Exploration, Exploitation, and Public Sector Innovation: An Organizational Learning Perspective for the Public Sector

Choi, Taehyon; Chandler, Susan M.

doi:10.1080/23303131.2015.1011762

Cited by 66 publications

(88 citation statements)

References 67 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite the extensive body of ambidexterity research, relatively few empirical studies adopting this theoretical lens have been conducted in the public sector context (see Choi & Chandler, 2015;Fossestøl et al, 2015;Smith & Umans, 2015;Trong Tuan, 2017). The public sector thus remains largely locked in a predominant focus on efficiency.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficiency creep and shadow innovation: enacting ambidextrous IT Governance in the public sector

Magnusson

Koutsikouri

Päivärinta

2020

European Journal of Information Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current push towards increased innovation within the public sector calls for new approaches to IT Governance. However, recent findings highlight the aim to avoid trade-offs between innovation and efficiency through organisational ambidexterity. This paper reports a case study of ambidextrous IT Governance in two large government agencies. According to the findings, ambidextrous IT Governance is enacted through two separate but interrelated mechanisms that emerge simultaneously. In terms of exploitation, the "efficiency creep" mechanism creates a bias for efficiencyrather than innovation-oriented investments. In terms of exploration, the "shadow innovation" mechanism involves unsanctioned innovation activities. These two mechanisms interplay, in the enactment of ambidextrous IT Governance. The contribution of this study lies in theorising about how ambidextrous IT Governance is enacted in public sector organisations, and how efficiency creep and shadow innovation influence each other. This contribution aids future research and practice on public sector innovation and IT Governance.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficiency creep and shadow innovation: enacting ambidextrous IT Governance in the public sector

Magnusson

Koutsikouri

Päivärinta

2020

European Journal of Information Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although research into ambidexterity and its antecedents in PSOs is emerging (e.g. Smith and Umans 2015;Choi and Chandler 2015;Gieske, van Meerkerk, and van Buuren 2018;Boukamel and Emery 2017;Kobarg et al 2017;Plimmer, Bryson, and Teo 2017), still a lot remains unknown on ambidextrous practices of PSOs and on how organizational antecedents shape these practices (Palm and Lilja 2017;Bryson, Boal, and Rainey 2008). Ambidextrous practices of similar PSOs can differ widely due to a different strategic intent, culture, managerial focus and informal routines (Cannaerts, Segers, and Henderickx 2016;Smith and Umans 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ambidextrous practices in public service organizations: innovation and optimization tensions in Dutch water authorities

Gieske

Duijn

Buuren

2019

Public Management Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For public service organizations (PSOs) it is essential to be able to simultaneously optimize and innovate policies, processes and services. This article explores how PSOs shape these dual practices by examining optimization and innovation practices in eight Dutch regional water authorities (RWAs) using focus groups. It uncovers mutually reinforcing differences in culture, strategy and management leading to different ambidextrous configurations. In low ambidextrous RWAs a legalistic taskorientation goes along with a transactional management style and focus on optimization only. In high ambidextrous RWAs a societal value-orientation, integrative strategies, and a more transformational management style lead to more embedded innovation practices.

show abstract

“…A plausible counterargument is that cities with strong mayors face additional political pressure to make more data available (Pardo, Cresswell, and Thompson ). But political pressure is an uneven tool for promoting innovation implementation, with mixed empirical results (Choi and Chandler ; Wood, Bernt, and Ting ). The stability and professionalization associated with council‐manager governments increase the chance for genuine innovation implementation (Rivera, Streib, and Willoughby ; Streib and Willoughby ).Hypothesis Cities with council‐manager forms of government will make more data available across departments than strong mayor cities.…”

Section: Public Sector Innovation and Open Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementation of Digital‐Era Governance: The Case of Open Data in U.S. Cities

Young

2020

Public Administration Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the institutional factors that influence the implementation of open data platforms in U.S. cities. Public management scholarship has argued that governance can be transformed by new information technologies that improve transparency and engagement, reduce administrative costs, and support performance management systems. However, this argument ignores key risks for administrators, as well as institutional and political obstacles that can thwart implementation. This article uses hierarchical negative binomial regression to analyze the organizational and institutional features influencing implementation in more than 1,500 departments across 60 cities. Department type and administrative capacity are strongly associated with the number of open data files available, while city‐level institutional characteristics and administrative capacity are not significant factors. Municipal demographics are also identified as a factor, suggesting a potential demand‐side influence from wealthy and technologically proficient residents. Evidence for Practice The implementation of open data policies benefits from targeted approaches at the department level rather than uniform, citywide objectives or requirements. City executive‐level positions such as chief data or information officers are not necessarily associated with successful implementation, measured by the number of open data files made available. Open data implementation involves additional administrative responsibilities and labor at the department level, so city administrators looking to expand the number and variety of data sets available through their open data platforms should devote time and resources to working directly with departments to facilitate and encourage data sharing. Administrators looking to expand the number and variety of data sets available through their open data platforms should consider the costs associated with investing in increasing individual departments’ abilities to balance the additional administrative responsibilities and labor involved.

show abstract

Exploration, Exploitation, and Public Sector Innovation: An Organizational Learning Perspective for the Public Sector

Cited by 66 publications

References 67 publications

Efficiency creep and shadow innovation: enacting ambidextrous IT Governance in the public sector

Efficiency creep and shadow innovation: enacting ambidextrous IT Governance in the public sector

Ambidextrous practices in public service organizations: innovation and optimization tensions in Dutch water authorities

Implementation of Digital‐Era Governance: The Case of Open Data in U.S. Cities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About