Search results

The public sector has traditionally been considered inhospitable to innovation, particularly innovations initiated by middle managers and front‐line staff. Unlike the private sector, the public sector is characterized by asymmetric incentives that punish unsuccessful innovations much more severely than they reward successful ones, by the absence of venture capital to seed creative problem solving, and by adverse selection by innovative individuals against public service careers. A growing body of evidence based on applications to innovation awards reveals that, despite this inhospitable environment, frontline public servants and middle managers are responsible for many innovations. In addition, some public sector organizations have consistently produced a large number of innovations. Draws on this evidence to suggest ways of enhancing public sector organizations’ capacity for innovation.

The purpose of this study is examined whether coproduction appears spontaneously in the literature on public sector innovation and governance, the citizens’ role in coproduction and the implication of citizens’ participation in the governance of innovation networks.

The review complied with preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) protocol. The search was performed in the Ebsco, Scopus and WOS databases. The authors analyzed 47 papers published from 2017 to 2022. Thematic and content analysis were adopted, supported by MAXQDA.

The papers recognize the importance of the citizens in public innovation. However, only 20% discuss coproduction, evidencing the predominance of governance concepts related to interorganizational collaborations – but not necessarily to citizen engagement. The authors also verified the existence of polysemy regarding the concept of governance associated with public innovation, predominating the term “collaborative governance.”

The small emphasis on “co-production” may result from the search strategy, which deliberately did not include it as a descriptor, considering the research purpose. One can consider this choice a limitation.

Considering collaborative governance as a governing arrangement where public agencies directly engage nonstate stakeholders in a collective decision-making process that is formal, consensus-oriented and deliberative (Ansell and Gash, 2007), the forum where the citizen is supposed to be engaged should be initiated by public agencies or institutions and formally organized, as suggested by Österberg and Qvist (2020) and Campomori and Casula (2022). These notions can be useful for public managers concerning their role and how the forums structure should be to promote collaboration and the presence of innovation assets needed to make the process fruitful (Crosby et al., 2017).

Despite the collaborative nature of public innovation, the need for adequate governance characteristics, and the importance of citizens in the innovative process, most studies generically address collaborative relationships, focusing on interorganizational collaboration, with little focus on specific actors such as citizens in the governance of public innovation. Thus, it is assumed that the literature that discusses public innovation and governance includes the discussion of coproduction. The originality and contribution of this study is to verify this assumption.

The aim of this chapter is to study innovation in the public sector, to get a better understanding of what is considered as an innovation, to show how that can be measured and to define different types of observed innovations. The chapter addresses to study all significant changes and improvements made within 12 Luxembourg public organizations.

The first part is a literature review with presentation of the key definitions and concepts; it illustrates the themes related to innovation and its measurement in the public sector. The second part presents the methodology applied to 12 Luxembourg public administrations. I based my study on a follow-up interviews conducted in 2008 within certain public organizations, followed by a second phase of satisfaction surveys completed from the rest of the administrations in 2012. I analyzed the results and measured public services’ degree of innovation. I adopted the Australian case of conceptual framework and presented its application into the Luxembourgish context taking into account national problematic in the discussion section. Comments and feedback are directly extracted from the interviews are added in the conclusion.

After analyzing the self-assessment’s final reports of 12 Luxembourg public organizations, my team and I, grouped the areas to innovate in different categories in order to identify the origins of the most recurrent causes. These self-assessment reports have also highlighted the lack of outcome evaluation in public organizations.

This study will help public sector organizations to develop strategies to improve innovation capability. First by implementing the continuous improvement program and second by measuring the public sector innovation, it will help organizations to identify their strengths and weaknesses on various aspects of innovation.

This paper aims to analyze Brazil’s legal and institutional arrangements for the design, implementation and accountability of public procurement for innovation (PPI) and to investigate how this apparatus has been adjusted, modified and even replaced to enable its use in innovation policies.

It is a descriptive analysis of the legal framework for PPI in Brazil supplemented with case reports of ongoing PPI contracts.

Despite the significant advances in the PPI legal framework in Brazil, this instrument’s implementation is still limited. A disconnection between PPI and innovation policy goals and legal-institutional constraints are reasonable answers to this problem.

Law is closely related to the design, implementation and control of public policy tools. However, there is still a tine understanding of how the legal framework can corroborate or constrain new mechanisms to state purchase power, such as PPI.

Public procurement is the most crucial tool of demand-side policies for innovation, and it is implemented according to the legal framework in each country. This paper adds to the law and innovation research agenda, providing an overview of the Brazilian PPI legal framework and how it is going so far.

This study aims to evaluates a public policy program that finances projects for the development of innovative technological solutions. This paper analyzed the influence of human and social capital on the development of the projects, under the perspective of the policy’s effectiveness and efficiency. This specific policy adopted the funding model of economic subsidy by means of grants, which shows the significant engagement of the public sector in applying nonrefundable resources more directly through loans, assuming the role of an entrepreneurial state, according to Mazzucato (2011, 2018) and Tavani and Zamparelli (2020).

This is a quantitative-descriptive study, according to Marconi and Lakatos (2017). This study is descriptive, for presenting information on innovation projects funded by FUNCAP (Ceará Foundation for Support to Scientific and Technological Development). In addition, this study is quantitative, by establishing multivariate relationships among the variables that relate to human capital and social capital, which are relevant to technological and innovative development, and by introducing variables on technological evolution, proposed as measures of the program’s effectiveness (DTRL, MkTRL) and efficiency (ETRL).

This paper sought to contribute on public policies for innovation, more specifically on analyzing variables that may affect the development of technological and innovative projects in knowledge-intensive companies. The authors studied capitals potentially important for these companies in the development of innovative projects. Specifically, the authors sought to understand the importance of human capital and how it reflects in technical and scientific knowledge of the project team and of social capital and how it reflects the connection and social relationship among different team members. The results presented that the degree of efficiency of the public funding program depends on how much the teams of the benefited projects have accumulated knowledge, skills and technical capacities – the so-called teams’ human capital.

It is important to address the research sample as a research limitation, which had 72 responses obtained, from a submission rate of 284. Another study limitation is on the qualitative analysis of the topics addressed from the companies and policymakers perspectives, considering that the quantitative nature of the study does not allow for a deeper understanding of the qualitative perspective of the actors involved in the phenomenon studied. As recommendations for future studies, it is suggested to conduct qualitative studies on the aspects studied here. In this sense, it is possible to conduct case studies for specific companies, or policymakers, to clarify and deepen the relationships between the themes addressed here.

As for the practical implications of the research, both for managers of public funding programs and for company managers, the benefits of human capital, related to innovative project development teams, are important in programs that deal with technological development projects. In practice, this means that the greater the human capital of academic background of the members of the supported project teams, the more efficient the projects are in the process of developing their technologies by using the resources provided (Ashford, 2000; Chen et al., 2008; Lerro et al., 2014).

Hence, the authors conclude that the evaluated innovation-funding program through grants achieved acceptable results in terms of promoting the technological evolution of the benefited projects and bringing the technologies closer to the market. Its efficiency was the least favorable result, showing that the program needs to focus on improving this specific aspect. Within the investigated program, the issue that needs enhancement (efficiency – ETRL) was the one that presented significant relationships with the human and social capital of the benefited projects’ teams. Thus, it is possible that, by selecting more projects that have teams with high capital, the efficiency of the public policy, in this case the development of projects with high technological and innovative potential, will be possibly reached.

The findings strengthen the need for innovation public policies designed and implemented in a systemic way in the science, technology and innovation ecosystem, to provide a technological infrastructure and human capital necessary for developing projects with high technological and innovative potential (Ergas, 1987; Audretsch and Link, 2012; Caloghirou et al., 2015; Edler and Fagerberg, 2017; Silvio et al., 2019).

This study examines the critical factors contributing to the different conditions of innovation sustainability after a change in local political leadership.

This study used a multiple case study approach and applied the critical incident technique (CIT) to collect and analyze data from four innovation cases in the two local governments of Indonesia.

The results highlight that the sustainability condition of each innovation after the political regime change is determined by multiple critical factors.

First, the data collected through interviews may contain a memory bias. Second, this study was limited to local governments and did not consider innovation taxonomies.

The study implies that in order to sustain innovation, public leaders must support innovation legitimacy as a new organizational structure; thus, it can be more durable in the long term. In addition, public leaders need to minimize innovation politicization by authorizing bureaucrats to autonomously manage innovation operationalization.

Public leaders need to pay careful attention to their innovation sustainability because a non-sustained policy can disappoint the individuals working for it, losing their trust and enthusiasm. This dissatisfaction could become a barrier to mobilizing support for the following policies.

Innovation sustainability is a new theme that is overlooked in the public sector innovation literature. Therefore, investigations using different methods and contexts are required, as this study offers. This study also demonstrated the value of CIT in identifying critical factors affecting innovation sustainability in the context of political leadership change.

Institutional, economic, social and technological advancements enable openness to cope with wicked public management issues. Although open innovation (OI) is becoming a new normality for public sector entities, scholarly knowledge on this topic is not fully systematized. The article fills this gap, providing a thick and integrative account of OI to inspire public management decisions.

Following the SPAR-4-SLR protocol, a domain-based literature review has been accomplished. Consistently with the study purpose, a hybrid methodology has been designed. Bibliographic coupling permitted us to discover the research streams populating the scientific debate. The core arguments addressed within and across the streams were reported through an interpretive approach.

Starting from an intellectual core of 94 contributions, 5 research streams were spotted. OI in the public sector unfolds through an evolutionary path. Public sector entities conventionally acted as “senior partners” of privately-owned companies, providing funding (yellow cluster) and data (purple cluster) to nurture OI. An advanced perspective envisages OI as a public management model purposefully enacted by public sector entities to co-create value with relevant stakeholders (red cluster). Fitting architectures (green cluster) and mechanisms (blue cluster) should be arranged to release the potential of OI in the public sector.

The role of public sector entities in enacting OI should be revised embracing a value co-creation perspective. Tailored organizational interventions and management decisions are required to make OI a reliable and dependable public value generation model.

The article originally systematizes the scholarly knowledge about OI, presenting it as a new normality for public value generation.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a comprehensive analysis of Indonesia’s public service innovation drawn from the top 99 nominees of the national competition for public service innovation from 2014 to 2016.

To answer the research question, this study applied archival research as a research strategy. A documentation method was conducted to collect the data. Using content analysis aided by NVivo 11 this study analyzes the following themes: implementing agencies, innovation types, innovation goals, innovation outcomes, policy sector in which innovation implemented and geographical perspective.

The public service innovation in Indonesia from 2014 to 2016 were dominated by local government and process innovation in which designates to the amalgamation of technological and administrative dimensions of innovation. The most occurrence outcomes were aimed to tackling societal problems in the health and education sector. Whilst in the geographical perspective, big portion of innovation were taking place in Java Island.

The result of this study is mainly based on secondary data drawing from public service innovation competition held by the Indonesian Ministry of Administrative Reform. Consequently, the result is limited to provide a mapping feature and trends of innovation. Future research may use more extensive samples (not only sourced from the nominees but also all submitted initiatives) to obtain more representation of public service innovation in Indonesia.

Given the fact that lack of collaboration between public and private actors, the government needs to consider on designing strategies and policy direction to foster collaboration in public service innovation.

This research offers a comprehensive analysis on Indonesian public service innovation. Methodologically, the research introduces archival research as one of the alternative research strategies on public sector innovation scholarships.

The purpose of this paper is to better understand whether firm cooperation and absorptive capacity foster success in seeking public financial support for innovation activities and, by doing so, how they contribute to innovation output.

The authors therefore extend the existing literature focusing on the effects of cooperation and absorptive capacity on specific public financial support for innovation activities in Portuguese firms from local or regional government, central administration and the European Union by using available data from the Community Innovation Survey CIS 2010 and the application of logistic regression models. The empirical analysis enabled a better understanding of the positive relationship of the variables that determine the form of public financial support in the integration of incentives within firms to stimulate innovation.

Therefore, as the level of absorptive capacity in Portuguese firms increases, so does the demand for benefits from public financial support to stimulate innovation from the European Union also increases. The same analysis, now considering the determinant cooperation, notes the positive effects of institutional sources of information and cooperation, in the propensity for seeking public financial incentives from the Central Administration and the European Union. As for internal information and cooperation sources, they are positively related to the integration of incentive measures from the local or Regional Administration and Central Administration.

The paper presents results that allow us to propose some suggestions that both the firms and those responsible for the implementation of public policies can undertake to increment innovation performance.

The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of New Public Management (NPM) reforms/practices on innovation in public sector organizations. Although much is written on NPM, the assumption that NPM reforms stimulate organizational innovation has not been empirically tested. The present study is an attempt to bridge this research gap.

Building on open-systems approach, institutional theory, and innovation research, this study argues that organizational innovation occurs in response to stimuli in the external (environmental factors) and internal environment (organizational factors), considering NPM reforms/practices as a proxy for external or environmental factors. Organizational factors include formal structural complexity, senior management support and job security. The study tests this model using data from a national survey conducted in five states in the US.

The study provides empirical insights into our understanding of the factors that drive innovation in public sector organizations. The study finds that although environmental factors are as significant as organizational factors in driving innovation in the public sector, senior management support remains the most important predictor of innovation.

This paper fulfils an identified need to study the effect of NPM reforms and practices on innovation in public organizational settings.