Drivers and barriers to innovation in the Australian public service: A qualitative thematic analysis

Wipulanusat, Warit; Panuwatwanich, Kriengsak; Stewart, Rodney A.; Sunkpho, Jirapon

doi:10.2478/emj-2019-0001

Abstract

The purpose of this paper was to identify common themes from archival records related to innovation in the Australian Public Service (APS). A thematic analysis was conducted to review and evaluate archival records which consisted of transcripts from senior manager presentations at Innovation Month seminars from 2014 to 2018 and other related official documents. This empirical study addressed innovation from the leaders’ perspective, reflecting upon their experience. Analysing themes within archival records helped to gain insights from various perspectives of leaders on how they regard an innovation agenda for the APS. Three themes emerged from archival records: (1) innovation characteristics; (2) drivers of innovation; and (3) barriers to innovation. Synthesis of these drivers and barriers can provide important insights for senior APS managers on how they can enhance their organisations’ ability to innovate in order to respond to digital disruption challenges and opportunities. Variety of perspectives with leader’s perceptions informs about authors’ selection of the research question among consistent patterns and legitimates the salient themes as input for QSR NVivo 11.

References

Altshuler, A. A., & Behn, R. D. (2010). Innovation in American government: Challenges, opportunities, and dilemmas Washington, United States: Brookings Institution Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Australian Public Service Commission. (2011). State of the Service Report: State of the Service Series 2010-11 Canberra, Australia: ACT.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Australian Public Service Commission. (2014). State of the Service Report: State of the Service Series 2013-2014 Canberra, Australia: ACT.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Australian Public Service Commission. (2016). State of the Service Report 2015-16 Canberra, Australia: ACT.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Australian Public Service Commission. (2017). State of the Service Report 2016-17 Canberra, Australia: ACT.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Barnett, J., Vasileiou, K., Djemil, F., Brooks, L., & Young, T. (2011). Understanding innovators’ experiences of barriers and facilitators in implementation and diffusion of healthcare service innovations: a qualitative study. BMC Health Services Research 11(1), 1-12.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bason, C. (2010). Leading public sector innovation: Co-creating for a better society Bristol, United Kingdom: Bristol University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bekkers, V., Edelenbos, J., & Steijn, B. (2011). Innovation in the public sector New York, United States: Palgrave Macmillan.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Berry, F. S., & Berry, W. D. (2007). Innovation and diffusion models in policy research. In P. A. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of Policy Process (2nd ed.). Colorado, United States: Westview.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bloch, C. (2010). Towards a conceptual framework for measuring public sector innovation. Measuring innovation in the public sector in the Nordic countries: Toward a common statistical approach^‟“Copenhagen Manual”
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Borins, S. (2006). The challenge of innovation in government: Endowment for the business of government Arlington, United States: PricewaterhouseCoopers.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bowden, A. (2005). Knowledge for Free? Distributed Innovation as a Source of Learning. Public Policy and Administration 20(3), 56-68.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal 9(2), 27-40.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3(2), 77-101.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2015). Business research methods Oxford, United States: Oxford University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Sage publications.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Currie, G., Humphreys, M., Ucbasaran, D., & McManus, S. (2008). Entrepreneurial leadership in the English public sector: paradox or possibility? Public Administration 86(4), 987-1008.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Damanpour, F., & Schneider, M. (2009). Characteristics of innovation and innovation adoption in public organizations: Assessing the role of managers. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: J-PART 19(3), 495-522.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Demircioglu, M. A. (2018). The Effects of Empowerment Practices on Perceived Barriers to Innovation: Evidence from Public Organizations. International Journal of Public Administration 41(15), 1302-1313.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Demircioglu, M. A., & Audretsch, D. B. (2017). Conditions for innovation in public sector organizations. Research Policy 46(9), 1681-1691.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Deschamps, J. P. (2005). Different leadership skills for different innovation strategies. Strategy & Leadership 33(5), 31-38.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R., & Jackson, P. R. (2012). Management research London, United Kingdom: Sage.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Eggers, W. D., & Singh, S. K. (2009). The Public innovator’s playbook: Nurturing bold ideas in government Cambridge, United States: Ash Institute, Harvard Kennedy School.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Elison, S., Ward, J., Davies, G., & Moody, M. (2014). Implementation of computer-assisted therapy for substance misuse: a qualitative study of Breaking Free Online using Roger’s diffusion of innovation theory. Drugs and Alcohol Today 14(4), 207-218.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Evans, A. J., & Burger, V. L. J. (2016). An empirical investigation into innovation drivers and barriers in public sector organisations. International Journal of Innovation Science 8(4), 404-422.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Fereday, J., & Muir-Cochrane, E. (2006). Demonstrating rigor using Thematic Analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 5(1), 80-92.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Franza, R. M., & Grant, K. P. (2006). Improving federal to private sector technology transfer. Research Technology Management 49(3), 36-40.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Glor, E. D. (1998). What do we know about enhancing creativity and innovation? A review of literature. The Innovation Journal 3(1), 1-8.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Golembiewski, R. T., & Vigoda, E. (2000). Organizational innovation and the science/craft of management. Current Topics in Management 5, 263-280.