Search results

Coproduction is both a recurrent way of organizing public services and a maturing academic field. The academic debate has analyzed several facets, but one deserves further analysis: its impact on the cost efficiency of public services. The purpose of this paper is to aim at systematizing the findings on the relationship between coproduction and cost efficiency and at developing insights for future research.

This paper is based on a structured literature review (SLR), following the approach proposed by Massaro, Dumay and Guthrie. The SLR approach differs from traditional narrative reviews since, like other meta-analysis methods, it adopts a replicable and transparent process. At the same time, when compared to most common meta-analysis or systematic review logics, it is better suited to incorporate evidence from case studies and etnographies. This makes the method especially suited to public administration and management studies.

Results shed light on the nature of the academic literature relating coproduction to cost efficiency, on what type of costs are affected and how and on the meaningfulness of productivity measures when public services are co-produced.

In times of fiscal distress for many governments, the paper contributes to research and practice in systematically re-assessing the effects of coproduction on public budgets.

Follower's individual differences have been receiving increased attention in studying destructive leadership because followers may enable or disable it. One of these yet under-researched features is the role of followers' leadership coproduction beliefs (a role construal) in explaining their resistance to destructive leaders. Departing from the proactive motivation theory, this paper explores the robustness of coproduction beliefs by testing its ability to predict followers' resistance to destructive leaders across four situations – abusive supervision, exploitative leadership, organization directed behaviors and laissez-faire.

With a sample of 359 participants that answered a scenario-based survey, the present study tests the relationship between coproduction beliefs and resistance behaviors in the four mentioned groups, while controlling for alternative explanations. A multigroup analysis was conducted with PLS-SEM.

Constructive resistance is always favored by coproduction beliefs independently of the leader's type of destructive behavior. Dysfunctional resistance, however, is sensitive to the leader's type of destructive behavior.

This paper extends knowledge on the role of coproduction beliefs as an individual-based resource against destructive leaders.

In coproduction, citizens may be confronted with a conflict between creating user value and a more collective understanding of public value creation. In order to deal with conflicts experienced as trade-off situations, coproducers follow various coping strategies leading to different results. This study aims to gain insight into what drives the choices for coping strategies, which are valuable for understanding the role of citizen coproducers in public value creation.

This article studies the effects of citizens' external efficacy and trust in public servants on citizen coproducers' preferences for coping strategies. The study presents a vignette experiment among n = 257 citizens involved in the temporary use of vacant spaces in Flanders, Belgium.

No statistically significant effects of external efficacy and trust in public servants on respondents' preferences for coping strategies are found. The results show that irrespective of the level of external efficacy or trust in public servants, citizen coproducers prefer to ask for help from the public servant involved in the project.

This result draws attention to the need for facilitation and guidance from public servants and the servants' organizations to help citizen coproducers balance out these otherwise paralyzing value conflicts. Moreover, the lack of statistically significant effects of trust and external efficacy is a valuable finding for literature. The result shows that, in the drivers of coproduction behavior, there is no consistent relationship between citizen trust in government or external efficacy and coproduction behavior.

The purpose of this co-produced research project was to conduct interviews with people working in, volunteering with and accessing Canadian recovery colleges (RCs) to explore their perspectives on what an evaluation strategy for RCs could look like.

This study used a participatory action research approach and involved semistructured interviews with 29 people involved with RCs across Canada.

In this paper, the authors share insights from participants about the purposes of RC evaluation; key elements of evaluation; and the most applicable and effective approaches to evaluation. Participants indicated that RC evaluations should use a personalized, humanistic and accessible approach. The findings suggest that evaluations can serve multiple purposes and have the potential to support both organizational and personal-recovery goals if they are developed with meaningful input from people who access and work in RCs.

The findings can be used to guide evaluations in which aspects that are most important to those involved in RCs could inform choices, decisions, priorities, developments and adaptations in RC evaluation processes and, ultimately, in programming.

