Building innovative public institution

Abdullahi, Danjuma; Baba, Yahaya T.; Musa, Ramli

doi:10.1504/ijpp.2016.079750

Cited by 1 publication

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Yet, cultural aspects and local management settings should be taken into account: even if many authors describe that the introduction of “team-based” management and optimization of processes may improve the governance and management of an institution ( 31 , 54 ), Song ( 64 ) shows that such strategy may not be effective in a historical hierarchical administration setting. Leaders can encounter challenges to convince staff that changes are possible and can be positive, and that “new autonomies” for staff due to decentralization process demand higher accountability of results at lower levels – yet, these processes can be facilitated ( 79 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Innovations are determinants of good service provision of an institution ( 31 , 56 ), and can as well contribute to increased transparency and, consequently, to the reduction of fraud and corruption. The use of new technologies (digitalization) enables institutions to “implement governmental information reforms more efficiently and effectively” ( 79 ) and simplifies the interface between citizens and the state ( 31 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many sources of evidence in this review show that for any organization, measuring performance and results is crucial for institution building, and that there is a wide array of approaches and instruments ranging from performance measurement, monitoring and evaluation to different types of audits. As state-owned and public organizations often suffer from poor reputation, low legitimacy, and are often perceived by the public as being corrupt ( 45 , 47 , 66 , 69 , 79 ), control and the transparent dissemination of findings is critical.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Transparent management of resources is good business practice ( 22 , 66 , 79 ), increasing the recognition by the society and increasing its support ( 5 , 44 ). The integrity of public sector institutions is a crucial basis to prevent corruption.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Yet, they should be regulated by high level authorities (e.g., the Ministry of Health) for their establishment and functioning, including areas of expertise, experience, roles, responsibilities, skills and remunerations (51). (22,66,79), increasing the recognition by the society and increasing its support (5, 44). The integrity of public sector institutions is a crucial basis to prevent corruption.…”

Section: External Framework and Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Strengthening national public health institutes: a systematic review on institution building in the public sector

Brugnara,

Jaramillo,

Olarte-Peña

et al. 2023

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionStrong and efficient institutions are vital to the development of well-functioning governments and strong societies. The term “institution building” encompasses the creation, support, development, and strengthening of organizations and institutions. Still, there is little aggregated evidence on “institution building” considering a wider system-thinking approach, best practices, or development cooperation specifically in the field of public health. In 2007, the International Association of National Public Health Institutes (IANPHI) created a guiding Framework that countries may use for developing National Public Health Institutes (NPHIs). This Framework is currently being revised.MethodsIn this context, we conducted a systematic review to facilitate this revision with recent evidence on institution building and its potential contribution to NPHI. We followed the PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews, searching for relevant publications in seven scientific databases (Pubmed, VHL/LILACS, EconLit, Google Scholar, Web of Science, World Affairs Online, ECONBIZ) and four libraries (World Bank; European Health for All database of the World Health Organization European Region, WHO; Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, OECD; and the African Union Common Repository). The search was carried out in October 2021. We used the “framework analysis” tool for systematically processing documents according to key themes.ResultsAs a result, we identified 3,015 records, of which we included 62 documents in the final review. This systematic review fills a major gap of aggregated information on institution building in the field of public health and National Public Health Institutes. It is to our knowledge the first systematic review of this kind. The overriding result is the identification and definition of six domains of institution building in the health sector: “governance,” “knowledge and innovation,” “inter-institutional cooperation,” “monitoring and control,” “participation,” and “sustainability and context-specific adaptability.”DiscussionOur results show that the described domains are highly relevant to the public health sector, and that managers and the scientific community recognize their importance. Still, they are often not applied consistently when creating or developing NPHIs. We conclude that organizations engaged in institution building of NPHIs, including IANPHI, may greatly benefit from state-of-the-art research on institution building as presented in this study.

show abstract