IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v46y2017i5p900-910.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rethinking the effect of risk aversion on the benefits of service innovations in public administration agencies

Author

Listed:
  • Torugsa, Nuttaneeya (Ann)
  • Arundel, Anthony

Abstract

This study applies a holistic approach grounded in configurational theory to a sample of 2505 innovative public administration agencies in Europe to explore the effect of organizational risk aversion on the benefits from service innovations. The analyses, using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (QCA), identify several combinations of strategies (varying by the agency size and the novelty of innovation) that managers in risk-averse agencies can use to work effectively around the risks of innovating. The findings show that the managers of both high and low risk-averse agencies can achieve high benefits from their innovation efforts, but their strategizing behaviors differ. An integrated strategy that combines collaboration, complementary process and communication innovations, and an active management strategy to support innovation is the most effective method for ‘low-risk-averse’ small agencies and ‘high-risk-averse’ larger agencies to obtain high benefits from either novel or incremental service innovations. Our results point to the need to rethink the conventional assumption that a culture of risk aversion in public sector agencies is a cause of management ineffectiveness and a stumbling block to innovation success.

Suggested Citation

  • Torugsa, Nuttaneeya (Ann) & Arundel, Anthony, 2017. "Rethinking the effect of risk aversion on the benefits of service innovations in public administration agencies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(5), pages 900-910.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:46:y:2017:i:5:p:900-910
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2017.03.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733317300598
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2017.03.009?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lars Fuglsang, 2010. "Bricolage and invisible innovation in public service innovation," Journal of Innovation Economics, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(1), pages 67-87.
    2. Felix Ritchie, 2014. "Resistance to change in government: risk, inertia and incentives," Working Papers 20141412, Department of Accounting, Economics and Finance, Bristol Business School, University of the West of England, Bristol.
    3. Markus M. Bugge & Carter W. Bloch, 2016. "Between bricolage and breakthroughs—framing the many faces of public sector innovation," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(4), pages 281-288, May.
    4. Arundel, Anthony & Huber, Dorothea, 2013. "From too little to too much innovation? Issues in measuring innovation in the public sector," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 146-159.
    5. David Albury, 2005. "Fostering Innovation in Public Services," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(1), pages 51-56, January.
    6. Andrea Prado & Arch Woodside, 2015. "Deepening Understanding of Certification Adoption and Non-Adoption of International-Supplier Ethical Standards," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 132(1), pages 105-125, November.
    7. Bloch, Carter & Bugge, Markus M., 2013. "Public sector innovation—From theory to measurement," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 133-145.
    8. Fariborz Damanpour & Richard M. Walker & Claudia N. Avellaneda, 2009. "Combinative Effects of Innovation Types and Organizational Performance: A Longitudinal Study of Service Organizations," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(4), pages 650-675, June.
    9. Ragin, Charles C., 2000. "Fuzzy-Set Social Science," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226702773, December.
    10. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    11. D’Este, Pablo & Iammarino, Simona & Savona, Maria & von Tunzelmann, Nick, 2012. "What hampers innovation? Revealed barriers versus deterring barriers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 482-488.
    12. George A. Boyne, 2002. "Public and Private Management: What’s the Difference?," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(1), pages 97-122, January.
    13. Jean Hartley, 2005. "Innovation in Governance and Public Services: Past and Present," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(1), pages 27-34, January.
    14. Louise Brown & Stephen P. Osborne, 2013. "Risk and Innovation," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 186-208, February.
    15. Nuttaneeya (Ann) Torugsa & Anthony Arundel, 2016. "Complexity of Innovation in the public sector: A workgroup-level analysis of related factors and outcomes," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(3), pages 392-416, March.
    16. Chung-An Chen & Barry Bozeman, 2012. "Organizational Risk Aversion: Comparing The Public and Non-Profit Sectors," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(3), pages 377-402, March.
