Design in the public sector: Toward a human centred model of public governance

References

• Alford, J. 2009. Engaging Public Sector Clients: From Service-delivery to Co-production. Hampshire: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Alvesson, M. 2003. “Methodology for Close up Studies – Struggling with Closeness and Closure.” Higher Education 46 (1): 167–193. doi:10.1023/A:1024716513774.
   Google Scholar
• Amadae, S. M. 2003. Rationalizing Capitalist Democracy: The Cold War Origins of Rational Choice Liberalism. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ansell, C., and J. Torfing, ed. 2014. Public Innovation through Collaboration and Design. Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Barnard, C. I. 1968[1938]. The Functions of the Executive. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bason, C. 2010. Leading Public Sector Innovation: Co-creating for a Better Society. Bristol: Policy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bason, C. 2013. “Design-led Innovation in Government.” In Stanford Social Innovation Review. 10th Anniversary Issue, Spring 2013: 15–17.
   Google Scholar
• Bason, C. 2014. “Design Attitude as an Innovation Catalyst.” In Ansell & Torfing: Collaborative Innovation and Design in the Public SectorPublic Innovation Through Collaboration and Design, edited by Christopher Ansell and Jacob Torfing, 209–228. Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Bate, P., and G. Robert. 2007. Bringing User Experience to Healthcare Improvement: The Concepts, Methods and Practices of Experience-based Design. Abingdon: Radcliffe Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Benington, J., and M. Moore. 2011. Public Value: Theory and Practice. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Bode, I. 2006. “Disorganized welfare mixes: Voluntary agencies and new governance regimes in Western Europe.” Journal of European Social Policy 16 (4): 346–359.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boland, R. J., and F. Collopy. 2004. Managing as Designing. Stanford, CA: Stanford Business Books.
   Google Scholar
• Bourgon, J. 2008. “The Future of Public Service: A Search for a New Balance.” Australian Journal of Public Administration 67 (4): 390–404. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8500.2008.00597.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bourgon, J. 2011. A New Synthesis of Public Administration: Serving in the 21st Century‬. Canada: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Boyer, B., J. W. Cook, and M. Steinberg. 2011. In Studio: Recipes for Systemic Change. Helsinki: Sitra.
   Google Scholar
• Briassoulis, H. (Ed.). 2005. Policy integration for complex environmental problems: The example of Mediterranean desertification. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, T. 2009. Change by Design: How Design Thinking Transforms Organizations and Inspires Innovation. New York: HarperCollins.
   Google Scholar
• Buxton, P. 2010.“Social Innovation is My Motivation.” The Guardian, May 12. https://www.theguardian.com/service-design/social-innovation
   Google Scholar
• Capano, G., M. Howlett, and M. Ramesh. 2015. “Bringing Governments Back In: Governance and Governing in Comparative Policy Analysis.” Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis 17 (4): 311–321. doi:10.1080/13876988.2015.1031977.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christiansen, J. 2014. “The Irrealities of Public Innovation.” Doctoral thesis (submitted), Aarhus University.
   Google Scholar
• Churchman, C., R. Ackoff, and E. Arnoff. 1957. Introduction to Operations Research. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Clarke, A., and J. Craft. 2019. “The Twin Faces of Public Sector Design.” Governance 32 (1): 5–21. doi:10.1111/gove.12342.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Colander, D., and R. Kupers. 2014. Complexity and the Art of Public Policy: Solving Society’s Problems from the Bottom Up. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cole, M., and G. Parston. 2006. Unlocking Public Value: A New Model for Achieving High Performance in Public Service Organizations. Hoboken: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Considine, M. 2012. “Thinking outside the box? Applying design theory to public policy.” Politics & Policy 40 (4): 704–724.
   Google Scholar
• Cooper, R., and S. Junginger. 2011. “General Introduction: Design Management – A Reflection.” In The Handbook of Design Management, edited by R. Cooper, S. Junginger, and T. Lockwood, 1–34. Oxford: Berg Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Corbin, J., and A. Strauss. 2008. Basics of Qualitative Research. Third ed. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Craft, J., and M. Wilder. 2017. “Catching a Second Wave: Context and Compatibility in Advisory System Dynamics.” Policy Studies Journal 45 (1): 215–239. doi:10.1111/psj.v45.1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dantzig, George B. 1963. Linear Programming and Extensions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dewey, J. 1938. Logic: The Theory of Inquiry. New York: Henry Holt & Company.
   Google Scholar
• Downs, G. W., and P. D. Larkey. 1986. The Search for Government Efficiency: From Hubris to Helplessness. New York: Random House.
   Google Scholar
• Doz, Y., and M. Koskonen. 2014. Governments for the Future: Building the Strategic and Agile State. Helsinki: Sitra.
