Toward an Entrepreneurial Public Sector

Abstract

An entrepreneurial public agency pursues the implementation of innovative programs that may broaden public service choices, increase service quality, and more effectively serve citizens. Such public entrepreneurship depends on risk taking and risk tolerance; however, public servants tend to be generally risk averse in their behaviors and personal preferences, and are therefore less likely to pursue entrepreneurial approaches to public problems. Using social exchange theory as a framework to understand the reciprocal relationship between agency and employee, this study examines whether agency behaviors might alter the risk aversion of those employees and make the agency environment more conducive to entrepreneurship. Findings suggest that managers' demonstration of risk tolerance, reward for creativity and innovation, and agency solicitation of employee input are positively related to employee perceptions of higher risk tolerance among their peers.

Managing employee innovative behaviour through transformational and transactional leadership styles

“…Contingent sanctions are used to make employees aware of the consequences of inadequate performance. An environment that supports risk-taking is conducive to innovation at the organizational and individual level (Brown and Osborne, 2013;Clark, 2016;Flemig, Osborne and Kinder, 2016;Ricard et al, 2017). If managers use contingent sanctions too often, employees may be discouraged from innovative behavior because failure is too costly.…”

“…Control has the potential to crowd out intrinsic motivation (Frey and Jegen, 2001), and if this happens then the supposedly positive effects of transformational leadership are mitigated. While no leader can perform his or her duty without using sanctions, applying them to a very high extent may enforce the belief that innovation is risky in the public sector (Flemig and Osborne, 2013;Clark, 2016). As a result, the vision articulated by the transformational leader may influence innovative behavior less since employees fear that it entails a high risk of receiving blame.…”

“…We control for tenure and age, which have been found to be correlated with several work behaviors (Ng and Feldman, 2008). We also control for gender, since men may be more risk seeking (Byrnes, Miller and Schafer, 1999), and scholars have noted that innovation attempts represent a risky work behavior (Clark, 2016;Flemig, Osborne and Kinder, 2016;Ricard et al, 2017). Job position is also included as a control variable because the innovation agenda in Odense Municipality may have affected different work groups in different ways.…”

Determinants of university employee intrapreneurial behavior: The case of Latvian universities

“…Trusting that their managers will help them to overcome complications can smooth the way for employees through bureaucratic procedures and organizational inertia (Rigtering and Weitzel, 2013). An employee’s trust in management leads to higher levels of creativity, innovation, and solicitation of ideas (Clark, 2016). Chen and Bozeman (2012) claim that trust in managers influences employees’ intrapreneurial behavior and risk-aversion.…”

“…Factors like gender, educational level, age, income level, risk-taking, personal initiative, and innovativeness can influence the intrapreneurial behavior of faculty and staff (e.g. Alpkan et al, 2010; Chen and Bozeman, 2012; Clark, 2016; Douglas and Fitzsimmons, 2013; Hornsby et al, 2009). With regard to risk, Clark (2016) observes that increased risk tolerance can increase intrapreneurial behavior.…”