    17. Wynen & Verhoest & Ongaro & van Thiel & in cooperation with the COBRA network, 2014. "Innovation-Oriented Culture in the Public Sector: Do managerial autonomy and result control lead to innovation?," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(1), pages 45-66, January.
    18. Arch G. Woodside & Alexandre Schpektor & Xin Xia, 2013. "Triple Sense-Making of Findings from Marketing Experiments Using the Dominant Variable Based-Logic, Case-Based Logic, and Isomorphic Modeling," International Journal of Business and Economics, School of Management Development, Feng Chia University, Taichung, Taiwan, vol. 12(2), pages 131-153, December.
    19. Arundel, Anthony & Casali, Luca & Hollanders, Hugo, 2015. "How European public sector agencies innovate: The use of bottom-up, policy-dependent and knowledge-scanning innovation methods," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(7), pages 1271-1282.
    20. Jean Hartley, 2014. "New development: Eight and a half propositions to stimulate frugal innovation," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(3), pages 227-232, May.
    21. repec:ucp:bkecon:9780226702766 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hua (Jonathan) Ye, 2018. "Encouraging Innovations of Quality from User Innovators: An Empirical Study of Mobile Data Services," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 423-441, December.
    2. Mehmet Akif Demircioglu & Roberto Vivona, 2021. "Positioning public procurement as a procedural tool for innovation: an empirical study [Creating the Conditions for Radical Public Service Innovation]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 40(3), pages 379-396.
    3. Aarthi Raghavan & Mehmet Akif Demircioglu & Araz Taeihagh, 2021. "Public Health Innovation through Cloud Adoption: A Comparative Analysis of Drivers and Barriers in Japan, South Korea, and Singapore," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(1), pages 1-30, January.
    4. Anjum Razzaque & Richard Thomas Cummings & Magdalena Karolak & Allam Hamdan, 2020. "The Propensity to Use FinTech: Input from Bankers in the Kingdom of Bahrain," Journal of Information & Knowledge Management (JIKM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 19(01), pages 1-22, March.
    5. Manuel Fernández-Esquinas & María Isabel Sánchez-Rodríguez & José Antonio Pedraza-Rodríguez & Rocío Muñoz-Benito, 2021. "The use of QCA in science, technology and innovation studies: a review of the literature and an empirical application to knowledge transfer," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(8), pages 6349-6382, August.
    6. Arundel, Anthony & Bloch, Carter & Ferguson, Barry, 2019. "Advancing innovation in the public sector: Aligning innovation measurement with policy goals," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 789-798.
    7. Demircioglu, Mehmet Akif & Audretsch, David B., 2017. "Conditions for innovation in public sector organizations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(9), pages 1681-1691.
    8. Polyanin Andrey (Полянин А.В.) & Dokukina Irina (Докукина И.А.), 2020. "Directions Of Development Of Information Support For Public Administration In The Russian Federation [Направления Развития Информационного Обеспечения Публичного Управления В Российской Федерации]," State and Municipal Management Scholar Notes, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, vol. 2, pages 39-47.
    9. Aaron M. Lane, 2020. "The destruction phase of public sector innovation: regulations governing school closure in Australia," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 1151-1169, September.
    10. Mehmet Akif Demircioglu & David B. Audretsch, 2020. "Conditions for complex innovations: evidence from public organizations," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 820-843, June.
    11. Ma, Yaxue & Ba, Zhichao & Zhao, Haiping & Sun, Jianjun, 2023. "How to configure intellectual capital of research teams for triggering scientific breakthroughs: Exploratory study in the field of gene editing," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(4).
    12. Diego Cagigas & Judith Clifton & Daniel Díaz-Fuentes & Marcos Fernández-Gutiérrez & Juan Echevarría-Cuenca & Celia Gilsanz-Gómez, 2022. "Explaining public officials’ opinions on blockchain adoption: a vignette experiment [Robots and jobs: Evidence from US labor markets]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 41(3), pages 343-357.
    13. Rui Li & Yongmei Cui & Yajun Zheng, 2021. "The Impact of Corporate Strategy on Enterprise Innovation Based on the Mediating Effect of Corporate Risk-Taking," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-17, January.
    14. Iana Shaheen & Arash Azadegan & Samuel Roscoe, 2021. "Who Takes Risks? A Framework on Organizational Risk‐Taking During Sudden‐Onset Disasters," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(11), pages 4023-4043, November.
