1
INNOVATION AND ADOPTION OF
INNOVATION IN PUBLIC
ORGANIZATIONS
The International Conference of Organizational Innovation
Siam University, Bangkok, Thailand
August 4-6 2010
Mehmet Akif Demircioglu
mdemirci@indiana.edu
http://mypage.iu.edu/~mdemirci/
2
BERTINORO
July 22, 2011
Overview
• Introduction
• Theoretical Framework-Literature Review
▫ Public-Private Distinction
▫ Antecedent of Innovation
• Methods- Findings
▫ Journals
▫ Keywords
• Analyze the Trend and Discussion
3
BERTINORO
July 22, 2011
Introduction-Goal
 The aim of this article is to develop a strategic research
agenda for innovation studies particularly for public
organizations.
 What research questions and classifications are important
in terms of innovation research? What journals and
disciplines study innovation and what journals not? What
is the trend and popularity of innovation studies in the
several disciplines and journals?
 This presentation examines data concerning trends in
innovation research since 1960 and summarize results
from recent meta-analyses of the literature, in order to
draw conclusions about where future research is likely to
lead.
4
BERTINORO
July 22, 2011
Theoretical Framework
 Change, innovation, invention, creative behavior, and adaptation are
somewhat vague by many scholars, have been defined and interchangeably
used by others (Pierce and Delbecq, 1997, 28).
 Walker defines innovation as a process through which new ideas, objects,
and practices are created, developed or reinvented, and which are new for the
unit of adoption (Walker, 2008, p. 2).
 Organizational leaders, both in public and business, view innovation as
a source of organizational change, growth, and effectiveness
(Damanpour and Schneider, 2009, p. 495).
 Many scholars has studied the background and results of the adoption of
innovation in organizations (see Boyne et al. 2003; Damanpour and
Schneider 2009, Osborne and Gaebler 1992; Tidd, Besant, and Pavitt 1997;
Walker 2004).
 Innovation is a process which results in a new thing to an organizational
population (Daft 1978; Damanpour and Wischnevsky 2006)
5
BERTINORO
July 22, 2011
Public-Private Distinction
 The nature and extend of differences between public and
private sectors has long been a topic of debate (Lyons et al,
2006).
 “If there is no real difference between public and private
organizations, can we nationalize all industrial firms, or
privatize all government agencies (Rainey, 2010, 66)?
 Environmental factors (such as degree of market exposure,
legal and formal constraints, and political influence),
organization-environment transactions (such as public scrutiny),
and internal structures and processes (such as organizational
performance, personal characteristic of employees, and
complexity of objectives) are different (Rainey, Backoff, &
Levine, 1976).
6
BERTINORO
July 22, 2011
Public-Private Distinction (Cont.)
 The early scholars of organization theory (i.e. M. Weber, F. Taylor, and H. Simon argue
that their theories are applicable to all organizations (Rainey, 2010).
 Public and private organizations have more similarities than differences (Thompson,
1967).
 The New Public Management (NPM) movement has de-emphasized sectoral distinctions
and suggests that “management is management,” regardless of the sector.
 Recent administrative reforms in several governments reflect the new public
management’s focus on efficiency and market-based reforms after 1980s (see Song 2008,
Yamamoto 2003, Wise, 2002) were highly influenced by private sector management.
 Some scholars argue that “rather than asking “what makes an organization public”, an
alternative question asks, “what makes an organization more likely to provide for public
outcomes (or publicness) (Moulton, 2009)? Dimensional publicness recognizes varying
degree of public influence and political authority over all forms of organizations
regardless of public or private (see Moulton, 2009).
 Many scholars argue that private organizations increasingly carry out public purposes.
 Both public and private sector initiate and adopt innovations.
 Thus, innovation studies are important not only for private sector, but also public sector.
7
Potential Antecedents
Definition
BERTINORO
Association with
Organizational
Innovativeness
Positive, significant
July 22, 2011
Administrative intensity
Indicator of administrative overhead
Centralization
Extent to which decision-making
Negative, significant
autonomy is dispersed or concentrated in
an organization
“Specialization”, “functional
Positive, significant
differentiation”, and “professionalism”
Complexity
External communication
Formalization
Functional differentiation
Internal communication
Degree of organization members’
involvement and participation in
extraorganizational professional
activities.
Reflects emphasis on following rules and
procedures in conducting organizational
activities.
Extent to which divided into different
units.
Extent of communication among
organizational units.
Positive, significant
No significant
association
Positive, significant
Positive, significant
8
Managerial attitude
toward change
Managerial tenure
Professionalism
Slack resources
Specialization
Technical capacity
Vertical differentiation
Extent to which managers
Positive, significant
BERTINORO
July 22, 2011
or members of the dominant
coalition favor change.
Length of managers’ service
No significant association
and experience within an
organization.
Professional knowledge of an Positive, significant
organization’s members.
Reflects an organization’s
Positive, significant
resources beyond minimal
requirement to maintain
operations.
Number of an organization’s Positive, significant
specialties.
Reflects an organization’s
Positive, significant
technical resources and
technical potential.
Number of levels in an
No significant association
organization’s hierarchy.
9
BERTINORO
July 22, 2011
Methods
• A search on "innovation" in JSTOR using the
categories of journals (public policy/administration,
political science, business, sociology, education,
economics, and psychology) (between 1960 and
today) and saved the journal abstracts.
10
BERTINORO
July 22, 2011
Search Methods
Innovation (abstract only).
