No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Multi-level antecedents of public sector innovation? An ethnography of a large UK postal services organization
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 July 2022
Abstract
This paper examines professional and organizational-level antecedents of public sector innovation using findings from a 9-month ethnography conducted within the marketing department of a large UK postal organization. The analysis centres on vignettes of two cross-functional projects to develop product and service innovations that involved external design agencies. The data are based on observation of the marketing teams, semi-structured interviews, and documentary analysis. The study highlights that social practices characteristic of communities of practice are antecedent to the generation of absorptive capacity, but also shows that the learning produced by communities of practice is mediated by relations of power associated with these groups and interaction with organizational absorptive capacity. This paper develops the theory of absorptive capacity by shifting attention away from ‘prior knowledge’ in enabling acquisition of external knowledge to highlighting the role of intensive interaction, organizational context, and power relations in shaping knowledge creation for learning and innovation.
Keywords
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press in association with the Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management
References
Bittner, E. (1965). The concept of organization. Social Research, 32(3), 239–255. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40969788.Google Scholar
Burton, C. R., & Rycroft-Malone, J. (2014). Resource based view of the firm as a theoretical lens on the organisational consequences of quality improvement. International Journal of Health Policy and Management, 3(3), 113–115.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Butler, M. J., & Ferlie, E. (2020). Developing absorptive capacity theory for public service organizations: Emerging UK empirical evidence. British Journal of Management, 31(2), 344–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cinar, E., Trott, P., & Simms, C. (2019). A systematic review of barriers to public sector innovation process. Public Management Review, 21(2), 264–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cinar, E., Trott, P., & Simms, C. (2021). An international exploration of barriers and tactics in the public sector innovation process. Public Management Review, 23(3), 326–353 .CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clausen, T. H., Demircioglu, M. A., & Alsos, G. A. (2020). Intensity of innovation in public sector organizations: The role of push and pull factors. Public Administration, 98(1), 159–176.Google Scholar
Cohen, W. H., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 128–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Contu, A., & Willmott, H. (2003). Re-embedding situatedness: The importance of power relations in learning theory. Organization Science, 14(3), 283–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Vries, H., Bekkers, V., & Tummers, L. (2016). Innovation in the public sector: A systematic review and future research agenda. Public Administration, 94(1), 146–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Easterby-Smith, M., Graca, M., Antonacopoulou, E., & Ferdinand, J. (2008). Absorptive capacity: A process perspective. Management Learning, 39(5), 483–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farnsworth, V., Kleanthous, I., & Wenger-Trayner, E. (2016). Communities of practice as a social theory of learning: A conversation with Etienne Wenger. British Journal of Educational Studies, 64(2), 139–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferlie, E., Fitzgerald, L., Wood, M., & Hawkins, C. (2005). The nonspread of innovations: The moderating role of professionals. Academy of Management Journal, 48(1), 117–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fox, S. (2000). Communities of practice, Foucault and actor-network-theory. Journal of Management Studies, 37(6), 853–868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freidson, E. (1989). Theory and the professions. Indiana Law Journal, 64(3), 1. Available at https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ilj/vol64/iss3/1.Google Scholar
Greenhalgh, T., Robert, G., Macfarlane, F., Bate, P., & Kyriakidou, O. (2004). Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: Systematic review and recommendations. The Milbank Quarterly, 82(4), 581–629.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Laffin, M., & Entwistle, T. (2000). New problems, old professions? The changing national world of the local government professions. Policy & Politics, 28(2), 207–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lane, P. J., Koka, B. R., & Pathak, S. (2006). The reification of absorptive capacity: A critical review and rejuvenation of the concept. Academy of Management Review, 31(4), 833–863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langley, A. (1999). Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 691–710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An Introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The social construction of scientific facts. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Lave, J. (2008). Situated learning and changing practice. In Amin, A. & Roberts, J. (eds), Community, economic creativity, and organization (pp. 283–296). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, M., & Moultrie, J. (2005). The organizational innovation laboratory. Creativity and Innovation Management, 14(1), 73–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marabelli, M., & Newell, S. (2014). Knowing, power and materiality: A critical review and reconceptualization of absorptive capacity. International Journal of Management Reviews, 16(4), 479–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mørk, B. E., Hoholm, T., Ellingsen, G., Edwin, B., & Aanestad, M. (2010). Challenging expertise: On power relations within and across communities of practice in medical innovation. Management Learning, 41(5), 575–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orr, J. (1996). Talking about machines: An ethnography of a modern job. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Pettigrew, A. M., Ferlie, E., & McKee, L. (1992). Shaping strategic change: The case of the NHS in the 1980s. Public Money & Management, 12(3), 27–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pfeffer, J. (1992). Understanding power in organizations. California Management Review, 34(2), 29–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pyrko, I., Dörfler, V., & Eden, C. (2017). Thinking together: What makes communities of practice work? Human Relations, 70(4), 389–409.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roberts, J. (2006). Limits to communities of practice. Journal of Management Studies, 43(3), 623–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Royal Mail plc. (2019). Annual report and financial statements 2018–19. London: Royal Mail. Available at https://www.royalmailgroup.com/media/10795/annual-report-2018-19.pdf (downloaded 09.09.19).Google Scholar
Shotter, J. (1993). Cultural politics of everyday life: Social constructionism, rhetoric and knowing of the third kind. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Simon, H. A. (1985). What we know about the creative process. In Kuhn, R. L. (ed.), Frontiers in creative and innovative management (pp. 3–20). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.Google Scholar
Snyder, W., Wenger, E., & de Sousa Briggs, X. (2004). Communities of practice in government: Leveraging knowledge for performance. Public Manager, 32(4), 17–22.Google Scholar
Storey, J. (2002). HR and organizational structures. In Little, S., Quintas, P. & Ray, T. (eds), Managing knowledge: An essential reader (pp. 349–355). London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Todorova, G., & Durisin, B. (2007). Absorptive capacity: Valuing a reconceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 774–786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, S. J. W. (2006). Learning in doing: the social anthropology of innovation in a large UK organisation, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/2606/.Google Scholar
Turner, S., Allen, P., Bartlett, W., & Pérotin, V. (2011). Innovation and the English National Health Service: A qualitative study of the independent sector treatment centre programme. Social Science and Medicine, 73(4), 522–529.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Turner, S., & Lourenço, A. (2011). Competition and public service broadcasting: Stimulating creativity or servicing capital?. Socio-Economic Review, 10(3), 497–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, S., Vasilakis, C., Utley, M., Foster, P., Kotecha, A., & Fulop, N. J. (2018). Analysing barriers to service improvement using a multi-level theory of innovation: the case of glaucoma outpatient clinics. Sociol Health Illn, 40(4), 654–669.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Turner, S., & Wright, JSF. (2022). The corporatization of healthcare organizations internationally: A scoping review of processes, impacts, and mediators. Public Administration, 100(2), 308–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Volberda, H. W., Foss, N. J., & Lyles, M. A. (2010). Perspective – absorbing the concept of absorptive capacity: How to realize its potential in the organization field. Organization Science, 21(4), 931–951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waring, J., & Currie, G. (2009). Managing expert knowledge: Organizational challenges and managerial futures for the UK medical profession. Organization Studies, 30(7), 755–778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zahra, S. A., & George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of Management Review, 27(2), 185–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar