Manchester Institute of Innovation Research

Manchester Institute of Innovation Research

MIIRO

C RS

Innovation Service Innovation

Public Service Innovation

what messages from the collision of innovation studies and services research?

Ian MilesIan.Miles@mbs.ac.uk, Ian.Miles@hse.ru

1st International EIBURS-TAIPS Conference on: Innovation in the public sector and the development of e-services

DESP, University of Urbino, April 19-20 2012

Pictures from: http://www.cuin.co.uk/oldbuggas/layby.htmhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/icl_2900_computers

Back-office efficiency:DHSS Longbenton ICL 2970Late 1970s

Public Services – pioneers in large-scale computer use

Local government; Back-office computerisation dramatically increasing speed of service delivery

Public Services – basic office automation

Electronic Public Information – mid 1980sLAVA had over 120 members at peak

Local Authority Videotex Association

Library ServicesHighway Services Council Meetings Careers, Job OpeningsContact Us

Techno-enthusiasts in local government. Vision of public access to dataand ultimately transactional and interactive applications to widen democracy

The Prestel story• Introduced by Post/Telecomms – “public authority”- in many countries (prestige/ national champions/ learning to be information societies. Engineers looking for new services, initially as public utilities.• In UK unpromising pilot studies were ignored – innovators were convinced that this was the wave of future, and that they had the design paradigm (not used to consumer choice).• Expectations of massive take up – millions – but slow growth, never much more than 100k adopters in UK• Many information services put material online – but TV manufacturing industry was uncooperative (teletext as competitor!)• Consumer resistance to tying up TV and telephone, especially where little value-added information content; consumer adoption low: mainly business (esp. travel) and hobbyist use.•French Minitel story completely different – helped by free provision of terminals incorporating screens, new telecomms links – but also more open attitude to content providers and more transparent pricing; and learned from experiments about importance of interaction (messagerie).

NHS Direct

Inspired by example of telephone banking – why can’t we offer a user-friendly one-stop shop.

Defence Research – saving soldiers

Worked with Cambridge team using new tools for design of steels; then needed to persuade manufacturers to try out production (and engineering firm to punch holes).Key individual drove project over a decade.

Competition?• Certainly not the only driver of innovative effort:• Engineering and management aesthetics• and fashions• Public interest motivations• Often these sorts of personal commitment factor are important in creating

product champions who are vital for large-scale project success. (Which can be a problem with scaling up of services: loss of original visionary.)

• Competition at level of individuals seeking status and social prestige, in professional communities and work environments, and often route to mobility within (bureaucratic and other) organisations.

• Structurally: Competition in terms of assessment of performance against other comparable organisations – NPM-type performance indicators (and their sometimes perverse use by policymakers and citizens).

• Competition against private service providers (with different cost structures, often related to lack of full-service, universal service requirements), and against self-service and other innovations using new technologies or social innovations.

Public Services – definition for purpose of this account

O Public administration and defence, compulsory social security (division 84)

P Education (division 84)

QA Human health services (division 86)

QB Residential care and social work activities (divisions 87 + 88)

R Arts, entertainment and recreation (divisions 90 to 93)

NOT State-Owned Enterprises in, e.g., post and telecomms, transport, utilities… Though sometimes there are striking parallelsBigger question of “public services industry”Mainly human and informational transformations.

Stylised Features• Public services are typically very large scale organisations – especially

where run by national governments or large regional bodies.• Services that interact with the public typically have numerous local branches of

several types. Some are more or less replicas of other local branches, some may be specialist establishments.

• Often service ”consumers” have many touchpoints, extended over lengthy time, and possibly with a succession of establishments and service workers. “User” is often multiple, including (e.g.) wider family/community (in different roles).

• Local branches have moderate to high levels of managerial and professional autonomy – subject to political influence; and variations across services.

• Multi-level governance structures are common.• Limited ability to raise funds or determine long-term budgets.

• Some have very high levels of highly qualified staff – education, health, social work, often with many specialisms within these (and often much “boundary work”) .Some are dominated by mid-range staff – public administration, social security. Some are more a matter of low-skill workers – sanitary services and the like. Thus, almost as varied as the service sectors themselves.

11

Diversity in Workforce education

Agriculture

Manufacturing

HORECA

Trade Transport Pub.

Admin.

Other Sers.

FIRE

Education

Business Sers._ Health & Soc.

Sers.

HIGH SKILL

LOW SKILL

MEDIUM SKILL

EU, 2000

Innovation Research• Traditional (Manufacturing) Innovation Research – mainly focused on

technological product and process change. (assumes it is generally beneficial, at least for competitiveness.)

• Service Innovation research – service innovation (new service development) vs innovation in services

• Assimilation versus Demarcation perspectives. Demarcation stresses:oInvolvement of Customers/Clients (rather than remoteness from

production):• Coproduction (interactivity)• Product/process interpenetration• Experience (content)• Interaction with staff (mutual learning)

oIntangibility (rather than physical goods):• Comparability, demonstrability• Issues of IPR, less standard technology/ R&D focus• Services as newcomers to advanced technology

oOrganisational innovation (business models/ policy?)

Non-technological innovation (does involve technique and knowledge)

Organisational (institutional) innovation

Assesses and supports best practice – issue of metrics – but critique from lobbies about suppressing some “innovations”

http://www.nice.org.uk/aboutnice/

• Much survey work addresses innovation in services - private service firms (of size >ten employees)

• Reports different patterns in services of different types – and diversity across firms within sectors – could thus anticipate the same across different elements of a broad public service, if not necessarily across different local branches of one such element.

