Search results

Public entrepreneurship is increasingly being propounded as a key means of ‘doing more with less’ during the tough times associated with successive rounds of neoliberal restructuring and austerity. The primary aim of this chapter is to provide a critical-exploratory review of sponsorship – a disruptive interjection or particular form of public entrepreneurship.

Public entrepreneurship provides a useful theoretical frame for exploring some emergent ways of delivering public services in a post-Credit Crunch global operating environment. Empirical insights are derived from a single local authority in the United Kingdom.

There is a widespread concern that straitened economic conditions can engender the prevalence of short-term financial considerations at the expense of other objectives. Sponsorship, as a discrete form of public entrepreneurship in some circumstances has the potential to achieve multiple objectives, enriching public value. However, this is contingent of specific contextual factors.

By identifying some risks associated with disruptive interjections intended to open new paths for the sponsorship of public services as well as indicating some opportunities for risk reduction, it is hoped that our analysis may benefit public authorities when they are exploring or evaluating sponsorship ‘opportunities’.

Examining sponsorship through a public entrepreneurship conceptual frame has received limited research attention. Whether sponsorship is a ‘winning solution’ is contingent on the particular form of sponsorship as well as the specific time and place.

This chapter introduces the two main topics of ‘entrepreneurial policing’ and ‘criminal entrepreneurship’ and begins in Section 1.1 by considering the concept and scope of entrepreneurial policing around which this monograph is organised. Its definition and ontological development are considered. Thereafter, the author briefly discuss what entrepreneurship is (and is not) and set out examples of entrepreneurship of interest to policing, including – ‘Corporate’ and ‘Team’ Entrepreneurship, ‘Intrapreneurship’, ‘Social Entrepreneurship and Animateurship’, ‘Civic Entrepreneurship’, and ‘Public Service Entrepreneurship’. The author then discusses why entrepreneurship is of critical importance to the police service and discuss worked examples. Having developed a basic understanding of the power and utility of entrepreneurship, then in more detail what the term entrepreneurial policing means and how it evolved in practice and in the academic literature are considered. In Section 1.2, the foundations of entrepreneurial policing considering its ontological and epistemological development from ‘New Public Management’ to ‘New Entrepreneurialism’ and also the influence of the merging literatures of ‘Criminal Entrepreneurship’ and ‘Entrepreneurial Leadership’ are critically examined. In Section 1.3, our consideration to include a more nuanced understanding of the what is referred to as the ‘Entrepreneurship–Policing Nexus’ including consideration of the influence of dyslexia on policing and crime and the power of the ‘Entrepreneurial’ and ‘Gangster’ dreams on entrepreneurial motivation and propensity are expanded. In Section 1.4, an attempt is made to identify who the stakeholders of this new policing philosophy are? Finally, in Section 1.5, the chapter takeaway points which both articulates and confirms the inherent importance of entrepreneurship in policing and criminal contexts are discussed and detailed.

The interest in entrepreneurship in the public sector is recognized as an emergent phenomenon in the field of entrepreneurship. Existing theoretical work is limited in helping understand how entrepreneurship in public agencies occurs. The paper aims to discuss this issue.

This is a conceptual paper which develops the literature.

Building on the work of Klein et al. (2010) this paper contributes to theoretical development by providing an overview of public sector entrepreneurship (PSE). Although, there are similar features shared by private and PSE, it is proposed that there are significant differences between them, particularly in that public sector enterprise can be seen as entrepreneurship without entrepreneurs.

As a conceptual paper on PSE the literature is predominantly UK based.

This paper brings entrepreneurship from the periphery to the core of the theoretical debates, as it is an under-researched area. Moreover, theoretical development has implications for policy and practice as existing research is disparate.

The paper considers how entrepreneurship and enterprise in the public sector is formulated. The significance of the paper is to highlight the importance of public entrepreneurs in working alongside a multitude of stakeholders to deal with numerous global and internal environment forces ethically amongst on-going budgetary and fiscal constraints. The contribution is the highlighting of the difficulties and concerns when uniting the discourse of market-based entrepreneurship and the discourse of public sector service provision.

As entrepreneurship and market mechanisms are increasingly seen as a central part of public sector reforms to health and education, this chapter examines the entrepreneurial behaviour of public service providers in rural areas of the United Kingdom. Specific questions to be addressed include: How do rural providers (GPs, hospitals, schools) respond to the ‘market’ for provision of public services in rural areas? What are the constraints in acting entrepreneurially in these rural ‘markets’?

This chapter draws on a review of the literature and an empirical study of health care providers and schools with an emphasis on provision in rural areas and non-metropolitan urban areas. The results are based on 130 interviews with public, private and not-for-profit sector providers, and commissioners in health and education. Providers interviewed include schools, primary health care providers (General practitioners) and hospitals.

