Public services management and co-production in multi-level governance settings

Abstract

From a normative stance, co-production has been recommended at all stages of the public service cycle. However, previous empirical studies on co-production have neglected the question of how to make this happen. Moreover, little attention has been paid to how co-production might occur in multi-level governance settings. The aim of this article is to fill these gaps, identifying triggers and organizational and managerial issues that could support the adoption of co-production in multi-level governance settings. The empirical analysis is based on a case study of services for autistic children. The findings highlight that co-production was prompted by inter-organizational arrangements and that trust-building among the actors played a pivotal role in nurturing a coproduction approach. Points for practitionersFrom an organizational perspective, our case study shows that, in order to foster coproduction in multi-level governance settings, all stages of the public service cycle should be aligned and inspired by the same logic. From a managerial perspective itCorresponding author: Enrico Guarini, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Business Administration, Finance, Management and Law, Via R. Bicocca degli Arcimboldi, 8, 20126 Milan, Italy. Email: enrico.guarini@unimib.it highlights that the implementation of co-production requires new managerial skills and tools. Public managers are asked to listen to community groups and individuals, to mobilize collective resources and knowledge, and exercise a meta-governance role. Finally, in order to have co-produced services, our findings point to the need to start thinking differently about the roles of civil society and government in satisfying the common good.

Reading Public Service Co-Production through the Lenses of Requisite Variety

“…These results echoed what has been found in previous research (Sicilia et al, 2016;Gastil & Levine, 2005), which emphasizes the role of mediators in promoting citizens involvement. The trust built by on-line communities allowed to establish a strong commitment to the co-production initiative, removing the barriers produced by short-term personal interest of individual co-producers.…”

“…However, in the last decade the increasing fiscal pressures on governments and the growing expectations of the population served contributed in making co-production a common theme in public reforms and policies (Sicilia, Guarini, Sancino, Andreani, & Ruffini, 2016). In this context, public service co-production is aimed at enhancing the responsiveness and the effectiveness of public sector organizations (Bovaird, Van Ryzin, Loeffler, & Parrado, 2015).…”

Public budgeting in search for an identity: state of the art and future challenges

“…This logic initially has been promoted in a situation in which citizens were mainly viewed as passive actors that receive services and elect their representatives. With the emergence of ideas of 'active citizenship' and new forms of participatory democracy (Hendriks 2010), as well as of wider views of co-production as co-planning and co-design (Bovaird 2007;Sicilia et al 2016;Barbera, Sicilia, and Steccolini 2016) citizens are increasingly seen as active players in public governance, directly involved in deliberations and provisions of services. In the light of such developments, the potential contribution of budgeting to external accountability, both in terms of transparency and communication and in terms of stakeholder involvement and participation requires further investigation.…”

Designing for sustainable outcomes: espousing behavioural change into co-production programmes

“…Sicilia, Guarini, Sancino, Andreani, and Ruffini (2016), expands this notion to emphasise that there are several reasons that have brought about the preference for increased citizen participation, and these include 'the attempt to improve public service quality by bringing in the expertise of users and their networks; the need to provide public services that are better targeted and more responsive to users; the possibility of using co-production as a way of cutting costs; the opportunity to create synergies between government and civil society with a positive impact on social capital ' (p. 2, citing Brudney & England, 1983;Ostrom, 1996;Pestoff, 2009;Seligman, 1997).…”