   Google Scholar
• Dror, Y. 1967.“Policy Analysts: A New Professional Role in Government Service.”Public Administration Review 27(3): 197.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Du Gay, P. 2000. In Praise of Bureaucracy: Weber, Organizations, Ethics. London: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Dunleavy, Patrick, Helen Margetts, Simon Bastow, and Jane Tinkler. 2006. Digital Era Governance: IT Corporations, the State, and e-Government. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Edmondson, A. C., and S. E. McManus. 2007. “Methodological Fit in Management.” American Management Review 32 (4): 1155–1179.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Building Theories from Case Study Research. Stanford: American Management Review.
   Google Scholar
• Ellis, T. 2010. The New Pioneers: Sustainable Business Success through Social Innovation and Social Entrepreneurship. Chichester: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2012. Design for Growth & Prosperity. Report from the European Design Leadership Board. Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2013a. “A Vision for Public Services.” (version 13/ 06/2013). Accessed 7 January 2017. https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/vision-public-services
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2013b. Powering European Public Sector Innovation: Towards a New Architecture. Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Fayol, H. 1949[1916] . General and Industrial Management. Translated by C. Storrs, London: Sir Isaac Pitman & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Fukuyama, F. 2014. Political Order and Political Decay. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.
   Google Scholar
• Giudice, M., and C. Ireland. 2014. Rise of the DEO: Leadership by Design. San Francisco: New Riders.
   Google Scholar
• Goldsmith, S., and W. D. Eggers. 2004. Governing by Network: The New Shape of the Public Sector. Washington D.C.: Brookings Press.
   Google Scholar
• Halse, J. 2014. “Tools for Ideation: Evocative Visualization and Playful Modelling as Drivers of the Policy Process.” In Design for Policy, edited by C. Bason, 201–212. Farnham: Gower Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Hassan, Z. 2014. The Social Labs Revolution: A New Approach to Solving Our Most Complex Challenges. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Heskett, J. 2002. Toothpicks & Logos: Design in Everyday Life. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hood, C., and R. Dixon. 2015. Government that Worked Better and Cost Less? Evaluating Three Decades of Reform and Change in UK Central Government. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Howlett, M. 2009. “Governance modes, policy regimes and operational plans: A multi-level nested model of policy instrument choice and policy design.” Policy Sciences 42(1): 73–89.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howlett, M., & Rayner, J. 2013. “Patching vs packaging in policy formulation: Assessing policy portfolio design.” Politics and Governance 1 (2): 170–182.
   Google Scholar
• Hufty, M. 2011. “Governance: Exploring Four Approaches and Their Relevance to Research.” In Research for Sustainable Development: Foundations, Experiences, and Perspectives, edited by U. Wiesmann and H. Hurni, 403–424, Bern, Switzerland: NCCR North-South/Geographica Bernensia.
   Google Scholar
• Kay, A. 2007. “Tense layering and synthetic policy paradigms: The politics of health insurance in Australia.” Australian Journal of Political Science 42(4): 579–591.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelley, T. 2005. The Ten Faces of Innovation. New York: Doubleday.
   Google Scholar
• Kolko, J. 2015. “Design Thinking Comes of Age.„ Harvard Business Review.
   Google Scholar
• Kotter, J. P. 2007. “Why Transformation Efforts Fail.” Harvard Business Review, January.
   Google Scholar
• Manzini, E. 2015. Design, When Everybody Designs: An Introduction to Design for Social Innovation. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Manzini, E., and E. Staszowski, eds. 2013. Public & Collaborative: Exploring the Intersection of Design, Social Innovation and Public Policy. DESIS Network.
   Google Scholar
• Mason, M. 2010. “Sample Size and Saturation in PhD Studies Using Qualitative Interviews.” Forum: Qualitative Social Research 11 (3): 1–13. Accessed 7 January 2017. http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/viewArticle/1428
   Google Scholar
• McGann, M., T. Wells, and E. Blomkamp. 2021. “Innovation Labs and Co-production in Public Problem Solving.” Public Management Review 23 (2): 297–316. doi:10.1080/14719037.2019.1699946.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meroni, A., and D. Sangiorgi. 2011. Design for Services. Farnham: Gower Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Michlewski, K. 2015. Design Attitude. Farnham: Gower.
   Google Scholar
• Mintzberg, H. 2009. Managing. Harlow: Pearson Education.
   Google Scholar
• Moggride, B. 2007. Designing Interactions. Boston: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mulgan, G., N. Wilkie, S. Tucker, R. Ali, F. Davis, and T. Liptror. 2006. Social Silicon Valleys. London: Young Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Murray, R., J. Caulier-Rice, and G. Mulgan. 2009. Social Venturing. London: Nesta.
   Google Scholar
• Nachmias, Chava Frankfort and Nachmias David. 1992. Research Methods in the Social Sciences. London: Edward Arnold Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Nesta. 2014. I-teams: The Teams and Funds Making Innovation Happen in Governments around the World. London: Nesta with Bloomberg Philanthropies.
   Google Scholar
• Nielsen, R. K. 2014. “Global Mindset as Managerial Meta-competence and Organizational Capability.” Ph.D. thesis, Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School.
