Complexity of Innovation in the public sector: A workgroup-level analysis of related factors and outcomes

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

“…This includes new services that comprise various types of stakeholders, innovations that involve significant changes in internal work processes, changes in organization or management to accommodate new services and processes, and communication innovations that are part of a larger change in service provision or organization. These 'complex innovations' will thus often require the involvement of a wide range of employees and work functions throughout development and implementation, and to overcome barriers that the complexity presents (Torugsa and Arundel, 2014).…”

Reinventing the Wheel? Public Sector Innovation in the Age of Governance

“…Previous studies on innovation have focused on the organizational level of analysis (Moore and Hartley ) and this statement is also true for both of the books. However, innovation can be studied at the individual and group level as well (Demircioglu , ; Torugsa and Arundel , ). In other words, although these edited volumes adequately address the topics of organization theory, structure, strategy, and design, they overlook the role of organizational behavior in innovation (except Andersen and Van Mart's chapters).…”

“…I believe that complex innovations are necessary for complex problems. Complex innovations are defined according to the number of dimensions/parts (e.g., policy thinking) affected by a single innovation (Demircioglu ; Demircioglu and Audretsch ; Torugsa and Arundel ). However, contrary to Sorensen and Torfing's view, complex innovations do not necessarily require a collaborative approach.…”

Innovation Agents in the Public Sector: Applying Champion and Promotor Theory to Explore Innovation in the Australian Public Service

“…We develop these insights through an in‐depth qualitative approach using three case studies of medium and large APS agencies. Drawing on Kanter's () power bases as a linking mechanism between champion and promotor theory, we argue that the hierarchical and power‐dependent nature of the public sector drives the need for multiple innovation agents, both champions and promotors at multiple organisational levels, to navigate the complexity and barriers to innovation that characterise this organisational context (Torugsa and Arundel ). The study contributes to the public sector innovation literature through unravelling the critical roles adopted by individuals to ‘drive, navigate and protect’ a project and identifying the unique contributions of both champions and promotors at various organisational levels.…”