The article presents a yet unexplored framework for analysing the multidimensionality and dis/connections of participatory processes and their outcomes by using the concept of the ‘assemblage’ (DeLanda, 2006). The case is an eight-month collaboration between a task force initiated by Central Denmark Region, the socio-economic company Sager der Samler, and citizens. The collaboration is aimed at bringing together and working across various institutional and user perspectives to act on a societal challenge. The analysis is theoretically based on a review of existing theories of participation and typologies for analysing and evaluating participation. In particu- lar, the analysis focuses on the assemblage approach as a way of acknowledging the institutional, affective, mate- rial and power-related complexity of participatory processes. The assemblage approach helps to analytically stress that the process under investigation should be evaluated both with a more traditional focus on decision-making or power allocation, as well as taking into account the social, personal-affective and material benefits produced, and the potential for change in the relationship between public administration and citizens.
Purpose - This paper reports from a qualitative case study of a change initiative undertaken in a Danish public hospital setting during national healthcare reforms. The purpose of this paper is to challenge understandings of innovations as defined by being value-adding per se. Whether the effects of attempting to innovate are positive or negative is in this paper regarded as a matter of empirical investigation. Design/methodology/approach - Narrative accounts of activities during the change initiative are analysed in order to elucidate the effects of framing the change initiative as innovation on which boundaries are created and crossed. Findings - Framing change initiatives as innovation leads to intended as well as unanticipated boundary crossings where healthcare practitioners from different organizations recognize a shared problem and task. It also leads to unintended boundary reinforcements between "us and them" that may exclude the perspectives of patients or stakeholders when confronting complex problems in healthcare. This boundary reinforcement can lead to further fragmentation of healthcare despite the stated intention to create more integrated services. Practical implications - The paper suggests that researchers as well as practitioners should not presume that intentions to innovate will by themselves enhance creativity and innovation. When analysing the intended, unintended as well as unanticipated consequences of framing change initiatives as innovation, researchers and practitioner gain nuanced knowledge about the effects of intending to innovate in complex settings such as healthcare. Originality/value - This paper suggests the need for an analytical move from studying the effects of innovation to studying the effects of framing complex problems as a call for innovation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.