Civic Engagement Platform

An official website of the OECD.
Created by the Public Governance Directorate This website was created by the OECD Observatory of Public Sector Innovation (OPSI) and Observatory of Civic Space, both within the Public Governance Directorate (GOV).
How to validate authenticity Validation that this is an official OECD website can be found on the Civic Space page of the corporate OECD website.
Go back

Public Engagement - Innovative Capacity Framework

More information and context

Commments for version

updated at 31 Jan 2022
  How I can comment this document?
Comments about See in context
Audit
1 comment
Comments about See in context
Tensions regarding innovation within the public sector are often present. Underlying attitudes and barriers to innovation, such as risk aversion and hierarchical structures, are often embedded in the rules and regulations or become part of the wider organisational culture (OECD, 2017a) or principles of public administration. Tensions can also exist while trying to achieve the optimal balance of organisational ambidexterity, which involves balancing efficiency or exploitation of current activities versus exploration through innovation (Cannaerts, et al., 2020).
1 comment
Comments about See in context
In a recent study (Strand, et al., 2014) the drivers and barriers of innovative capacity in the public sector were analysed at three levels: macro (such as the influence of PESTLE factors – political, economic, social technology, legal, environmental), meso (organisational or institutional) and micro (policy makers and service providers). This study suggested that the main drivers for innovation in public sectors are located at the macro and micro levels, whereas the main barriers are found at the meso or organizational level. More specifically, common barriers to public sector innovation include lack of champions or leadership support, rewards and incentive systems, targets and performance management, budget and team resources, knowledge and application of innovation process and methods, and a poor distribution of money and overall risk aversion (Casebourne, 2014). These barriers act as illustrations of a system where innovative capacity is not embedded or considered at multiple levels. The efforts regarding individual level effects are also rarely studied.
1 comment
Comments about See in context
Shifting from a fad to innovation as embedded, action-oriented and creating value
1 comment
Comments about See in context
Public sector as an employer of choice and not of last resort:
1 comment
Comments about See in context
Citizen needs are changing and trust in governments is at risk
1 comment
Comments about See in context
Innovation projects and practices are communicated across organisations, and data sharing and knowledge management support capacity for innovation. Evaluation being integrated from the start and is being used to create continuous opportunities of improvement.
1 comment
Comments about See in context
Workforce strategy, practices and culture: combinations of knowledge, expertise across workforce; HR policy, HR systems including for talent management and recognition, mobility, diversity, recruitment, learning & development, performance management; organisational and workforce culture, organisation demographics
1 comment
Comments about See in context
Practical ability: Knowledge and capability,skills (e.g. data literacy, iteration, user-centricity, story-telling, insurgency), tools (methods, techniques, models) and resources (financial and non-financial)
1 comment
Comments about See in context
Institutional conditions and supports:
1 comment
Comments about See in context
Practical ability:
1 comment
Comments about See in context
Work environment:
1 comment
Comments about See in context
Extrinsic motivation:
1 comment
Comments about See in context
Innovative Capacity of Governments: A systemic framework (Working Paper)
0 comments