In spite of what many believe,there is actually much innovation going on in the public sector.

The public sector is often described as “bureaucratic” – in a negative sense, as a slow moving and rigid hierarchically organized system, as time-consuming, oversized and expensive. This may indeed be the case in some instances.

Still, from my own experience — working in and for the public sector — I have not found proof for the assumption that public sector organizations in general are less innovative than the ones found in the private sector.

Public organizations may be innovative learning organizations

Public organizations are learning organizations with their own share of entrepreneurs and with directives regarding the need for organizational change.

Many ministries, public agencies and public service institutions make use of technologies or services developed and delivered by private firms and organizations.

Public institutions also face technological challenges where the solutions cannot simply be bought off the shelf, and are thus involved in technological invention and development.

The introduction of New Public Management (NPM) has been a major current in organizational reforms in the public sector during the last 20 years. NPM’s private sector styles of organization have introduced a totally new mentality or rationale in the understanding of the role of the public sector — for good and for bad.

Privatization and outsourcing have also resulted in new relations with private sector firms and non-governmental organizations, and hence fundamentally changed the public welfare system.

Research on public innovation

Studies of change in the public sector have been conducted within various disciplines. In these studies, the main focus has been on efficiency, reorganization and structural reform of ministries, state agencies and public services.

Within the NPM-inspired studies, change tends to be treated as a linear and uni-directional process framed at the top and proceed to implement top-down changes in the public sector.

This is in my opinion a too narrow approach, and I have many studies to back me up when I say this. In these alternative studies innovation processes are rather understood to be open, dynamic and non-linear, also in the public sector.

The Minnesota Innovation Research Program (Van de Ven et.al.1999) has for example developed a “road map” for how innovations typically unfold – the “innovation journey”. They find that setbacks and mistakes occur frequently, and that criteria for success and failure often change throughout the process.

A more dynamic view of innovation in the public sector

I have myself had the pleasure of leading a research project under the EU Fifth Framework Program om innovation in the public sector called Publin.

We used a broad definition of innovation – “deliberate change with a certain objective in mind” – pointing to behavioral changes that are common in most, if not all, human contexts. Such a definition also encompass processes leading to new or improved products, processes or — as is most often the case in the public sector — services.

Publin found that there are a lot of innovation activities taking place in the public sector in the European countries. Even if there is no pressure to generate profit, as often found in private companies, public employees try to improve their ways of doing things.

They are motivated by idealism, the joy of creating something new, an interest in the topic at hand, career ambitions etc.

Barriers and drivers

We identified different types of barriers and drivers for innovation, i.e. social phenomena that hinder or encourage innovation activities in such institutions.

Among the important barriers to public innovation, we found the following:

• Size and complexity. The public sector comprises extremely complex and large-scale organizational entities that may develop internal barriers to innovation.
• Heritage and legacy. Public sector organizations are prone to entrenched practices and procedures.
• Professional resistance. There are professional groupings with their own communities of practice, belief systems and perspectives.
• Risk aversion. Public organizations are under the close scrutiny of both politicians and the media, and employees are not normally rewarded for taking risks.
• Need for consultation and unclear outcomes. The large range of stakeholder involvement generates a strong requirement to consult and review any planned changes.
• Pace and scale of change. There have been so many reforms that employees are becoming “innovation fatigued”.
• Absence of capacity for organizational learning. There may be a lack of structures or mechanisms for the enhancement of organizational learning.
• Public resistance to change. Elements of the public might be risk-averse.
• Absence of resources. There may be a lack of financial support or shortages of relevant skills or other support services.
• Technical barriers. There may be a lack of technological solutions to the problem at hand.

Among the important drivers and facilitators for innovation we found:

• Problem-oriented drivers. People innovate in order to solve certain problems.
• Non-problem oriented drivers. Innovations may improve on the former situation.
• Political push. Strategic change frequently requires strong, top-down, political will.
• Growth of a culture of review. Assessment practices may stimulate innovation.
• Support mechanisms for innovation. Authorities may implement policy measures aimed at funding and encouraging innovation.
• Capacity for innovation. Public employees have often high levels of professional expertise, creativity and problem solving.
• Competitive drivers. Performance targets may encourage the use of innovative approaches.
• Technological factors. Technological innovation can be a strong determinant for subsequent innovation.
• NGOs and private companies. Models developed by NGOs and private companies may be adopted by public institutions.

(These lists are based on a model developed by Paul Cunningham of the University of Manchester, a member of the Publin team.)

Many of these barriers and drivers are found in industry as well. Others are more prominent in the public sector, due to differences in organizational practices and incentive structures.

What both sectors have in common though, is that they consist of human beings trying to solve their problems through learning. Some of them are good at it, some are not. Many even try to resist change, as it may seem threatening.

Innovation therefore involves uncertainty and risk for the organization. Success depends on good communications with stakeholders to receive support and resources and of champions that are able to guide the development process through the difficulties.

This post has been based on work done within the framework of the Publin project and a project on innovation in the public sector in the Nordic countries called Interact, funded by the Nordic Innovation Centre.

You can download the Publin summary report for free from the Publin site.