Translating innovative practices into organizational knowledge in the public sector: A case study

Abstract

Previous research suggests that innovation is heavily informed by strategic management theories and that there is little engagement with practice-based approaches. A case study of a public sector organization identified as doing something innovative is presented. Four main themes emerged. Two themes, the ‘importance of a mandate’ and the ‘development of trust’, had their foundations in traditional management practices. The others, ‘capacity to challenge the norms’ and ‘boundary spanning’, emerged from practice. It is suggested that a managerial approach that developed a supportive setting for innovation enabled the development of practices whereby innovation was effectively recognized, nurtured and sustained.

The nature of management frameworks

“…Given the challenges to translate good management ideas into practice (see e.g., Ferguson & Blackman, 2017), this study corroborates how and why a framework becomes a common ground for a management realm. In a broad sense, the purpose of a framework in becoming an intersubjective reality is to communicate a shared system of meaning.…”

Functional leadership in interteam contexts: Understanding ‘what’ in the context of why? where? when? and who?

“…Communication (Bearman et al, 2010), collaboration (Beck & Plowman, 2013), learning (Chan et al, 2003), coordination (Newell & Swan), identity (Gray et al, 2019), cohesion (Ferguson & Blackman, 2019), trust (Chen & Wang, 2008) 4. When is leadership occurring?…”

“…Likewise, Ferguson and Blackman (2019) found that boundary spanning was related to team cohesion and performance in top management teams and this relationship was magnified as an increasing number of team members-aside from the CEO-participated in boundary spanning activities. Currently, however, both the extent to which formal versus informal leaders should engage in cross-boundary leadership and the extent to which 'boundary-spanning' behaviors reflect the phenomenon of 'leadership' remain poorly understood.…”

“…For example, in the context of studies within Category 2, researchers have depicted crossboundary processes as functions that formal leaders might enact and additionally, as functions that can be distributed among multiple team members . However, the studies we reviewed typically measured the overall 'amount' of team boundary spanning without considering which team members are enacting those processes (Ancona et al, 2002;Elkins & Keller, 2003;Ferguson & Blackman, 2019). The few exceptions to this trend suggest that there are meaningful effects when the patterning of team members' boundary spanning behavior is taken into account (Oh et al, 2004;Büchel et al, 2013).…”

Memórias Individuais E Coletividades: Uma História Oral Da (Privatização Da) Embratel

“…Não foi à toa então que o tema da memória organizacional passou a gerar pesquisas de caráter instrumental para as organizações, tais como gestão do conhecimento e aprendizagem organizacional (p.e., Argote et al, 2003;Miller & Martignoni, 2016;Liu et al, 2018), inovação (p.e., Olivera, 2000Garud et al, 2011;Ferguson & Blackman, 2017), desempenho individual e organizacional (p.e., Kmieciak, 2019;Laureiro-Martinez et al, 2019) e esquecimento organizacional (p.e., Nissley & Casey, 2002;Rao & Argote, 2006;Casey & Olivera, 2011;Holan, 2011). A memória, para essas pesquisas, serviria como um instrumento de gestão por parte da organização, visando a melhoria do seu desempenho.…”