Sustaining innovation: Creating nonprofit and government organizations that innovate naturally

Auger, Deborah A.

doi:10.1002/(sici)1520-6688(199921)18:2<343::aid-pam10>3.0.co;2-m

Cited by 7 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Subsequently, the relative importance of each barrier was determined by computing the weight ω j of each barrier via the utilization of its (R + C) and (R − C) values, denoting prominence and relation, respectively, as shown in Equation (7). Afterward, every discovered weight was normalized using Equation ( 8) and thereafter arranged in order of rank.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The concept of SCs is quite new; nevertheless, the pursuit of innovation has always been a prominent focus for urban areas and municipal administrations [6][7][8][9]. Cities are often given significant resources and autonomy to pursue and execute environmental and infrastructural initiatives, making cities potential hubs for groundbreaking innovation.…”

Section: Literature Review 21 Barriers To Sc Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Analysis of the Barriers to Smart City Development Using DEMATEL

Makki,

Alqahtani

2024

Urban Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study analyzes the barriers to developing smart cities (SCs) using the decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) approach. The primary objective is to identify, classify, and assess the main barriers hindering the progress of SCs. Through an extensive literature review, twelve main barriers were identified. The DEMATEL approach models and analyzes the relationships among these barriers based on expert input. The results reveal that technical problems, a lack of infrastructure, and high costs are classified as cause barriers. Security and privacy concerns and the absence of coordinated planning are classified as effect barriers. This study emphasizes the need for established criteria and iterative development requirements. Although the influence of knowledge and skills gaps and a lack of awareness is less significant, these aspects still require attention. The findings suggest that a comprehensive approach focusing on technical solutions, infrastructure development, strategic planning, and cybersecurity measures can effectively overcome barriers. Regular evaluation of barrier dynamics is crucial for implementing adaptive measures. The results provide decision-makers with a valuable model to address the challenges and foster the efforts of SC stakeholders.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Review 21 Barriers To Sc Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of the Barriers to Smart City Development Using DEMATEL

Makki,

Alqahtani

2024

Urban Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such organisations as churches, charities, and professional associations, have been involved in social policy making for longer than the nation‐state (Béland & Morgan, 2021). Compared to government, they are usually considered high‐quality providers of social services (Billis & Glennerster, 1998; Weisbrod, 1989), not least because they are more likely to develop innovative practices (Light, 1998; Osborne, 1998). Third‐sector organisations are also found to be overwhelmingly focused on breaking users' reliance on their services over time, thereby contributing to improving individual autonomy and reducing costs associated with repeated interventions.…”

Section: From Subsidiarisation To Spaces Of Subsidiaritymentioning

confidence: 99%

Spaces of subsidiarity: A comparative inquiry into the social agenda of Cohesion Policy

Ballantyne,

Mascioli

2024

Soc Policy Adm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cohesion Policy—the European Union's (EU) policy platform for regional and local development—represents a major yet often neglected instance of Social Europe. In this article we inquire into the delivery of Cohesion Policy projects concerned with social policy objectives. Specifically, we ask: how are these projects delivered? Building on the literature of subsidiarisation in social policy, we theorise that the interaction of two processes—vertical subsidiarisation across territorial levels and horizontal subisidiarisation across sectoral levels—generates different spaces of subsidiarity, with major implications for policy outputs and outcomes. Empirically, we explore the emergence of spaces of subsidiarity in over 800 Cohesion Policy projects for quality employment and labour mobility delivered in Italy, Portugal, and Spain, during the 2010s. We show that, despite common rules, the governance framework through which the social agenda of Cohesion Policy is implemented is not a constant but a variable, one that may be leveraged by future research to explain the heterogeneous impact of Cohesion Policy across the EU. Our contribution is relevant to research on Social Europe, research on the territorial dimension of post‐industrial welfare systems as well as research on Cohesion Policy.

show abstract

“…Edquist [59] proposed the implementation of organizational and technological aspects in process innovation. While the OECD has defined process innovation through [27], it later updated it with the term technological process innovation (TPI) [26] to show a more precise distinction from organizational process innovation [58,[60][61][62][63]. TPI is adopting new or significantly improved technological production methods, including product delivery methods.…”

Section: Process Innovationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Framework for Measuring Process Innovation Performance at Indonesian State-Owned Companies

Suwignjo

Gunarta

Wessiani

et al. 2022

Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several state-owned companies (SOEs) have successfully implemented process innovation. This paper examines the success factors that influence the successful implementation of process innovation in Indonesian state-owned companies. The present study used the three stages of an online questionnaire in the Delphi method to obtain consensus from experts. The consensus was measured based on the mean and standard deviation of the assessment answers provided by our respondents. Based on the development of process innovation implementation frameworks shown in previous studies, we obtained 28 factors that influence the successful implementation of process innovation. Our panelists believed that human resources and organizational factors, such as leadership, problem understanding, strategy, and culture, affected the success of process innovation in SOEs, even more than the research and development budget, support, and commitment factor of a given company. Meanwhile, cost efficiency was the main factor driving a company’s motivation to implement process innovation. The success factors in implementing process innovation are an essential consideration for the management of other SOEs eager to improve their company’s innovation performance, especially process innovation. Success factors were carried out comprehensively for all implementation indicators of process innovation, including inputs, process (idea generation, idea selection, and idea implementation), outputs and outcomes, diffusion, culture, strategies, and push and pull factors.

show abstract

Sustaining innovation: Creating nonprofit and government organizations that innovate naturally

Cited by 7 publications

References 1 publication

Analysis of the Barriers to Smart City Development Using DEMATEL

Analysis of the Barriers to Smart City Development Using DEMATEL

Spaces of subsidiarity: A comparative inquiry into the social agenda of Cohesion Policy

Framework for Measuring Process Innovation Performance at Indonesian State-Owned Companies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About