Innovation labs in the public sector: what they are and what they do?

References

• Argyris, C. 1977. “Organizational Learning and Management Information Systems.” Accounting, Organizations and Society 2 (2): 113–123. doi:10.1016/0361-3682(77)90028-9.
   Google Scholar
• Baker, W. E. 1992. “The Network Organization in Theory and Practice.” In Networks and Organization: Structure, Form, and Action, edited by N. Nohria and R. Eccles, 397–429. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bason, C. 2013. ‘Design-Led Innovation in Government.’ Accessed 12 November 2014. http://designthinkingsydney.com.au/sites/default/files/3.%20Spring_2013_Design_Led_Innovation_in_Government.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Bellefontaine, T. 2012. Innovation Labs: Bridging Think Tanks and Do Tanks. Policy Horizons Canada. Accessed 28 October 2014. http://www.horizons.gc.ca/eng/content/innovation-labs-bridging-think-tanks- and-do-tanks.
   Google Scholar
• Berger, P., and T. Luckmann. 1966. The Social Construction of Knowledge: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. Soho, NY: Open Road Media.
   Google Scholar
• Boulding, K. E. 1956. “General Systems Theory: The Skeleton of Science.” Management Science 2 (3): 197–208. doi:10.1287/mnsc.2.3.197.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burns, T. E., and G. M. Stalker. 1961. The Management of Innovation. London: Tavistock.
   Google Scholar
• Burstein, R., and A. Black. 2014. A Guide for Making Innovation Offices Work Series.Innovation. Washington, DC: IBM Centre for the Government.
   Google Scholar
• Chesbrough, H. W. 2003. Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Press.
   Google Scholar
• Child, J. 1972. “Organizational Structure, Environment and Performance: The Role of Strategic Choice.” Sociology 6 (1): 1–22. doi:10.1177/003803857200600101.
   Google Scholar
• Christensen, C. M. 1997. The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
   Google Scholar
• Christensen, C. M. 2006. “The Ongoing Process of Building a Theory of Disruption.” Journal of Product Innovation Management 23 (1): 39–55. doi:10.1111/jpim.2006.23.issue-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christensen, C. M., and M. E. Raynor. 2003. The Innovator’s Solution: Creating and Sustaining Successful Growth. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
   Google Scholar
• Collins, R. 1974. “Reassessments of Sociological History: The Empirical Validity of the Conflict Tradition.” Theory and Society 1 (2): 147–178. doi:10.1007/BF00160157.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coriat, B., and O. Weinstein. 2002. “Organizations, Firms and Institutions in the Generation of Innovation.” Research Policy 31 (2): 273–290. doi:10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00141-X.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cyert, R. M., and J. G. March. 1963. A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• DiMaggio, P. J., and W. W. Powell, edited by. 1991. The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Donaldson, L. 1987. “Strategy and Structural Adjustment to Regain Fit and Performance: In Defence of Contingency Theory.” Journal of Management Studies 24 (1): 1–24. doi:10.1111/joms.1987.24.issue-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doorley, S., and S. Witthoft. 2012. Make Space: How to Set the Stage for Creative Collaboration. Hoboken: John Wiley Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. “Agency Theory: An Assessment and Review.” Academy of Management Review 14 (1): 57–74.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flyvbjerg, B. 2006. “Five Misunderstandings about Case-Study Research.” Qualitative Inquiry 12 (2): 219–245. doi:10.1177/1077800405284363.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freeman, C., and C. Perez. 1988. Structural Crises of Adjustment, Business Cycles and Investment Behaviour. London: Pinter.
   Google Scholar
• GAO. 2014. Office of Personnel Management. Agency Needs to Improve Outcome Measures to Demonstrate the Value of Its Innovation Lab. Washington, DC: United States Government Accountability Office.