The challenges facing rural provision are examined. In terms of income generation providers reported the difficulties in having the critical mass required to keep services viable. There was particular attention to finding ways of diversifying income sources to increase turnover. Providers for rural areas are also having to find ways of coping with increased costs compared to urban providers, with limited account taken by the commissioners/buyers of services. The constraints related to introducing entrepreneurial behaviour to individuals who are resistant to risk taking and innovation based on market forces are also examined.

The work is based on a qualitative survey of a number of sectors. Further larger sample work is required to explore the propositions identified in more detail. The policy context has also been changing, with a need to identify how changes in government have affected the nature of entrepreneurship in public services.

The chapter provides policy implications and insights for providers of rural public services. There is a need to encourage diversity of income sources and to encourage collaboration between providers. There is also a need to identify where entrepreneurs in the public, private and social enterprise sectors are unwilling to deliver.

The chapter identifies key theoretical issues related to the role of enterprise in delivering public services. Further insights are provided regarding the role of rurality on both enterprise behaviour and public service delivery.

The purpose of this chapter is to introduce the concept of public business models and develop a theory for the process of developing and managing public business models.

This research synthesizes insights from various fields into a set of theoretical ideas that lay out what public business models are, to what extent they differ from commercial/industrial business models, and how they are developed and managed by public entrepreneurs.

Developing and managing a business model is an entrepreneurial task that has been missing from the public entrepreneurship literature. Public entrepreneurs perform these tasks using public and private resources, leveraging public institutional systems, and developing capabilities that differ in several dimensions from private entrepreneurs due to the nature of public goods and existence of quasi-markets where public business models are developed and used.

This chapter opens new avenues for research in public entrepreneurship by suggesting that (1) public business models form the foundation of public entrepreneurship, (2) public business models differ from commercial business models not in their functionality but rather in their scope and design, and (3) public business models co-evolve with public institutions to maintain their legitimacy and value creation potential.

This chapter equips public entrepreneurs with new insights into enterprising behaviors and the dynamism of value creation and capture in public ventures.

The current study represents the first attempt to directly incorporate the notion of business models into the public entrepreneurship literature.

In the past decade, the concept and theory of “Entrepreneurial Policing” has emerged in academic and policing circles, particularly in a UK context. The purpose of this paper is to collect salient articles from extant but diverse literatures such as policing and criminology to synthesise a literature on it, focussing upon conceptual, theoretical and practical elements.

The approach is based on synthesising a literature using an in-depth review methodology and on analysing it to develop new insights into theoretical elements.

The findings are that the literature base is diverse and comes from a variety of policing, criminology, entrepreneurship, management, leadership and policy journals. There is a protean literature but at present little conceptual or theoretical clarity.

There is a need for further empirical research in the form of qualitative face-to-face interviews to be conducted to develop typologies, taxonomies and topographies of entrepreneurial policing (EP). Developing illustrative case studies and teaching cases will educate new generations of police officers into the power and potential of EP as a change agent. This necessitates a change of policing structures, philosophies, processes and practices. From such theoretical groundwork, it is possible at a universal theory of what constitutes EP can be developed and tested. There is a need for commissioned research into the potentially revolutionary phenomenon; a text book and for training courses and seminars on the topic.

There are a number of practical implications for policing and policy practitioners and for its application in the future. From a policing perspective, an increased awareness of EP and criminal entrepreneurship can have positive outcomes in terms of new policing structures, philosophies, methodologies, practices and processes. From a criminal perspective, it heralds a better understanding of entrepreneurial crime, entrepreneurial criminals and organised crime groups. This could result in entrepreneurship educational programmes for police officers, senior officers and other law enforcement personnel and entrepreneurship awareness training for prisoners and ex-offenders and new avenues for utilising entrepreneurship as a diversion out of crime.

There are also a number of social implications including the need for policy makers and politicians to be aware of the policing–entrepreneurship nexus and to award financial grants to encourage enterprising behaviour across the criminal justice system; encourage entrepreneurs to give back to their local communities; and increase the number of social enterprises in under-privileged communities.

This review is the first of its kind to deal specifically with EP and its evolution.

To examine and account for an innovative project bid and delivery partnership by a fire and rescue service in an area (Eastern European migrant integration) usually thought to be beyond its remit. An interpretation of the findings will be based on public value theory.

The study examines three sets of conditions: national and local political and economic environments facilitating the grant bid and its success; a history of safety and safeguarding work by a specific fire and rescue service that made the bid plausible and leadership of the FRS in constructing both bid (for funding) and turning that into a delivery partnership. Methods included a focused analysis of existing academic work and government reports, observation of partnership meetings, interviews and a focus group.

That the success of the funding bid and delivery of objectives can be explained in terms of national government funding decisions relating to migrant integration; the recognition both locally and nationally that the specific FRS had the capacity, because of previous innovative partnership work, to manage all aspects of a sub-regional partnership; the ability of the FRS to manage the delivery of partnership objectives over a two year period; that the project realised a range of public value outcomes. It generated a range of public value outcomes. Individual managers took risks and worked ‘beyond authority’ but the partnership that they built and maintained was the principal entrepreneurial agent.

The findings may have implications for the reconfiguration of sub-regional public service delivery.

The chapter is a study of a successful innovative, fire and rescue service led public sector partnership creating public value outcomes.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the motivations behind public sector spin outs, focusing on the Right to Request policy, which enabled NHS staff to set up their own social enterprises to deliver healthcare services.

The paper draws on empirical data gathered from 16 in‐depth interviews with individuals who had led a Right to Request proposal.

Motivations to spin out of the NHS into a social enterprise were often “empathetic” in nature, built around the good of the service for staff and users. Alongside this, some felt “pushed” out of the NHS as a result of government restructuring policy, with social enterprise offering the only hope to survive as an organisation.

The study captures a particular point in time and there may be other perspectives that have not been included.

The paper is of use to academics, policy makers and practitioners. It provides an important contribution in thinking about how to motivate public sector staff, especially those from a health profession, to consider spinning out into social enterprises.

The paper is the first to look at the motivations of healthcare spin outs through the Right to Request programme. The findings are related to previous literature on social entrepreneurship within public sector settings.

Is public entrepreneurship an oxymoron? Why and how is enterprise/entrepreneurship important for public service delivery? The growing role of enterprise within the public sector has been the subject of much recent debate and policy focus, surrounding issues such as public value, meeting targets, and the need for innovation across public services by policy makers and managers given rapid reduction of budgets in this sector. This chapter reflects on these developments and examines the effects that an enterprise focus in the public services has in terms of vocation. Drawing on the Weberian notion of vocation (1941) in politics and the sciences, what does enterprise mean for the notion of public service? Certainly, historically the public services have enjoyed a strong vocational drive from its workforce, resulting in employee loyalty, and links with communities as well as higher levels of public trust than politicians or bankers, for example. The chapter draws on examples from education, public services and localism, all of which have seen to some degree the parachuting of managers in from the private sector or the aping of these behaviours and cultures in search of more entrepreneurial delivery. Drawing on the Weberian framework of bureaucracy and vocation, the chapter examines the changing role of public service and notions of community and duty, arguably damaged by failures of the Big Society agenda (Shand & Higman, 2014; Smith, 2010) and examines if and how enterprise can maintain the ethos of public service and vocational areas of the public sector in the enduring and pressurised new public management environment of meeting targets and value metrics.

The chapter adopts a Weberian approach in terms of vocation, and applies this concept to the notion of enterprise across the public services. The vocation approach in the public services, drawing upon Weber’s discussion of politics and science, underpins our discussion in this chapter as we argue that the role of innovation needs to be more widely applied and appreciated in the public services.

The chapter finds that examples of innovative behaviour and delivery are evident across the public services, but these need to be understood within the context of culture, values and ethos. These underpinning goals, across several frontline and first respondent public services particularly, are driven by dedication to duty and having to respond to rapid changes in targets, ‘customer’ service, and most recently, austerity. These responses need to be seen as innovative traits, linked to leadership and the Weberian notion of vocation.

The chapter raises several issues driven by failures or mistrust in the practical delivery and underpinning ethos of the public services. The focus on ethos has direct implications for both leadership within the public services and how these leaders’ roles and actions are interpreted by sections of wider society such as the media or the public. Notions of public trust are touched upon in the chapter, which highlight the role of key public services as different from the activities of politicians and bankers, areas which have become central to growing attitudes of mistrust among the public. The notion of vocation in the chapter is applicable to the practical arena as the role of innovation in public service needs to be reconsidered. The chapter suggests that, to date, the idea of innovation in public services has been driven by private sector innovation, and this has led to far too narrow an appreciation of what we term innovation within and across the public services.

This chapter unites debates around trust and innovation in the public and private sectors with the Weberian ideal of vocation, drawing upon key public services and their leadership and delivery to argue that we need to understand the drivers and motivating ethos behind the public services when we consider the role of innovation and indeed how we understand and apply this term within public service delivery.

The purpose of this paper is to adapt the research conducted on subclinical psychopaths in the private sector and applies it to the public sector to build a conceptual frame for further research on subclinical psychopaths in public organisations. General characteristics of entrepreneurs often run counter to democratic values, and are more often aligned with private sector values. Public managers who display one of the dark-triad personalities, i.e., psychopathy, can pose a greater threat to democratic values and the state.

The approach of this paper is theoretical with the aim of proposing a conceptual framework that utilises Downs’ five types of officials governing bureaucracies, to illustrate a relationship between public entrepreneurs and subclinical psychopaths.

The conceptual framework presented in this paper suggests that psychopathic entrepreneurs can be identified within Downs’ bureaucratic framework specifically as climbers (due to inherent personality traits) and as zealots (heroic and altruistic behaviour for organisational causes, yet motivated by power, domination, and self-interest). The implications of psychopathic public managers who engage in entrepreneurial activities may be escalating public distrust, hostility, and dissatisfaction in government.

This theoretical paper adds to the growing body of criticism for public entrepreneurship by conceptualising how psychopaths, as climbers and zealots, affect public trust in terms of accountability and democratic values.