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How Many Interviews Are Enough? An Experiment with Data Saturation and Variability. Field Methods 18(1), 59-82.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hadfield, L. (2010). Balancing on the edge of the archive: the researcher’s role in collecting and preparing data to deposit. Timescapes Working Paper Series 2010(2), 60-74.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hamson, N. (2004). Why innovation doesn’t work: and what to do about it. The Innovation Journal 9(1), 1-7.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research 15(9), 1277-1288.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kao, J. (2007). Innovation nation: How America is losing its innovation edge, why it matters, and what we can do to get it back New York, United States: Free Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kellough, J. E., & Nigro, L. G. (2002). Pay for performance in Georgia State Government: Employee perspectives on Georgia gain after 5 years. Review of Public Personnel Administration 22(2), 146-166.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kelly, G., Mulgan, G., & Muers, S. (2002). Creating public value: An analytical framework for public service reform London, United Kingdom: Strategy Unit, Cabinet Office.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Koch, P., & Hauknes, J. (2005). On innovation in the public sector: Academic Summary Report of Publin Oslo, Norway: NIFU STEP, Publin Report No. D20.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Langergaard, L. L., & Scheuer, D. J. (2012). Towards a deeper understanding of public sector innovation. In A. L. Macaulay, I. Miles, J. Wilby, L. Y. Tan, L. Zhao, & B. Theodoulidis (Eds.), Case Studies in Service Innovation (pp. 167-193). New York, United States: Springer New York.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Latham, J. R. (2014). Research design canvas: A framework for designing and aligning the “DNA” of your study Monument, Colorado: Leadership Plus Design, Ltd.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Management Advisory Committee [MAC]. (2010). Empowering change: Fostering innovation in the Australian public service Canberra, Australia: Australian Public Service Commission.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
May, T. (2001). Social research Buckingham, United Kingdom: Open University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Miller, R. (1999). The Internet in twenty years: cyberspace, the next frontier? Foresight 1(5), 467-472.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Moore, M., & Hartley, J. (2008). Innovations in governance. Public Management Review 10(1), 3-20.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Mulgan, G., & Albury, D. (2003). Innovation in the public sector London, United Kingdom: Cabinet office.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Myers, M. D. (1994). A disaster for everyone to see: An interpretive analysis of a failed is project. Accounting, Management and Information Technologies 4(4), 185-201.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Napier, C. J. (1989). Research directions in accounting history. The British Accounting Review 21(3), 237-254.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Nathan, H., & Thomas, C. (2012). A thematic analysis of a leadership speaker series. Journal of Management Development 31(8), 826-844.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Neuman, W. L. (2005). Social research methods, quantitative and qualitative approaches (6th ed.). Boston, United States: Pearson.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Page, S. (2005). What’s new about the new public management? Administrative change in the human services. Public Administration Review 65(6), 713-727.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Pärna, O. (2014). Managerial and contextual factors influencing innovation in information technology-based public sector services: an exploratory cross-national study. (Doctoral Dissertation), University of Tartu.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Pollach, I. (2012). Taming textual data: The contribution of corpus linguistics to computer-aided text analysis. Organizational Research Methods 15(2), 263-287.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Raipa, A., & Giedraityte, V. (2014). Innovation process barriers in public sector: A comparative analysis in Lithuania and the European Union. International Journal of Business and Management 9(10), 10-26.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2003). Research methods for business students Harlow, United Kingdom: Prentice Hall.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Setnikar, C., S., & Petkovšek, V. (2013). Private and public sector innovation and the importance of cross-sector collaboration. Journal of Applied Business Research 29(6), 1597-1606.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Vaismoradi, M., Turunen, H., & Bondas, T. (2013). Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nursing & Health Sciences 15(3), 398-405.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Varney, D. S. (2006). Service transformation: A better service for citizens and businesses, a better deal for the taxpayer London, United Kingdom: TSO.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Wipulanusat, W., Panuwatwanich, K., & Stewart, R. A. (2017a). Exploring leadership styles for innovation: an exploratory factor analysis. Engineering Management in Production and Services 9(1), 7-17.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Wipulanusat, W., Panuwatwanich, K., & Stewart, R. A. (2017b). Statistical data analysis of culture for innovation using an open data set from the Australian Public Service. In A. Calì, P. Wood, N. Martin, & A. Poulovassilis (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Vol. 10365, pp. 78-89). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Wipulanusat, W., Panuwatwanich, K., & Stewart, R. A. (2017c). Workplace innovation: Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis for construct validation. Management and Production Engineering Review 8(2), 57-68.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Wipulanusat, W., Panuwatwanich, K., & Stewart, R. A. (2018). Pathways to workplace innovation and career satisfaction in the public service: The role of leadership and culture. International Journal of Organizational Analysis 26(5), 890-914.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Yin, R. K. (2013). Case study research: Design and methods Beverly Hills, United States: Sage publications.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article

Drivers and barriers to innovation in the Australian public service: A qualitative thematic analysis

Abstract

Paradigm

My account