   Google Scholar
• Hannan, M. T., and J. Freeman. 1989. Organization Ecology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• James, O., and S. Van Thiel. 2011. “Structural Devolution to Agencies.” In The Ashgate Research Companion to New Public Management, edited by T. Christensen and P. Lægreid, 209–222. Aldershot: Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• John, P. 2014. “Policy Entrepreneurship in UK Central Government: The Behavioural Insights Team and the Uses of RCTs.” Public Policy and Administration 29 (3): 257–267. doi:10.1177/0952076713509297.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kattel, R., A. Cepilovs, W. Drechsler, T. Kalvet, V. Lember, and P. Tõnurist. 2014. “Can We Measure Public Sector Innovation? A Literature Review.” LIPSE Working Papers 2: 1–45.
   Google Scholar
• Katz, D., and R. L. Kahn. 1978. Organizations and the System Concept. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Kieboom, M. 2014. Lab Matters: Challenging the Practice of Social Innovation Laboratories. Amsterdam: Kennisland.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, Y. 2010. “Stimulating Entrepreneurial Practices in the Public Sector: The Roles of Organisational Characteristics.” Administration and Society 42: 780–814. doi:10.1177/0095399710377432.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langlois, R. N. 2007. Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism: Schumpeter, Chandler, and the New Economy. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lawrence, P. R., and J. W. Lorsch. 1967. “Differentiation and Integration in Complex Organizations.” Administrative Science Quarterly 12 (1): 1–47. doi:10.2307/2391211.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leadbeater, C., and P. Miller. 2004. The Pro-Am Revolution: How Enthusiasts are Changing Our Economy and Society. London: Demos.
   Google Scholar
• Lewin, K. 1947. “Frontiers in Group Dynamics II: Channels of Group Life; Social Planning and Action Research.” Human Relations 1 (2): 143–153. doi:10.1177/001872674700100201.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynn, L. 2013. “Innovation and Reform in Public Administration: One Subject or Two?” In Handbook of Innovation in Public Services, edited by S. Osborne and L. Brown, 29–43. Cheltenham: Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• March, J. G. 1981. “Footnotes to Organizational Change.” Administrative Science Quarterly 26: 563–577. doi:10.2307/2392340.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• March, J. G. 1991. “Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning.” Organization Science 2 (1): 71–87. doi:10.1287/orsc.2.1.71.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Margetts, H., and P. Dunleavy. 2013. “The Second Wave of Digital-Era Governance: A Quasi-Paradigm for Government on the Web.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences. doi:10.1098/rsta.2012.0382.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayo, E. 1946. The Human Problems of an Industrial Civilization. Boston, MA: Harward Business School.
   Google Scholar
• Mintzberg, H. 1979. The Structuring of Organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Mulgan, G. 2009. ‘Strengths, Weaknesses and a Way Forward?’ Accessed 11 May 2014. http://www.socialinnovationexchange.org/designforsi/blog?page=1.
   Google Scholar
• Mulgan, G. 2014. ‘Design in Public and Social Innovation.’ NESTA website. Accessed 11 May 2015. http://www.nesta.org.uk/sites/default/files/design_in_public_and_social_innov ation.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Osborne, S. P., and K. Brown. 2013. “Introduction: Innovation in Public Services.” In Handbook of Innovation and Change in Public Sector Services, edited by S. P. Osborne and L. Brown, 1–14. Northampton, MA: Cheltenham.
   Google Scholar
• Pärna, O., and N. Von Tunzelman. 2007. “Innovation in the Public Sector: Key Features Influencing the Development and Implementation of Technologically Innovative Public Sector Services in the UK, Denmark, Finland and Estonia.” Information Polity 12: 109–125.
   Google Scholar
• Parsons Desis Lab. 2013. ‘Government Innovation Lab Constellation.’ Accessed 27 June 2014. http://nyc.pubcollab.org/files/Gov_Innovation_Labs– Constellation_1.0.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Perez, C. 1983. “Structural Change and Assimilation of New Technologies in the Economic and Social Systems.” Futures 15 (5): 357–375. doi:10.1016/0016-3287(83)90050-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pollitt, C. 2004. “Theoretical Overview.” In Unbundled Government: A Critical Analysis of the Global Trend to Agencies, Quangos and Contractualisation, edited by C. Pollitt and C. Talbot, 319–342. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Pollitt, C. 2009. “Structural Change and Public Service Performance: International Lessons?” Public Money & Management 29 (5): 285–291. doi:10.1080/09540960903205907.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pollitt, C. 2010. “Technological Change: A Central yet Neglected Feature of Public Administration.” Nispacee Journal of Public Administration and Policy 3 (2): 31–53. doi:10.2478/v10110-010-0003-z.