"innovation" (abstract
only) AND "organization"
(abstract only).
innovation" (abstract only)
AND "adoption" (abstract
only)
Consolitated A) "innovation"
(abstract only) AND
"organization" (abstract only), B)
"innovation" (abstract only) AND
"adoption" (abstract only)
Results
2170 Results
192 Results
190 Results
360 Results
11
Innovation Only
BERTINORO
July 22, 2011
Search: Innovation Disciplines
Results
%
1
Business
1397
42.73
2
Economics
712
21.78
3
Education
237
7.25
4
Political Science
335
10.24
5
Psychology
8
0.24
6
Public Policy & Administration
231
7.06
7
Sociology
349
10.68
Total
3269
100
12
“Innovation” AND “Adoption”
BERTINORO
Categories
1960-1969 %
1 Business
0
%
0.0
2 Economics
1
%
9.1
3 Education
0
%
0.0
4 Political Science
1
%
9.1
5 Psychology
1
%
9.1
6 Public Policy and Administration
0
%
0.0
7 Sociology
8
%
72.7
8 TOTAL
11
1970-1979 %
7
0.0
21.2
1
0.4
3.0
3
0.0
9.1
6
0.4
18.2
0
0.4
0.0
4
0.0
12.1
12
3.0
36.4
33
4.1
1980-1989 %
27
2.6
46.6
10
0.4
17.2
2
1.1
3.4
6
2.2
10.3
0
0.0
0.0
9
1.5
15.5
4
4.4
6.9
58
12.2
1990-1999 %
37
10.0
48.7
12
3.7
15.8
4
0.7
5.3
6
2.2
7.9
1
0.0
1.3
7
3.3
9.2
9
1.5
11.8
76
21.4
July 22, 2011
2000-today %
44
13.7
47.3
17
4.4
18.3
4
1.5
4.3
8
2.2
8.6
0
0.4
0.0
8
2.6
8.6
12
3.3
12.9
93
28.0
TOTAL
%
115
16.2
42.4
41
6.3
15.1
13
1.5
4.8
27
3.0
10.0
2
0.0
0.7
28
3.0
10.3
45
4.4
16.6
271
34.3
42.4
15.1
4.8
10.0
0.7
10.3
16.6
100.0
13
BERTINORO
July 22, 2011
“Innovation” AND “Keywords”
Categories
1 Bottom-Up
%
2 Centralization
%
3 Complexity
%
4 Formalization
%
5 Organizational Size
%
6 Professionalism
%
7 Specialization
%
8 Tenure
%
9 Technical Capacity
%
10 Top Down
%
11 TOTAL
Total %
1960-1969 %
0
0.0
1
9.1
4
36.4
1
9.1
2
18.2
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
1
9.1
2
18.2
11
100.0
0.0
0.5
2.1
0.5
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
5.8
1970-1979 %
1
3.3
3
10.0
5
16.7
2
6.7
8
26.7
1
3.3
2
6.7
1
3.3
2
6.7
5
16.7
30
100.0
0.5
1.6
2.6
1.0
4.2
0.5
1.0
0.5
1.0
2.6
15.7
1980-1989 %
0
0.0
8
5.1
7
14.9
3
6.4
7
14.9
0
0.0
2
1.3
4
2.6
3
1.9
13
8.3
47
100.0
0.0
4.2
3.7
1.6
3.7
0.0
1.0
2.1
1.6
6.8
24.6
1990-1999 %
3
6.0
5
10.0
14
28.0
1
2.0
9
18.0
2
4.0
6
12.0
4
8.0
1
2.0
5
10.0
50
100.0
2000-2009
1.6
2.6
7.3
0.5
4.7
1.0
3.1
2.1
0.5
2.6
26.2
3
5.7
1
1.9
16
30.2
2
3.8
6
11.3
4
7.5
3
5.7
3
5.7
1
1.9
14
26.4
53
100.0
%
TOTAL
1.6
0.5
8.4
1.0
3.1
2.1
1.6
1.6
1.0
7.3
27.7
7
3.7
18
9.4
46
24.1
9
4.7
32
16.8
7
3.7
13
6.8
12
6.3
8
4.2
39
20.4
191
100.0
%
3.7
9.4
24.1
4.7
16.8
3.7
6.8
6.3
4.2
20.4
100.0
14
BERTINORO
July 22, 2011
Discussion
 It is clear from these findings that innovation continues to be an
important topic of study.
 It is because innovation has strong and important effects on
organizational performance.
 Organization theorists have argued for many years that
organizations need to be innovative in order to survive and
flourish (e.g., Burns and Stalker, Lawrence and Lorsch,
Thompson).
 It can be said that the rate of research on innovation will
continue to increase in future.
 I expect that more public administration & management
scholars will study innovation as the interaction between
private and public sector are increasing (see the NPM, postNPM, networks (collaboration), publicness).
15
BERTINORO
July 22, 2011
• Innovation research is and will not important topic
except business, public management and sociology
disciplines.
• We are starting to develop a sense of those conditions
that lead to innovation in organizations, but more
research will be necessary to test and replicate the
preliminary findings to date.
• The relationship between innovation and
“complexity”, “organizational size” and “top down”
are/will be hot topic.
16
BERTINORO
Roger’s S Shape
July 22, 2011
17
BERTINORO
July 22, 2011
Thank you
Mehmet Akif Demircioglu
mdemirci@indiana.edu
http://mypage.iu.edu/~mdemirci/