A recent scoping review revealed that although coproduction is a central feature of the RC model, coproduction principles are rarely acknowledged in descriptions of how RC evaluation strategies are developed. Exploring coproduction processes in all aspects of the RC model, including evaluation, can further the mission of RCs, which is to create spaces where people can come together and engage in mutual capacity-building and collaboration.

The purpose of this polyphonic paper is to report on interdisciplinary discussions on the state-of-the-art and future of public sector accounting research (PSAR). The authors hope to enliven the debates of the past and future developments in terms of context, themes, theories, methods and impacts in the field of PSAR by the exchanges they include here.

This polyphonic paper adopts an interdisciplinary approach. It brings into conversation ideas, views and approaches of several scholars on the actual and future developments of PSAR in various contexts, and explores potential implications.

This paper has brought together scholars from a plurality of disciplines, research methods and geographical areas, showing at the same time several points of convergence on important future themes (such as accounting as a mean for public, accounting, hybridity and value pluralism) and enabling conditions (accounting capabilities, profession and digitalisation) for PSA scholarship and practice, and the richness of looking at them from a plurality of perspectives.

Exploring these past and future developments opens up the potential for interesting theoretical insights. A much greater theoretical and practical reconsideration of PSAR will be fostered by the exchanges included here.

In setting out a future research agenda, this paper fosters theoretical and methodological pluralism in the interdisciplinary research community interested in PSAR in various contexts. The discussion perspectives presented in this paper constitute not only a basis for further research in this relevant accounting area on the role, status and developments of PSAR but also creative potential for practitioners to be more reflective on their practices and also intended and united outcomes of such practices.

Quality improvement has developed and spread, and today, all Swedish Regions emphasize that their strategies are based on systematic improvement. This paper aims to describe and illuminate the development of Quality Improvement (QI) in Swedish healthcare and welfare organizations by using publications in a Swedish context.

The overview synthesis is inspired by a scoping literature review approach of relevant literature. All publications relevant to Swedish healthcare and welfare settings between 1992 until 2020 were included.

In all, 213 papers, 29 books and chapters and 34 dissertations related to QI and research in Swedish healthcare and welfare context were identified. From 2011 to 2020, the publication rate increased rapidly. Six different focus areas emerged: systematic and value-creating improvement work; collaboration between organizations and healthcare providers; use of improvement methods and (theoretical) models; leadership and learning; measurements, quality registers and follow-up; and involvement and patient safety. Further QI development in Swedish healthcare and welfare points to an increased importance of collaboration between organizations and coproduction with beneficiaries for the healthcare and welfare services.

This paper is one of the first to describe and illuminate the QI development in the healthcare and welfare sector in a country. The trajectory also points to a need for coproduction to handle future challenges.

Technological advancements and global societal changes reshapes manufacturing industry emphasizing needs for competence development of industrial professionals. The purpose of this paper is to study how organizational learning supports the development of academic structures, creating agile and sustainable formal educational models meeting novel competence needs.

The qualitative case study, part of a longitudinal research study, focuses on internal academic processes supporting a new formal educational model. Qualitative data was collected through five focus groups, incorporating 32 informants from different HEI function categories.

Changing traditional academic structures requires joint engagement between all HEI functions, emphasizing organizational learning with subprocesses of searching, creating, sustaining and exchanging knowledge in a learning loop. Results show a consensus among the different HEI functions regarding the value of the HEI’s coproduction with society; however, bureaucracy and academic structure hinder flexibility. Cross-functional teams building a “chain-of-trust” throughout the HEI coupled with full management support show opportunities to progress into a learning organization.

Organizational learning within HEIs requires trustful and open communication, multifunction knowledge exchange, holistic views of processes and system thinking, achieved through cross-functional teams and continuous improvement through learning loops.

Industry-academic collaboration on formal education for lifelong learning needs to become both agile and resilience to meet technological advancement and sustainability.

Novel technology, digitalization and sustainability gain ground and require that society and organizations, including academia, change and learn. This means that academia is meeting new challenges and needs to develop internal processes.