IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/padxxx/v41y2021i1p12-22.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Context and innovation in traditional bureaucracies: A Hong Kong study

Author

Listed:
  • Ian Scott

Abstract

Traditional bureaucracies, defined in Weberian terms, are almost invariably seen as antithetical to innovation. Yet, although the academic literature presents an array of formidable structural barriers to the emergence and implementation of new ideas, innovation does occur in traditional bureaucracies. How can the structural impediments be overcome? What are the processes that enable innovation to take place? Based on a longitudinal study of the Hong Kong government's innovation policies and practices, it is argued that political context is a critical variable explaining how, even in rigid traditional bureaucracies, barriers may be avoided or temporarily suspended. Two contrasting case studies are used to illustrate, first, the importance of political commitment in gaining acceptance for new ideas and, second, the failure of agencies dedicated to innovation to achieve their objectives. It is postulated that circumventing structural barriers or working through political channels to reduce their impact may be a more constructive strategy than creating dedicated agencies to develop innovative measures. The study is grounded in a literature review, documentary evidence from the Hong Kong government's innovative agencies, and interviews with senior staff from those agencies.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:padxxx:v:41:y:2021:i:1:p:12-22
    DOI: 10.1002/pad.1899
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.1899
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/pad.1899?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Louise Brown & Stephen P. Osborne, 2013. "Risk and Innovation," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 186-208, February.
    2. Wang, Jue, 2018. "Innovation and government intervention: A comparison of Singapore and Hong Kong," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 399-412.
    3. Jakob Edler & Jan Fagerberg, 2017. "Innovation policy: what, why, and how," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(1), pages 2-23.
    4. Marie McHugh & Geraldine O'Brien & Joop Ramondt, 2001. "Finding an Alternative to Bureaucratic Models of Organization in the Public Sector," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(1), pages 35-42, January.
    5. Karo , Erkki & Kattel , Rainer, 2015. "Innovation Bureaucracy: Does the organization of government matter when promoting innovation?," Papers in Innovation Studies 2015/38, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    6. Jacob Torfing, 2019. "Collaborative innovation in the public sector: the argument," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(1), pages 1-11, January.
    7. Paul Windrum, 2008. "Innovation and Entrepreneurship in Public Services," Chapters, in: Paul Windrum & Per Koch (ed.), Innovation in Public Sector Services, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. 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.
    9. Yingyi Qian & Chenggang Xu, 1998. "Innovation and Bureaucracy Under Soft and Hard Budget Constraints," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 65(1), pages 151-164.
    10. Mark Moore & Jean Hartley, 2008. "Innovations in governance," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(1), pages 3-20, January.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. Janet Diamond & Siv Vangen, 2017. "Coping with austerity: innovation via collaboration or retreat to the known?," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(1), pages 47-54, January.
    14. Paul Windrum & Per Koch (ed.), 2008. "Innovation in Public Sector Services," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 4030.
    15. Mahmoud Moussa & Adela McMurray & Nuttawuth Muenjohn, 2018. "A Conceptual Framework of the Factors Influencing Innovation in Public Sector Organizations," Journal of Developing Areas, Tennessee State University, College of Business, vol. 52(3), pages 231-245, July-Sept.
    16. Dongil D. Keum & Kelly E. See, 2017. "The Influence of Hierarchy on Idea Generation and Selection in the Innovation Process," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(4), pages 653-669, August.
    17. Emre Cinar & Paul Trott & Christopher Simms, 2019. "A systematic review of barriers to public sector innovation process," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(2), pages 264-290, February.
    18. Kerry Brown, 2004. "Human resource management in the public sector," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(3), pages 303-309, September.
    19. 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.
    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. 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).
    2. Edoardo Ongaro & Ting Gong & Yijia Jing, 2021. "Public administration, context and innovation: A framework of analysis," Public Administration & Development, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 41(1), pages 4-11, February.

    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. 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).
    2. 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).
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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).
    6. Demircioglu, Mehmet Akif & Audretsch, David B., 2017. "Conditions for innovation in public sector organizations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(9), pages 1681-1691.
    7. 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.
    8. 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).
    9. 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.
    10. 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).
    11. Klas Palm & Johan Lilja, 2021. "On the road to Agenda 2030 together in a complex alliance of Swedish public authorities," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(6), pages 9564-9580, June.
    12. Lars Fuglsang & Anne Vorre Hansen & Ines Mergel & Maria Taivalsaari Røhnebæk, 2021. "Living Labs for Public Sector Innovation: An Integrative Literature Review," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-19, June.
    13. 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.
    14. Yingzhu Yang & Fengsheng Wu, 2022. "The Sustainability of the Project-Driven Innovation of Grassroots Governance: Influencing Factors and Combination Paths," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-17, December.
    15. Tirziu, Andreea-Maria, 2016. "Inovarea socială – o viziune benefică asupra sectorului public. Studiu de caz: inovarea socială în universităڏile publice din Italia [Social innovation – a beneficial vision on the public sector. C," MPRA Paper 77705, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2016.
    16. Agarwal, Renu & Mittal, Neeraj & Patterson, Eric & Giorcelli, Michela, 2021. "Evolution of the Indian LPG industry: Exploring conditions for public sector business model innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).
    17. John, Laura, 2022. "Rethinking digital governance - How collaborative innovation strategies advance the development of digital innovations in public organisations," Junior Management Science (JUMS), Junior Management Science e. V., vol. 7(5), pages 1400-1418.
    18. Rinor F. Kurteshi, 2018. "Information Sources Supporting Innovation In The Public Sector: The Case Of Kosovo," Oradea Journal of Business and Economics, University of Oradea, Faculty of Economics, vol. 3(2), pages 22-31, September.
    19. Elena Madeo, 2021. "The Role of Crowdfunding for New Funding Challenges in Public Universities: An Italian Case Study," Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, , vol. 15(2), pages 186-205, September.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:padxxx:v:41:y:2021:i:1:p:12-22. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0271-2075 .

    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.