Abstract
The key contribution of this paper is the proposal of a novel conceptual model for the social business value proposition. This research was about making sense out of the body of knowledge underlying social business concepts and perspectives, stemming from the social entrepreneurship literature, and building on the so-called business model ontology that underlies the widely used business model canvas. The developed constructs were built in the scope of a design science approach to research, supported by an assessment process that involved several steps comprising the interaction with well-known academicians and practitioners in the area of social business, culminating with a case-study for final validation and assessment. Interviews with the experts from the field helped in the iterative development process of the ontology and its assessment, further supported by informed arguments and a continuous review of the literature.

Abstract
The beginning of an innovation process, also known as "front-end of innovation" (FEI), counts as an essential contributor to the successful development of new products and for their market appeal. Nevertheless, while helpful procedures and techniques for developing new products are well-known and widely applied, FEI is still an understudied area, and models for managing it are not yet commonly used in technology-oriented companies. FEI, also known as "fuzzy front end", can even be "fuzzier" in not-for-profit research centers. That is because the focus of these centers is advancing of scientific knowledge, rather than commercializing the results of those activities. This study summarizes the insights from a literature review on the topic of "project portfolio management" (PPM) in relation to innovation and, more specifically, with FEI and its components of ideation, innovation management, innovation strategy, foresight, and incremental or radical innovation. The authors selected and reviewed content from 170 papers published in SCOPUS prior to February 2019. The discussion uses a theoretical framework called "Front-End of Innovation Integrative Ontology (FEI2O)" to assist in framing the discussion. © 2020, SPb RAACI.

Abstract
Literature is the noblest of all the arts. Music dies on the air, or at best exists only in memory; oratory ceases with the effort; the painter's colors fade and the canvas rots; the marble is dragged from its pedestal and is broken into fragments.

Abstract
As we write this editorial, people around the world are apprehensive about their future; some are at home; some are thinking about the loved ones they cannot visit; some, unfortunately, are dying. We watch the graphs and listen to the daily news of new coronavirus cases, but be it just one or one thousand, for the those close of the ones affected, the impact is catastrophic. (...)

Abstract
This Fall Issue will discuss about the power of technology and Internet. Innovation is taking place everywhere through new and emerging technologies changing the way we think, live, breathe, travel, and do shopping to name a few areas. Funny enough is that some of us believe that the most important technologies are on the market available to please customers and users, and nothing more important will show up later. We, as humans, systematically underestimate the power of technology and its impact on daily life. There are several well-known quotations from very smart people which have turned ridiculous after some time by basically shifting initial assumptions into market knowledge. Whatever is too expensive and complex today becomes a commodity in no time and shortly after doesn’t bring competitive advantage any longer (the S-curve effect, see e.g Bayus, 1998 or Rogers, 1962, for different explanations). Several notable studies illustrate (like the well cited and used BCG tools) how rapidly diffusion is influencing production costs and consequently, accelerates the speed of diffusion itself. The question here stems from where the balance between the minority of ‘crazy’ developers and the majority of pioneering consumers willing to try something new lies.  (...)

Abstract
We initiated this series with a view to catalyse and extend the focus on conceptualisation and application of behavioural science methods for managing innovation, albeit from a whole human perspective. We started with the notion that how to increase individual (human) creativity, collaboration productivity and innovativeness in innovation projects is a common concern for most firms. After discussions on the brain-mind-behaviour triad in the beginning, the interim editorial highlighted behavioural experiments as one plausible method to further the science of managing for innovation. In this final piece on the series, we conclude with a caveat on using experimental methods in examining the human side of innovation (Salampasis and Mention 2017) and discuss avenues for future research in innovation management, which increasingly reflects a collaborative affair (Bogers et al., 2017; Heil and Bornemann 2018). (...)