Between bricolage and breakthroughs—framing the many faces of public sector innovation

Bugge, Markus M.; Bloch, Carter

doi:10.1080/09540962.2016.1162599

Cited by 63 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 21 publications

(27 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Arundel, Casali, & Hollanders, 2015; Clausen, Demircioglu, & Alsos, 2020), the MEPIN project (Measuring Public Innovation in the Nordic Countries) (e.g. Bloch & Bugge, 2013; Bugge & Bloch, 2016), and the State of Employee Surveys in the Australian government (e.g. Demircioglu & Audretsch, 2019, 2020; Torugsa & Arundel, 2016a, 2016b) has facilitated the increase in studies in recent years.…”

Section: Public Sector Innovation: State Of the Fieldmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public sector innovation in the Asia‐pacific trends, challenges, and opportunities

Wal

Demircioğlu

2020

Aust J Public Adm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public organizations face a multitude of challenges that force them to innovate existing processes, policies, programs, and products. Indeed, in recent years, innovation has become a core topic of study in public administration. However, the vast majority of the public sector innovation literature stems from the United States and Western Europe. The lack of Asia‐Pacific studies is particularly striking given that countries like Australia, China, Japan, New Zealand, South Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan consistently rank high on public sector innovation. This special issue brings together state of the art empirical research on public sector innovation in the Asia‐Pacific region that examines a range of drivers and outcomes of innovation, including studies comparing Asia‐Pacific countries and countries in the East and the West. The findings show that public sector employees in the studied countries all seek opportunities to innovate, whereas cultural norms and values either constrain or enable innovative behaviour and affect the extent to which employees experience leadership support for displaying such behaviour.

show abstract

Section: Public Sector Innovation: State Of the Fieldmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public sector innovation in the Asia‐pacific trends, challenges, and opportunities

Wal

Demircioğlu

2020

Aust J Public Adm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In many parts of the world, public sector organizations are faced with the growing needs of social programs to address health, inequality, and aging issues, while at the same time experiencing severe resource constraints. In response, there is considerable interest in how governments may become more innovative in addressing such challenges (Arundel, Casali, & Hollanders, 2015;Borins, 2008;Osborne & Brown, 2011;Hartley, Sørensen, & Torfing, 2013;Bugge & Bloch, 2016;Demircioglu, 2017;Demircioglu & Audretsch, 2017). However, despite such interest, prior research has focused primarily on how private sector organizations innovate but have paid little attention to the public sector context.…”

Section: Public Service Innovation and Crowdfundingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Crowdfunding public projects: Collaborative governance for achieving citizen co-funding of public goods

Hong

Ryu

2019

Government Information Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study explores the potential of crowdfunding as a tool for achieving "citizen co-funding" of public projects. Focusing on philanthropic crowdfunding, we examine whether collaborative projects between public and private organizations are more successful in fundraising than projects initiated solely by private organizations. We argue that government involvement in crowdfunding provides some type of accreditation or certification that attests to a project's aim to achieve public rather than private goals, thereby mitigating information asymmetry and improving mutual trust between creators (i.e., private sector organizations) and funders (i.e., crowd). To support this argument, we show that crowdfunding projects with government involvement achieved a greater success rate and attracted a greater amount of funding than comparable projects without government involvement. This evidence shows that governments may take advantage of crowdfunding to "co-fund" public projects with the citizenry for addressing the complex challenges that we face in the twenty-first century.

show abstract

“…There is considerable variation in the novelty and technical complexity of public sector innovations, with innovations ranging along a scale from minor incremental changes (Bugge and Bloch, 2016;Fuglsang, 2010) to disruptive or transformative innovations that completely alter or replace how services are provided or the services themselves (Osborne and Brown, 2011). Although the theoretical concept of transformative innovations in the public sector has been verified in case studies, the incidence of such innovations and how they can be managed effectively have not undergone rigorous empirical analysis (Mandell and Keast, 2013).…”

Section: Innovation Noveltymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…If a written or oral description of a single innovation is obtained, this information can be used to estimate the novelty of the innovation. Bugge and Bloch (2016) coded 1,536 written descriptions of innovations from the MEPIN study (these were not limited to 'most important innovations') and estimated that 27.7% of them did not meet the definition of an innovation, while 32.6% were minor innovations.…”

Section: Innovation Noveltymentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring innovation in the public sector

Bloch

2013

Handbook of Innovation Indicators and Measurement

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is sufficient evidence, drawn from surveys of innovation in the public sector and cognitive testing interviews with public sector managers, to provide basic recommendations for how to measure innovation in the public sector. The recommendations recognize the unique characteristics of the public sector and are intended to provide useful information for policy efforts to improve the innovative capabilities and innovation outcomes of public sector organizations. Important topics for measurement include the characteristics of survey respondents and their workplace, innovation drivers, resources for innovation, innovation processes and strategies, innovation outcomes, novelty of innovations, and obstacles to innovation. Although many proposed questions are similar to those included in the Oslo Manual guidelines for measuring innovation in the private sector, surveys of public sector innovation need to delve more deeply into innovation processes and strategies, particularly on how innovations are developed. We also recommend that public sector innovation surveys combine a subject-based method that asks about innovation activities in general and an object-based method that includes questions on a specific 'most important' or 'most recent' innovation. This hybrid approach can improve the accuracy of question responses and provide high-quality data for policy development.

show abstract

Between bricolage and breakthroughs—framing the many faces of public sector innovation

Cited by 63 publications

References 21 publications

Public sector innovation in the Asia‐pacific trends, challenges, and opportunities

Public sector innovation in the Asia‐pacific trends, challenges, and opportunities

Crowdfunding public projects: Collaborative governance for achieving citizen co-funding of public goods

Measuring innovation in the public sector

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About