   Google Scholar
• Normann, R., and R. Ramirez. 1994. Designing Interactive Strategy: From Value Chain to Value Constellation. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Osborne, D., and T. Gaebler. 1992. Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit Is Transforming the Public Sector. Reading: Addison Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Osborne, S. P. 2021. “Public Management Reform in Global Context.” Public Management Review 23 (1): 1–1. doi:10.1080/14719037.2020.1752027.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborne, S. P., and L. Brown. 2013. Handbook of Innovation in Public Services. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Osborne, S. P., Z. Radnor, and K. Strokosch. 2016. “Co-Production and the Co-Creation of Value in Public Services: A Suitable Case for Treatment?” Public Management Review 18 (5): 639–653. doi:10.1080/14719037.2015.1111927.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paquet, G. 2009. Scheming Virtuously: The Road to Collaborative Governance. Ottawa: Invenire.
   Google Scholar
• Parker, S., and J. Heapy. 2006. The Journey to the Interface: How Public Service Design Can Connect Users to Reform. London: Demos.
   Google Scholar
• Pautz, H. 2011. “Revisiting the Think-Tank Phenomenon.” Public Policy and Administration, 26 (4): 419–435. doi:10.1177/0952076710378328.
   Google Scholar
• Peters, G. B. 2010. “Still the Century of Bureaucracy? The Roles of Public Servants’.” In Public Management in the Postmodern Era: Challenges and Prospects, edited by J. Fenwick and J. McMillan, 145–161. Northampton: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Polaine, A., L. Lövlie, and B. Reason. 2013. Service Design: From Insight to Implementation. New York: Rosenfeld Media.
   Google Scholar
• Pollitt, C., and G. Bouckaert. 2011. Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis - New Public Management, Governance, and the Neo-Weberian State. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pycroft, A., and C. Bartollas. 2014. Applying Complexity Theory: Whole Systems Approaches to Criminal Justice and Social Work. Bristol: Policy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Richardson, J., Gunnel, G., & Jordan, G. (1982). The concept of policy style. In Policy styles in Western Europe, edited by J. J. Richardson,1–16. London, UK: Allen & Unwin.
   Google Scholar
• Rogge, K., and Reichardt, K. 2016. “Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: An extended concept and framework for analysis.” Research Policy 45 (8): 1620–1635.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rowe, P. G. 1987. Design Thinking. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sanders, E. 2014. “Co-designing Can Seed the Landscape for Radical Innovation and Sustainable Change.” In The Highways and Byways to Radical Innovation: Design Perspectives, edited by P. R. Christensen and S. Junginger, 131–152. Kolding, Denmark: Design School Kolding.
   Google Scholar
• Sanders, E., and P. J. Stappers. 2008. “Co-creation and the New Landscapes of Design.” CoDesign: International Journal of CoCreation in Design and the Arts 4 (1): 5–18. doi:10.1080/15710880701875068.
   Google Scholar
• Schön, D. A. 1983. The Reflective Practitioner. Aldershot: Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Shove, L. 2007. The Design of Everyday Life. Oxford: Berg Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Simon, H. A. 1947. Administrative Behavior. New York: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Simon, H. A. 1996. The Sciences of the Artificial. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Simon, H. A. 1997. Administrative Behavior. New York: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sirkin, H. L., P. Keenan, and A. Jackson 2005. “Harvard Business Review.” October.
   Google Scholar
• Stead, D., Geerlings, H., & Meijers, E. 2004. Policy integration in practice: The integration of land use planning, transport and environmental policy-making in Denmark, England and Germany. Delft, Netherlands: Delft University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Suddaby, R. 2006. “What Grounded Theory Is Not.” Academy of Management Journal 49 (4): 633–642. doi:10.5465/amj.2006.22083020.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ‬Turse, N. 2013. Kill Anything that Moves: The Real American War in Vietnam. New York: Picador.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, F. W. 1967[1911]. The Principles of Scientific Management. New York & London: Norton.
   Google Scholar
• The Economist. 2018.“Design Thinking: People First.”
   Google Scholar
• Von Neumann, J., and O. Morgenstern. 1994[1944]. Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Weber, M. 1947. The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. [reprint 1947]. New York: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Weick, K. E. 2004. “Rethinking Organizational Design.” In Managing as Designing, edited by R. J. Boland and F. Collopy, 36–53. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wetter-Edman, K. 2014. “Design for Service: A framework for exploring designers’ contribution as interpreter of users’ experience.” Ph.D. diss., University of Gothenburg.
   Google Scholar
• Williamson, B. 2015b. “Governing Methods: Policy Innovation Labs, Design and Data Science in the Digital Governance of Education.” Journal of Educational Administration and History 47 (3): 251–271. doi:10.1080/00220620.2015.1038693.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wren, D. A., and A. G. Bedeian. 2009. The Evolution of Management Thought. 6th ed. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Yin, R. K. 2014. Case Study Research. 5th ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
   Google Scholar