Magdalena Wnuk
Innovations in the social sciences and humanities (SSH) are increasingly driven by digital developments and the need to advance technologies within their disciplines. At the same time, they retain distinctive characteristics, such as critical reflection, epistemic diversity, and a reliance on long-term, in-depth engagement with their audiences . As a result, innovation models borrowed from other fields or from business-oriented practices are often challenging to apply within the SSH community (Bakhshi et al., 2008; Ghazinoory et al., 2025; Gulbrandsen & Aanstad, 2015). For the OPERAS Innovation Lab, this specificity has been one of the key questions from the very beginning: how should support models and workflows be designed to reflect the unique needs of SSH innovators?
To establish the foundations for the OPERAS Innovation Lab’s support offer for SSH innovators, we conducted two studies and validated the findings using co-design methods. In 2021, we carried out exploratory research examining patterns of change and attitudes towards innovative methods of scholarly communication within the SSH community (Avanço et al., 2021). In 2023 and 2024, this research was complemented by a case study that examined four projects pioneering innovative approaches to scholarly communication: two digital journals, an innovative toolkit for exploring resources, and a recommender system for OA books (Maryl et al., 2024). The results of the case study were further explored in a co-creation workshop to develop criteria for validating innovative research outputs and projects (Gouzi, 2025). All these activities were documented and discussed on the OPERAS Innovation Lab blog (see the posts here). Building on this work, and in particular on the outcomes of the co-creation workshop, in November 2024, the Lab proposed a 10-criteria evaluation and research assessment framework to help recognise innovative outputs in the social sciences and humanities while fostering their sustainability and long-term impact.
The next step was to test the framework’s usefulness across innovative ideas at different stages of development and with diverse objectives and backgrounds. The first opportunity to put this framework into practice arose with the GRAPHIA project. The OPERAS Innovation Lab joined Work Package task 6.1 dedicated to innovation management. As part of the task, the Lab aims to contribute to the development of exploitation and sustainability plans for the GRAPHIA project pilots and use cases – innovative products or tools built upon the GRAPHIA Knowledge Graph (for more information about this, see our GRAPHIA series featuring some of the pilot leaders). We saw this as an ideal opportunity to build on the original evaluation and research assessment framework, adapting it to the specific needs of the pilots and use cases – all innovative in nature – and to the objective of providing tailored support at different stages of their product (or research output) development. Below, I present the updated framework and the next steps for testing it.
10 dimensions for shaping your idea as a viable product
To provide partners from GRAPHIA with a ready-to-use tool, we refined the 10-criteria framework to make it applicable to ongoing projects. Therefore, we operationalised it as a set of guidelines to help innovators navigate the often complex and cyclical development process. We decided to treat the ten key dimensions from the original framework:
1. Novelty
2. Utility
3. User Engagement
4. User Responsiveness
5. Support & Training
6. Impact & Collaboration
7. Bridging Potential
8. Sustainability
9. Peer Review & Validation
10. Reusability & Reproducibility
as factors that can be revisited and reconsidered at various stages of the development process. Rather than serving as a checklist, the framework encourages reflection and discussion, helping project teams identify strengths, uncover gaps, and shape practical development plans through co-design activities. The general guidelines are now as follows:
| Dimension | Key question | What does it help you define? |
| 1. Novelty | What makes this innovation unique? | A clear and evidence-based statement of what differentiates the idea from existing solutions. |
| 2. Utility | Which user needs does it address? | The core user needs and problems the innovation is designed to solve. |
| 3. User Engagement | How will people use it? | A clear understanding of how users interact with the innovation throughout their journey. |
| 4. User Responsiveness | Can it adapt to different users and contexts? | Strategies for making the innovation flexible and relevant across different settings and audiences. |
| 5. Support & Training | How will users be enabled to adopt it? | A plan for onboarding, documentation, training, and user support. |
| 6. Impact & Collaboration | Who benefits from the innovation? | Identification of key stakeholders, beneficiaries, and opportunities for collaboration. |
| 7. Bridging Potential | Can it create value beyond its original context? | Potential applications, partnerships, or uses across disciplines and sectors. |
| 8. Sustainability | How will it be maintained in the long term? | A strategy for governance, funding, maintenance, and future development. |
| 9. Peer Review & Validation | How will its quality and credibility be demonstrated? | Evidence that the innovation has been tested, evaluated, and validated by users or experts. |
| 10. Reusability & Reproducibility | Can others adopt, reuse, or build upon it? | Documentation and resources that enable replication, adaptation, and wider uptake. |
The framework can also be understood as a step-by-step guide to evaluating and developing an innovation. The first two dimensions – novelty and utility – focus on the ideation phase. The next three – user engagement, user responsiveness, and support and training – address the activities needed to foster user adoption and engagement. The final five – impact and collaboration, bridging potential, sustainability, validation, and reusability/reproducibility – support the development of exploitation and long-term sustainability plans.