    15. Pirrone Giuseppe & Milotta Margherita, 2024. "Entrepreneurial Culture and Continuous Improvement to Handle Environmental Turbulence," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 18(1), pages 1465-1476.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Arundel, Anthony & Bloch, Carter & Ferguson, Barry, 2019. "Advancing innovation in the public sector: Aligning innovation measurement with policy goals," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 789-798.
    2. Demircioglu, Mehmet Akif & Audretsch, David B., 2017. "Conditions for innovation in public sector organizations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(9), pages 1681-1691.
    3. Cinar, Emre & Demircioglu, Mehmet Akif & Acik, Ahmet Coskun & Simms, Chris, 2024. "Public sector innovation in a city state: exploring innovation types and national context in Singapore," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(2).
    4. Demircioglu, Mehmet Akif & Vivona, Roberto, 2021. "Depoliticizing the European immigration debate: How to employ public sector innovation to integrate migrants," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(2).
    5. Mehmet Akif Demircioglu & David B. Audretsch, 2019. "Public sector innovation: the effect of universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 596-614, April.
    6. Laurin Buchheim & Alexander Krieger & Sarah Arndt, 2020. "Innovation types in public sector organizations: a systematic review of the literature," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 70(4), pages 509-533, November.
    7. Ian Scott, 2021. "Context and innovation in traditional bureaucracies: A Hong Kong study," Public Administration & Development, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 41(1), pages 12-22, February.
    8. Arundel, Anthony & Casali, Luca & Hollanders, Hugo, 2015. "How European public sector agencies innovate: The use of bottom-up, policy-dependent and knowledge-scanning innovation methods," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(7), pages 1271-1282.
    9. Barrutia, Jose M. & Echebarria, Carmen & Aguado-Moralejo, Itziar & Apaolaza-Ibáñez, Vanessa & Hartmann, Patrick, 2022. "Leading smart city projects: Government dynamic capabilities and public value creation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    10. Mehmet Akif Demircioglu & David B. Audretsch, 2020. "Conditions for complex innovations: evidence from public organizations," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 820-843, June.
    11. Fuglsang, Lars & Hansen, Anne Vorre, 2022. "Framing improvements of public innovation in a living lab context: Processual learning, restrained space and democratic engagement," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    12. Iuliia Iliashenko & Fragkoulis Papagiannis & Patrizia Gazzola & Nataliia Cherkas & Daniele Grechi, 2023. "Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Organisational Propensity to Innovate in a Public-Sector Context," Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Emerging Economies, Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India, vol. 32(1), pages 111-156, March.
    13. Nuttaneeya (Ann) Torugsa & Anthony Arundel & Paul L. Robertson, 2018. "Applying Configurational Thinking To Identify Recipes For Producing Service Innovations In The Service Sector," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 22(06), pages 1-23, August.
    14. Irena Dokic & Ivana Rasic & Suncana Slijepcevic, 2021. "Innovation in the public services at the local and regional level," Working Papers 2101, The Institute of Economics, Zagreb.
    15. Yoann Queyroi & David Carassus & Christophe Maurel & Christophe Favoreu & Pierre Marin, 2020. "L’innovation publique locale : une analyse de ses impacts perçus en matière de performance publique," Post-Print hal-02933122, HAL.
    16. Carmelina Bevilacqua & Yapeng Ou & Pasquale Pizzimenti & Guglielmo Minervino, 2019. "New Public Institutional Forms and Social Innovation in Urban Governance: Insights from the “Mayor’s Office of New Urban Mechanics” (MONUM) in Boston," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-24, December.
    17. Vassallo, Jarrod P. & Banerjee, Sourindra & Zaman, Hasanuzzaman & Prabhu, Jaideep C., 2023. "Design thinking and public sector innovation: The divergent effects of risk-taking, cognitive empathy and emotional empathy on individual performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    18. Rinor KURTESH, 2018. "A Systematic Review Of The Internal And External Barriers To Public Sector Innovation In Kosovo," Business Excellence and Management, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 8(3), pages 12-23, September.
    19. Arundel, Anthony & Huber, Dorothea, 2013. "From too little to too much innovation? Issues in measuring innovation in the public sector," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 146-159.
    20. Silvia Cruz & Sônia Paulino & Faïz Gallouj, 2015. "Public Service Innovation: Solid Waste Sector from the Perspective of Clean Development Mechanism Landfill Projects," Post-Print halshs-01247615, HAL.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:46:y:2017:i:5:p:900-910. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.