• Confirms that many services emphasise organisational innovation more

•But technological innovators also tend to be organisational innovators

•Huge variation in levels and styles of innovationoKIS > manufacturingoTraditional services report low levels (partly a scale issue)

Service Innovation Research

[inspired not least by Rob Glushko’s extensive work on front and back stage service processes]

Schematic Service Process

Back Office (back stage) Front Office

(front stage)User ( and wider

user communities)

Employees Organisation Infrastructure Infostructure

Business Partners

If back-office innovation is largely driven by pursuit of efficiency, then we might expect rather

similar trajectories in both public and

private services – and office-based aspects

of manufacturing Even if less

competitiveness driver, scale of public

services may promote early

adoption of office IT - & organisational

innovation?

Schematic Service Process

Back Office (back stage) Front Office

(front stage)User ( and wider

user communities)

Employees Organisation Infrastructure Infostructure

Business Partners

May be multiple back

offices – representing

different layers of

organisational hierarchy – up

to the responsible ministries/

govt. Departments – and functional

specialisms e.g. hospital

laboratories vs. management

structures

Service – and site of new

service delivery in case

of service innovation

Many different roles; outsourcing. PPPs, suppliers of innovative goods

and services – role of third sector.

Barras’ Reverse Product Cycle +

Back Office (back stage) Front Office

(front stage)User ( and wider

user communities)

Employees Organisation Infrastructure Infostructure

Business PartnersNew IT –

technological revolution in

service industries – introduced initially for efficiency reasons in large-scale

data processing

New services produced or delivered by

new IT

Supply new IT plus organisational advice/models

Learning about IT capabilities, and

exploitation of data on individuals (etc.),

together with improved IT, means scope for improved

quality in service

Users employ own platforms

and access data from

many sources to increase

own capabilities in

service coproduction

New and Improved Public Services

Back Office (back stage) Front Office

(front stage)User ( and wider

user communities)

Employees Organisation Infrastructure Infostructure

Business Partners

Data analytics, data sharing

across boundaries

(though some privacy issues and the like).

New services based on better

data on user characteristics and contexts, and on more

intensive data exchange – not just e-delivery

Third Sector – social innovation as well as technological

Scope for rapid feedback e.g. from

experiments, prototypes; new

service design

New roles for Users and

Communities – including

user innovation

New data and understanding – neurosciences, ecological data, and problem-specific tools including new IT (visualisation, robotics) but also

others relating to specific services (e.g. pharmacy, surgery).

Location – and Dimensions - of Service Innovation (den Hertog)

Back Office (back stage) Front Office

(front stage)User (wider user

communities)

Employees Organisation Infrastructure Infostructure

Business Partners

Service Concept

Customer Interaction

Value System

Delivery (Technology)Delivery

(Organisation)

Revenue Model

P den Hertog, W van der Aa,

M W. de Jong, (2010)

"Capabilities for managing service innovation: towards a conceptual framework", Journal of Service Management, Vol. 21 I(4), pp.490 – 514

Innovations often involve change on several dimensions

Capabilities required for Service Innovation (den Hertog)

Back Office (back stage) Front Office

(front stage)User (wider user

communities)

Employees Organisation Infrastructure Infostructure

Business Partners

Service Concept

Customer Interaction

Value System

Delivery (Technology)Delivery

(Organisation)

Revenue Model

P den Hertog, W van der Aa, M W. de Jong, (2010)

"Capabilities for managing service innovation: towards a conceptual framework", Journal of Service Management, Vol. 21 I(4), pp.490 – 514

Plus, public services: capabilities in mediating between political and operational

Sales, after sales

Partnering, M&A,

procurement

Finance, strategy

HRMTechnology

Marketing

New servi

ce

solutions a

nd

experie

nces

“Sales” and “revenue model” terminologies less relevant: performance assessment and indicators more.

Public Service Innovation Prospects• Major challenges:

• Fiscal Crisis (continued) – pressure to cut costs (e.g. use of paraprofessionals) and outsource (including to third sector). Scope for political crises and media agenda-setting.

• Demographics and Global Issues creating new conditions of social needs (including those relating to service success)

• User expectations, demands and activity• Rapid technological change in IT, and much learning across many organisations; new

“consumer” platforms, new functionalities (e.g. locational data, health monitoring) • Privacy and data security (and other system vulnerabilities)

• Opportunities to learn:• Open Innovation• Adaptation of ideas and frameworks – including lessons from New Service Development

e.g. project-and product orientation, analysis of innovation relative to market (not just supplier), measurement of quality and performance; and from Service Design tools, philosophies, communities.

• New IT capabilities, e.g. data analytics• “Consumers” as a Resource.

Implications for Innovation Studies• Synthesis approach contributions:

• Nature and trajectory of innovations as shaped by factors beyond competition, regulatory compliance, and the usual suspects.

• Variety across both public and private services in terms of governance, regulation, public and media relations, etc. Possibly some sets of service where similarities and differences depend on features other than public/private characterisation. Need to explore and establish ways of assessing capabilities.

• Networks of innovators include organisations with distinct drivers and structural features, which need to be seen in wider terms than “barriers”.

• Between theory and practice:• Grand challenges confronting our societies almost always require combination of goods

and services, private and public action. Understanding public service innovation can inform analysis and design of grand responses. (Example – active independent living, with health monitoring and lifestyle enhancing technology and communication systems supported by new structures of health and social care service organisation and provision.)

• Or more modestly, public-private partnerships are commonplace (though groundrules evolving), and wider understanding required to grasp innovation in such circumstances.

END OF PRESENTATION