amidst the COVID-19 crisis: research methodology. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 148, 119739. https://doi.
assessing impact and policy responses. J. Ind. Bus. Econ. 47 (3), 499–510. https:// org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119739.
doi.org/10.1007/s40812-020-00169-4. Potts, J., 2019. Innovation Commons: The Origin of Economic Growth. Oxford University
Kracauer, S., 1952. The challenge of qualitative content analysis. Public Opin. Q. 16 (4), Press, New York, NY.
631–642. https://doi.org/10.1086/266427. Pyka, A., 2017. Dedicated innovation systems to support the transformation towards
Kraus, S., Clauss, T., Breier, M., Gast, J., Zardini, A., Tiberius, V., 2020. The economics of sustainability: creating income opportunities and employment in the knowledge-
COVID-19: initial empirical evidence on how family firms in five European countries based digital bioeconomy. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex 3 (4). https://doi.
cope with the corona crisis. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. 26 (5), 1067–1092. https:// org/10.1186/s40852-017-0079-7. Article 27.
doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-04-2020-0214. Pyka, A., Bogner, K., Urmetzer, S., 2019. Productivity slowdown, exhausted
Krippendorff, K., 2004. Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology, 2nd ed. opportunities and the power of human ingenuity-schumpeter meets Georgescu-
SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. https://doi.org/10.2307/2288384. Roegen. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 5 (3), 1–17. https://doi.org/
Kuckertz, A., Brändle, L., Gaudig, A., Hinderer, S., Morales Reyes, C.A., Prochotta, A., 10.3390/JOITMC5030039.
Steinbrink, K.M., Berger, E.S.C., 2020. Startups in times of crisis – a rapid response to Rakas, M., Hain, D.S., 2019. The state of innovation system research: what happens
the COVID-19 pandemic. J. Bus. Ventur. Insights 13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. beneath the surface? Res. Policy 48 (9), 103787. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jbvi.2020.e00169. Article e00169. respol.2019.04.011.
Laine, C.R., 1995. The herfindahl-hirschman index: a concentration measure taking the Raven, R., Walrave, B., 2020. Overcoming transformational failures through policy mixes
consumer’s point of view. Antitrust Bull 40 (2), 423–432. https://doi.org/10.1177/ in the dynamics of technological innovation systems. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change
0003603×9504000206. 153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.05.008. Article 119297.
Landis, J.R., Koch, G.G., 1977. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical Reinhart, C.M., Rogoff, K.S., 2014. Recovery from financial crises: evidence from 100
data. Biometrics 33 (1), 159–174. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310. episodes. Am. Econ. Rev. 104 (5), 50–55. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.104.5.50.
Laperche, B., Lefebvre, G., Langlet, D., 2011. Innovation strategies of industrial groups in Rittel, H.W.J., Webber, M.M., 1973. Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sci
the global crisis: rationalization and new paths. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 78 4 (2), 155–169. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01405730.
(8), 1319–1331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2011.03.005. Ryan, B.J., Coppola, D., Canyon, D.V., Brickhouse, M., Swienton, R., 2020. COVID-19
Loxton, M., Truskett, R., Scarf, B., Sindone, L., Baldry, G., Zhao, Y., 2020. Consumer community stabilization and sustainability framework: an integration of the Maslow
behaviour during crises: preliminary research on how coronavirus has manifested hierarchy of needs and social determinants of health. Soc. Disaster Med. Public Heal.
consumer panic buying, herd mentality, changing discretionary spending and the Inc. 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1017/dmp.2020.109.
role of the media in influencing behaviour. J. Risk Financ. Manag. 13 (8), 166. Schlaile, M.P., Klein, K., Böck, W., 2018. From bounded morality to consumer social
https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm13080166. responsibility: a transdisciplinary approach to socially responsible consumption and
Lubberink, R., Blok, V., van Ophem, J., Omta, O., 2017. Lessons for responsible its obstacles. J. Bus. Ethics 149 (3), 561–588. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-
innovation in the business context: a systematic review of responsible, social and 3096-8.
sustainable innovation practices. Sustain 9 (5), 721. https://doi.org/10.3390/ Schlaile, M.P., Urmetzer, S., 2021. Transitions to sustainable development. In: Leal Filho,
su9050721. W., Azul, A.M., Brandli, L., Lange Salvia, A., Wall, T. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of the UN
MacQueen, K.M., McLellan, E., Kay, K., Milstein, B., 1998. Codebook development for Sustainable Development Goals: Decent Work and Economic Growth. Springer, Cham,
team-based qualitative analysis. Cult. Anthropol. Methods 10 (2), 31–36. https:// pp. 1067–1081. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95867-5_52.
doi.org/10.1177/1525822×980100020301. Schlaile, M.P., Urmetzer, S., Blok, V., Andersen, A.D., Timmermans, J., Mueller, M.,
Maier, D., Waldherr, A., Miltner, P., Wiedemann, G., Niekler, A., Keinert, A., Pfetsch, B., Fagerberg, J., Pyka, A., 2017. Innovation systems for transformations towards
Heyer, G., Reber, U., Häussler, T., Schmid-Petri, H., Adam, S., 2018. Applying LDA sustainability? Taking the normative dimension seriously. Sustain 9 (12). https://
topic modeling in communication research: toward a valid and reliable doi.org/10.3390/su9122253. Article 2253.
methodology. Commun. Methods Meas. 12 (2–3), 93–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/ Schlaile, M.P., Urmetzer, S., Ehrenberger, M.B., Brewer, J., 2020. Systems
19312458.2018.1430754. entrepreneurship: a conceptual substantiation of a novel entrepreneurial “species.”.
Mandel, A., Veetil, V., 2020. The economic cost of COVID lockdowns: an out-of- Sustain. Sci. 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-020-00850-6.
equilibrium analysis. Econ. Disasters Clim. Change 4, 431–451. https://doi.org/ Schumpeter, J.A., 2002. Seventh chapter of the theory of economic development
10.1007/s41885-020-00066-z. (Translated by U. Backhaus). Ind. Innov. 9 (1/2), 93–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/
Maslow, A.H., 1943. A theory of human motivation. Psychol. Rev. 50, 370–396. https:// 13662710220123653.
doi.org/10.1037/h0054346. Sjöö, K., Taalbi, J., Kander, A., Ljungberg, J., 2014. SWINNO: a database of Swedish
Matias, T., Dominski, F.H., Marks, D.F., 2020. Human needs in COVID-19 isolation. innovations, 1970-2007. In: Lund Papers in Economic History. General Issues. Lund,
J. Health Psychol. 25 (7), 871–882. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105320925149. Sweden (133).
Max-Neef, M., Elizalde, A., Hopenhayn, M., Herrera, F., Zemelman, H., Jataba, J., Suh, J., Horvitz, E., White, R.W., Althoff, T., 2020. Population-Scale Study of Human
Weinstein, L., 1989. Human scale development: an option for the future. Dev. Needs During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Analysis and Implications arXiv e-print.
Dialogue 1 (4), 380–381. Townsend, J., 1981. Science and Technology Indicators For the UK: Innovations in
Meadows, D.H., 2008. Thinking in Systems: A primer. chelsea green publishing, 2008. Britain since 1945. SPRU Occasional Paper Series, No. 16, Science Policy Research
Miller, J., McCoy, K., 2017. Topic model stability for hierarchical summarization. In: Unit (SPRU), University of Sussex, Brighton.
Proceedings of the Workshop on New Frontiers in Summarization. Copenhagen, TrendWatching BV, 2021. Methodology [WWW Document]. URL https://info.trendwat
Denmark, pp. 64–73. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/w17-4509. ching.com/methodology (accessed 2.16.21).
Wahl, D.C., 2020. Building a new normal. Resurgence Eco 321, 25–28.

22
J. Dahlke et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 169 (2021) 120799

Wang, Y., Hong, A., Li, X., Gao, J., 2020. Marketing innovations during a global crisis: a (University of Hohenheim). During her studies, she gained working experience in ac­
study of China firms’ response to COVID-19. J. Bus. Res. 116, 214–220. https://doi. counting and business analytics and is passionate about turning data into valuable insights.
org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.05.029. Her research interests focus on sustainable innovation, social entrepreneurship and the
Weick, K.E., 1993. The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: the Mann Gulch role of networks.
disaster. Adm. Sci. Q. 38 (4), 628. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393339.
Weyrauch, T., Herstatt, C., 2017. What is frugal innovation? Three defining criteria.
Dr. Michael P. Schlaile currently holds two part-time postdoc positions, one in the
J. Frugal Innov. 2 (1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40669-016-0005-y.
research project “New Imaginative Economies” at Cusanus Hochschule für Gesell­
World Bank, 2020. Global Economic Prospects, June 2020. World Bank, Washington, DC.
schaftsgestaltung and one at the Department of Innovation Economics at the University of
https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1553-9.
Hohenheim. Prior to that, he worked at the Department of Business Ethics (2012 to 2016).
Yu, O., 2018. A new model of human needs as the foundation for innovation
Michael’s research revolves around memes, worldviews, responsibility, sustainability
management. IEEE Eng. Manag. Rev. 46 (3), 40–45. https://doi.org/10.1109/
transitions, and the interplay of cultural and economic evolution in complex socio-
EMR.2018.2870431.
economic systems – including dedicated innovation systems. He has published in jour­
nals such as Cognitive Systems Research, Int. J. Computational Economics and Econo­
Johannes Dahlke is a doctoral student and junior researcher in the field of innovation metrics, Journal of Business Ethics, Journal of Business Research, Journal of Evolutionary
management and economics. His main focus is on the application of artificial intelligence Economics, Philosophy of Management, Sustainability Science, and Sustainability. For
by businesses and how to reconcile it with the notion of social responsibility. Beyond that, more information, please follow Michael on ResearchGate or Twitter.
he is interested in sustainability transitions and responsible research and innovation. For
his research, he was awarded a full doctoral scholarship from the Heinrich-Böll-Founda­
Prof. Dr. Andreas Pyka graduated in Economics and Management at the University of
tion. Previously, he received a double-degree M.Sc. in International Business and Eco­
Augsburg in 1998 and spent afterwards two years as a Post Doc in Grenoble. His-fields of
nomics from the University of Hohenheim and the University of Venice. Follow his work
research are Neo-Schumpeterian Economics and Evolutionary Economics with a special
on johannesdahlke.com.
emphasis on numerical techniques of analysing dynamic processes of qualitative change
and structural development. From October 2006 to March 2009 he worked at the Uni­
Dr. Kristina Bogner is a postdoctoral researcher in the field of innovation management versity of Bremen as Professor in Economic Theory. Since April 2009 Andreas Pyka holds
and economics at the University of Hohenheim and the Hohenheim Innovation Green­ the chair for innovation economics at the University of Hohenheim, Stuttgart. Andreas
house. Her main research interests are the transformation towards sustainability, in gen­ Pyka’s research areas are knowledge driven developments and transformation of economic
eral, as well as knowledge and learning for the transformation towards a sustainable systems.
knowledge-based bioeconomy, in particular. Kristina Bogner received her doctoral de­
gree from the University of Hohenheim in 2019 and has previously worked at the
Prof. Dr. Bernd Ebersberger is an economist and a management scholar with a strong
Hohenheim Research Center for Bioeconomy. She holds several degrees in Economics from
interest in innovation, entrepreneurship and higher education. Currently, Bernd Ebers­
the Leipzig University (Germany), the Université de Fribourg (Switzerland) and the Uni­
berger holds the professorship for management of innovation with the University of
versity of Hohenheim (Germany). For more information, please follow Kristina on Res
Hohenheim in Stuttgart, Germany. There he is also speaker of the research network
earchGate or LinkedIn.
’Innovation, Entrepreneurship, and Finance (INEF)’. His-work is published in Journal of
Applied Economics, Research Policy, Regional Studies, Journal of Economic Geography,
Maike Becker is a research associate at the Department of Innovation Management at the European Management Review, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, Journal of
University of Hohenheim. She holds a bachelor’s degree in International Economics Evolutionary Economics, Journal of Technology Transfer, und Structural Change & Eco­
(University of Tübingen) and a master’s degree in International Business and Economics nomic Dynamics.

23