How are we going to apply the framework to the GRAPHIA use cases and pilots?
Our collaboration with the GRAPHIA innovators will officially begin during the Innovation Prototyping Lab 2 in Brussels, taking place on 14 September 2026. The GRAPHIA pilots represent graph-based solutions developed to address a broad range of research needs within the social sciences and humanities. Developed by a wide range of stakeholders – from private companies to research teams in public institutions – the projects are at different stages of development. Some are still in the exploration phase, while others already have a viable technology that now needs to be adapted to specific use cases. For the Lab, and for testing the usability of its framework, the greatest challenge lies precisely in this diversity of projects and use cases.
Therefore, to successfully kick off the consultation process with all pilot leaders, we will begin with a structured baseline assessment to be completed by all. Our first step will be to develop a readiness profile for each project or idea to identify its stage of development and, most importantly, the gaps in its product design and implementation plan. To ensure a consistent and comparable assessment across all pilots, we evaluate each project along two dimensions: the maturity of the idea and the evidence supporting it, defining four statuses: Early Exploration, Validated Idea, Technology Seeking a Use Case, and a Ready-For-Deployment Project.
- In the Early Exploration stage, the project team needs support primarily in the Novelty and Utility dimensions, as there is limited evidence demonstrating that their idea addresses real user needs.
- In the case of the Validated Idea, the concept has been sufficiently developed and benchmarked against existing solutions, so the creators primarily need support in the dimensions related to the exploitation phase.
- Technology Seeking a Use Case typically involves an existing technological solution to address a challenge that has not yet been solved. We therefore revisit the ideation and adoption-related dimensions to identify the most suitable application.
- With advanced, Ready-For-Deployment Projects (including alpha or beta versions), we can focus on developing comprehensive exploitation plans, with particular attention to Impact and Collaboration and activities related to Bridging Potential across sectors.
Following the readiness assessment of each idea, we will be able to start a consultation process with guided activities that help address outstanding questions and uncertainties, while taking the first step towards structuring supporting evidence and planning further development. The collaboration between the OPERAS Innovation Lab and the GRAPHIA pilots and use cases will continue throughout the duration of the project. We will keep you posted on our progress and share updates as the work develops!
The author used an AI model to consult the framework, as well as for proofreading and consistency checking.
References:
- Avanço, K., Balula, A., Błaszczyńska, M., Buchner, A., Caliman, L., Clivaz, C., Costa, C., Franczak, M., Gatti, R., Giglia, E., Gingold, A., Jarmelo, S., Padez, M. J., Leão, D., Maryl, M., Melinščak Zlodi, I., Mojsak, K., Morka, A., Mosterd, T., … Wieneke, L. (2021). Future of Scholarly Communication. Forging an inclusive and innovative research infrastructure for scholarly communication in Social Sciences and Humanities. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5017705
- Bakhshi, H., Schneider, P., & Walker, C. (2008). Arts and Humanities Research and Innovation. Arts and Humanities Research Council; National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts.
- Ghazinoory, S., Aghaei, P., Safavi, G., & Safdari Ranjbar, M. (2025). Innovation in humanities and social sciences: Definition, specification, valuation. Quality & Quantity, 59(5), 4305–4339. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-025-02178-8
- Gouzi, F. (2025, marca 11). A New Approach to Evaluating Innovation in Social Sciences and Humanities. OPERAS Innovation Lab Observatory. https://lab.operas-eu.org/2025/03/11/a-new-approach-to-evaluating-innovation-in-social-sciences-and-humanities/
- Gulbrandsen, M., & Aanstad, S. (2015). Is innovation a useful concept for arts and humanities research? Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 14(1), 9–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474022214533890
- Maryl, M., Wnuk, M., Gouzi, F., & Umerle, T. (2024). Guidelines on Publishing and Evaluating Innovative Outputs in Social Sciences and Humanities (OPERAS-PLUS Deliverable 4.1). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14221728