   Google Scholar
• Pollitt, C. 2011. “Innovation in the Public Sector: An Innovatory Overview.” In Innovation in the Public Sector: Linking Capacity and Leadership, edited by V. Bekkers, J. Edelenbos, and B. Steijn, 35–43. Basingstoke: Palgrave/Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Puttick, R. 2014. Innovation Teams and Labs: A Practice Guide. London: Nesta.
   Google Scholar
• Puttick, R., P. Baeck, and P. Colligan. 2014. I-Teams: The Teams and Funds Making Innovation Happen in Governments around the World. London: Nesta and Bloomberg Philanthropies.
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, E. M. 1995. Diffusion of Innovations. New York: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schein, E. H. 1996. “Culture: The Missing Concept in Organization Studies.” Administrative Science Quarterly 41: 229–240. doi:10.2307/2393715.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Senge, P. M. 1990. The Fifth Discipline. New York: Doubleday.
   Google Scholar
• Single, A. W., and W. M. Spurgeon. 1996. “Creating and Commercializing Innovation inside a Skunk Works.” Research-Technology Management 39 (1): 38–41.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ståhlbröst, A., and M. Holst. 2013. The Living Lab Methodology Handbook.  Luleå: Luleå University of Technology and CDT. Accessed 14 April 2015. http://www.ltu.se/cms_fs/1.101555!/file/LivingLabsMethodologyBook_web.p df.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, F. W. 1911. The Principles of Scientific Management. New York: Harper and Row.
   Google Scholar
• Tiesinga, H., and R. Berkhout, edited by. 2014. Labcraft: How Innovation Labs Cultivate Change through Experimentation and Collaboration. London: Labcraft Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Tõnurist, P., R. Kattel, and V. Lember. 2015. “New Leisure Class and Conspicuous Politics in Urban Regeneration Initiatives.” Working Papers in Technology Governance and Economic Dynamics 64: 1–24.
   Google Scholar
• Townsend, A. M. 2013. Smart Cities: Big Data, Civic Hackers, and the Quest for a New Utopia. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
   Google Scholar
• Trist, E. L. 1978. On Socio-Technical Systems. Sociotechnical Systems: A Sourcebook. San Diego, CA.: University Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Tushman, M. L., and C. A. O’Reilly III. 2002. Winning through Innovation: A Practical Guide to Leading Organizational Change and Renewal. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tushman, M. L., and E. Romanelli. 1985. “Organizational Metamorphosis: A Punctuated Equilibrium Model of Organizational Evolution.” Research in Organizational Behavior 7: 171–222.
   Google Scholar
• UNICEF. 2012. UNICEF Innovation Labs: A Do-It-Yourself Guide. Accessed 4 May 2015. http://www.unicef.org/videoaudio/PDFs/Innovation_Labs_A_Do-It- Yourself_Guide.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Van De Ven, A. H., and M. S. Poole. 1995. “Explaining Development and Change in Organizations.” Academy of Management Review 20 (3): 510–540. doi:10.2307/258786.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verhoest, K., S. Van Thiel, G. Bouckaert, and P. Lægreid. 2012. Government Agencies: Practices and Lessons from 30 Countries. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Weber, M. 2009. Wirtschaft Und Gesellschaft. Grundriß Der Verstehenden Soziologie. 5th ed. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.
   Google Scholar
• Williamson, B. 2014. “Knowing Public Services: Cross-Sector Intermediaries and Algorithmic Governance in Public Sector Reform.” Public Policy and Administration 29 (4): 292–312. doi:10.1177/0952076714529139.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar