Search results

There is still no universal definition of the third sector in Europe, but it can be seen as including all types of non-governmental not-for-profit entities such as non-profit organizations, mutuals, cooperatives, social enterprises and foundations. This article attempts to make sense of the current shifting conceptualization of the third sector in Europe. It is based on short country summaries of the images and concepts of the third sector in 13 European countries by EMES Network’s members, first presented in 2008 (Defourny and Pestoff, 2008; nine of them were recently revised and are found in the appendix to this article.). The perception and development of the third sector in Europe is closely related to the other major social governance institutions/mechanisms, like the market, state and community and through the third sector’s interaction with them. Moreover, many third sector organizations (TSOs) overlap with these other social institutions, resulting in varying degrees of hybridity and internal tensions experienced by them. TSOs can generate resources from their activities on the market, by providing services in partnership with the state and/or by promoting the interests of a given community or group. The country overviews document a growing professionalization of TSOs in most countries and a growing dependency of public funds to provide services. This has important theoretical and practical implications for orienting the articles included in this book. Thus, it can provide a key for better understanding the discussion and analysis in the remainder of this volume.

This chapter aims to contribute to the literature on sustainability in the public sector by discussing how human resource and human resource management can help to integrate environmental management into organizations and improve environmental performance. Public sector scholars have neglected the study of Green Human Resource Management (GHRM) until now. Nevertheless, implementing such practices could lead to positive outcomes regarding awareness of environmental issues, organizational reputation and attractiveness, job satisfaction and organizational performance. The authors discuss the relevance and the necessity of developing a field of research on GHRM in public organizations. Starting from a conceptual review of the main literature on GHRM, this chapter provided some directions for future research.

This chapter addresses the potential for knowledge, learning, and collaboration (KLC) cultures in public sector organizations. Public sector organizations are among the most complex for introducing or nourishing a KLC approach because there are multiple levels of cultures with varying levels of influence. We describe these complex cultures as tiers. First, we define public sector organizations’ business goals, purpose, and strategies. Then, the authors translate and interpret all five levels of culture for public sector organizations. The chapter also details the nature of cultural complexity, namely the four tiers of public sector cultures: (1) the company culture (Tier 1); (2) the public service culture (Tier 2); (3) the culture of the external environment (Tier 3); and (4) the internal KLC cultures (Tier 4). This chapter establishes a framework for describing an organization’s complex culture and determining the best KLC approach for the context.

Heritage assets (HAs) are important goods or properties that define a country’s culture, history, and identity. Public sector entities are the primary custodians of a nation’s heritage properties; however, many local museums and historic houses are managed by private not-for-profit (NFP) organisations that essentially act to conserve these heritage places.

Through a documentary analysis, this chapter aims to investigate the points of convergence and the differences between accounting policies for governmental heritage and private NFP organisations.

The study demonstrates that even private NFP entities present the same characteristics as public sector ones in the accounting of heritage goods and that there are certain accounting standards being equally applicable; therefore, the accounting policies for governmental heritage are in accordance with the accounting policies for NFP organisations such as museums, art galleries, charities, churches, for their heritage goods.

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.

An examination of the commonalities and differences between performance management practices in the public and private sector.

A literature review of 100 publications in international academic journals over the last 20 years.

The chapter develops a framework which links the dimensions of the public/private-distinction (ownership, funding, control and type of goals) to the design and use of performance management systems (PMS). This framework subsequently informs a literature review, which can be summarised as follows: Multi-dimensionality of the PMS is core in both public and private sector organisations, but quite many private sector papers point to a financial focus at the top of the PMS, while public sector organisations show a broad variety of performance indicators, including those on societally relevant goals. In addition, a link between the PMS and strategies can be found in the public and the private sector, but the match between different strategies and PMS design is more elaborated in the private sector. These findings are largely in accordance with our expectations. The review also finds support for the assumption that performance information in public sector organisations is primarily used for external accountability reasons, while internal managerial control is the main purpose in private firms. The use of performance information is quite intensive and mostly functional in both sectors, which does not meet our expectations. Overall, the differences between performance management practices in the public and private sector are less stringent than expected.

Due to limited evidence about the importance of performance-related pay systems and no evidence about targeting in both sectors, a more focused literature review on these issues would be desirable.

Mutual learning between both sectors, for example the public sector can learn from the private sector on how to link strategy to the PMS and the private sector can learn from the public sector about serving a multitude of stakeholders in the PMS.

A comprehensive review of performance management practices in the public and private sector.

This book chapter uses structuration theory and aims to study cross-sectoral collaborations for co-creating public value and their implications in terms of the role and the relationships of the public sector with the private and third sector.

Our research is exploratory and our main research question is: What are the modalities of structuration of cross-sectoral collaborations for co-creating public value? Our analysis is based on a multiple case study analyses conducted in the region of Trentino – South Tyrol (Italy), and it draws on primary and secondary data collected through six extensive semi-structured interviews and documentary analysis on about fifty organizations participating in six cross-sectoral collaborations. We found that the co-creation of public value led public organizations to structure cross-sectoral collaborations involving private and third-sector organizations, but preexistent structures of signification, domination, and legitimation hampered the public sector as a whole to fully democratically meta-govern the modalities of structuration.

The chapter provides insights for practice by highlighting the elements of structuration theory as a useful framework of analysis for decision-making of public managers involved in cross-sectoral collaborations. Research implications deal with using structuration theory and critical approaches at a macrolevel (e.g., the role of the public sector as a whole) within public management studies.

This study examines the association between the use of a package of contemporary and a package of traditional management accounting practices with organizational change and organizational performance.

Data were collected based on a mail survey distributed to a sample of 740 public sector organizations.

The findings indicate that while the prevalence of traditional practices is still dominant, such practices were not associated with organizational change or performance. Rather, those organizations that use contemporary management accounting practices to a greater extent experienced greater change and stronger performance.

The findings suggest that contemporary management accounting practices can assist public sector practitioners in improving performance and promoting organizational change.

The study provides an empirical insight into the use and effectiveness of management accounting practices in the public sector. The study provides the first empirical analysis of the effect of using a package of management accounting practices in the public sector.