TY - JOUR
T1 - The Nature and Incidence of Workgroup Innovation in the Australian Public Sector: Evidence from the Australian 2011 State of the Service Survey
AU - Torugsa, N.A.
AU - Arundel, A.
N1 - Export Date: 8 December 2016
References: Abernathy, W.J., Utterback, J.M., Patterns of Industrial Innovation (1978) Technological Review, 80 (JUNE/JULY), pp. 41-47; Amara, N., Landry, R., Traore, N., 'Managing the Protection of Innovations in Knowledge-Intensive Business Services (2008) Research Policy, 37 (9), pp. 1530-1547; Arundel, A., Huber, D., From Too Little to Too Much Innovation? Issues in Measuring Innovation in the Public Sector (2013) Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 27 (7), pp. 146-159; (2009) Innovation in the Public Sector: Enabling Better Performance, Driving New Directions, , Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia; (2011) State of the Service Report: State of the Service Series 2010-2011, , Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia; Birkinshaw, J., Hamel, G., Mol, M.J., Management Innovation (2008) Academy of Management Review, 33 (4), pp. 825-845; Borins, S., The Challenge of Innovating in Government.' PricewaterhouseCoopers Endowment for the Business of Government (2001), ArlingtonBorins, S., Leadership and Innovation in the Public Sector (2002) Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 23 (8), pp. 467-476; Borins, S., Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation (2010) Innovation as Narrative, , Cambridge: Harvard Kennedy School; Boyne, G.A., Gould-Williams, J.S., Law, J., Walker, R.M., Explaining the Adoption of Innovation: An Empirical Analysis of Public Management Reform (2005) Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 23 (3), pp. 419-436; Bozeman, B., Bretschneider, S., The "Publicness Puzzle" in Organization Theory: A Test of Alternative Explanations of Differences between Public and Private Organizations (1994) Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 4 (2), pp. 197-223; Buchanan, J., Congleton, R., (1998) Politics by Principle, Not Interest: Toward Non-Discriminatory Democracy, , New York: Cambridge University Press; D'Este, P., Iammarino, S., Savona, M., von Tunzelmann, N., What Hampers Innovation? Revealed Barriers versus Deterring Barriers (2012) Research Policy, 41 (2), pp. 482-488; Damanpour, F., Walker, R.M., Avellaneda, C.N., Combinative Effects of Innovation Types and Organizational Performance: A Longitudinal Study of Service Organizations (2009) Journal of Management Studies, 46 (4), pp. 650-675; Fernandez, S., Pitts, D.W., Understanding Employee Motivation to Innovate: Evidence from Front Line Employees in United States Federal Agencies (2011) Australian Journal of Public Administration, 70 (2), pp. 202-222; Greene, W.H., (2003) Econometric Analysis, , 5th ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; Hartley, J., Innovation in Governance and Public Services: Past and Present (2005) Public Money and Management, 25 (1), pp. 27-34; Kiser, E., Comparing Variety of Agency Theory in Economics, Political Science, and Sociology: An Illustration from State Policy Implementation (1999) Sociological Theory, 17 (2), pp. 146-170; Langergaard, L.L., Scheuer, J.D., Towards a Deeper Understanding of Public Sector Innovation (2012) Case Studies in Service Innovation, pp. 167-193. , L. A. Macaulay, L. Miles, J. Wilby, Y. L. Tan, L. Zhao, and B. Theodoulidis (eds.), London: Springer; Leiponen, A., Helfat, C., Innovation Objectives, Knowledge Sources and the Benefits of Breadth (2010) Strategic Management Journal, 31 (2), pp. 224-236; Light, P., (1998) Sustaining Innovation: Creating Nonprofit and Government Organizations that Innovate Naturally, , San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; Moon, M.J., The Pursuit of Managerial Entrepreneurship: Does Organization Matter? (1999) Public Administration Review, 59 (1), pp. 31-43; Osborne, S.P., Brown, L., Introduction: Innovation in Public Services (2013) Handbook of Innovation in Public Services, pp. 1-28. , In S. P. Osborne and L. Brown (eds.). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar; Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.M., Lee, J., Podsakoff, N.P., Common Method Variance in Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of the Literature and Recommended Remedies (2003) Journal of Applied Psychology, 88 (5), pp. 879-903; Rainey, H.G., Bozeman, B., Comparing Public and Private Organizations: Empirical Research and the Power of the A Priori (2000) Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10 (2), pp. 447-469; Ross, S., The Economic Theory of Agency: The Principal's Problem (1973) American Economic Review, 63 (2), pp. 134-139; Shin, S.J., Kim, T.Y., Lee, J.Y., Bian, L., Cognitive Team Diversity and Individual Team Member Creativity: A Cross-Level Interaction (2012) Academy of Management Journal, 55 (1), pp. 197-212; Vigoda-Gadot, E., (2003) Managing Collaboration in Public Administration: Governance, Businesses, and Citizens in the Service of Modern Society, , Westport, CT: Praeger; Vigoda-Gadot, E., Schwabski, N., Shoham, A., Ruvio, A., Public Sector Innovation for the Managerial and the Postmanagerial Era: Promises and Realities in a Globalizing Public Administration (2005) International Public Management Journal, 8 (1), pp. 57-81; Wagner, R., Choice, Exchange, and Public Finance (1997) American Economic Review, 87 (2), pp. 160-163; Walker, R.M., Innovation Type and Diffusion: An Empirical Analysis of Local Government (2006) Public Administration, 84 (2), pp. 311-335; Walker, R.M., An Empirical Evaluation of Innovation Types and Organizational and Environmental Characteristics: Towards a Configuration Framework (2008) Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18 (4), pp. 591-615; Walker, R.M., Damanpour, F., Devece, C.A., 'Management Innovation and Organizational Performance: The Mediating Effect of Performance Management (2011) Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21, pp. 367-386; Windrum, P., Innovation and Entrepreneurship in Public Services (2008) Innovation in Public Sector Services, pp. 3-20. , In P. Windrum and P. Koch (eds.), Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar; Windrum, P., Garcia-Goni, M., A Neo-Schumpeterian Model of Health Services Innovation (2008) Research Policy, 37 (4), pp. 649-672
PY - 2016/6
Y1 - 2016/6
N2 - Using data from a nationally representative survey of all Australian Government employees, we explore the nature of innovation implemented at the workgroup level and assess the multi-dimensionality of the workgroup's 'most significant innovation' (MSI). Of the 10222 survey respondents, 48% reported at least one innovation implemented by their workgroup, with an innovation more commonly reported with an increase in the respondent's age, seniority, and service experience; among men and university graduates. The results reveal that 54% of the reported MSIs incorporate between two and five dimensions of innovation types (policy, service, service delivery, administrative/organizational, and conceptual), and most of these dimensions reinforce each other. Different dimensions of the MSI draw on different sources of ideas (with senior leaders having the broadest impact), face different 'revealed' barriers, require different levels of workplace creativity, and produce different beneficial effects. Our findings help strengthen an understanding of the influencing factors and the effects of multi-dimensional public sector innovations. This large-scale empirical study explores the nature of workgroup-level innovations in the Australian public sector and assesses the multi-dimensionality of the 'most significant innovation' (MSI). The results show that some MSIs encompass more than one dimension of innovation types, and each dimension is influenced by different factors and produces different benefits. Australian Journal of Public Administration © 2016 Institute of Public Administration Australia.
AB - Using data from a nationally representative survey of all Australian Government employees, we explore the nature of innovation implemented at the workgroup level and assess the multi-dimensionality of the workgroup's 'most significant innovation' (MSI). Of the 10222 survey respondents, 48% reported at least one innovation implemented by their workgroup, with an innovation more commonly reported with an increase in the respondent's age, seniority, and service experience; among men and university graduates. The results reveal that 54% of the reported MSIs incorporate between two and five dimensions of innovation types (policy, service, service delivery, administrative/organizational, and conceptual), and most of these dimensions reinforce each other. Different dimensions of the MSI draw on different sources of ideas (with senior leaders having the broadest impact), face different 'revealed' barriers, require different levels of workplace creativity, and produce different beneficial effects. Our findings help strengthen an understanding of the influencing factors and the effects of multi-dimensional public sector innovations. This large-scale empirical study explores the nature of workgroup-level innovations in the Australian public sector and assesses the multi-dimensionality of the 'most significant innovation' (MSI). The results show that some MSIs encompass more than one dimension of innovation types, and each dimension is influenced by different factors and produces different benefits. Australian Journal of Public Administration © 2016 Institute of Public Administration Australia.
KW - Barriers
KW - Idea sources
KW - Most significant innovation (MSI)
KW - Public sector innovation
KW - Workgroup
KW - Workplace creativity
KW - workgroup
KW - EMPIRICAL-ANALYSIS
KW - MANAGEMENT
KW - public sector innovation
KW - ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE
KW - AGENCY
KW - most significant innovation (MSI)
KW - idea sources
KW - barriers
KW - workplace creativity
U2 - 10.1111/1467-8500.12095
DO - 10.1111/1467-8500.12095
M3 - Article
SN - 0313-6647
VL - 75
SP - 202
EP - 221
JO - Australian Journal of Public Administration
JF - Australian Journal of Public Administration
IS - 2
ER -