INNOVATION TYPE AND DIFFUSION: AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2006.00004.x |
| Date | 01 June 2006 |
| Author | RICHARD M. WALKER |
| Published date | 01 June 2006 |
Public Administration Vol. 84, No. 2, 2006 (311–335)
© Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2006, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street,
Malden, MA 02148, USA.
INNOVATION TYPE AND DIFFUSION:
AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF LOCAL
GOVERNMENT
RICHARD M . WALKER
This paper presents the fi rst empirical test of innovation type and diffusion in
local government. Five types of innovations – one product, three process and one
ancillary – were tested in a multivariate model that included environmental, orga-
nizational and diffusion variables. The research was conducted on 120 upper tier
English local authorities using a multiple informant survey instrument. Results in-
dicate that adoption of innovation is both complex and contingent – different factors
drive the diffusion of different types of innovation across upper tier English local
government. These fi ndings suggest that further research is required on the interac-
tions of types of innovation in public organizations and that policy instruments
developed to assist adoption need to be sensitive to variations between innovations.
INTRODUCTION
Innovation has been promoted by governments around the world as a key
tool to improve public services. The UK Labour Government ’ s public man-
agement policies echo this leaning and innovation is promoted in all public
service arenas. The Prime Minister ’ s Strategy Unit argues that innovation
is a core task of public organizations that improves responsiveness and
effi ciency ( Mulgan and Albury 2003 ). The ‘ Public Service Improvement’
principles of national standards, devolution and delegation, fl exibility and
incentives and greater choice for the consumer, as laid out in Reforming Our
Public Services. Principles into Practice (Offi ce of Public Services Reform (OPSR)
2002), require public agencies to formulate and implement new approaches
to public service delivery. Examples include the Police Standards Unit, Local
Primary Care Trusts, work to reduce red tape led by the Cabinet Offi ce ’ s
Regulatory Impact Unit, and the National College of School Leadership
(OPSR 2002). As a means to achieve improvements in public service delivery,
innovation also remains prominent in ongoing consultation on the future of
English local government (ODPM 2004).
Innovation is complex and contested. Some organizations may adopt in-
novations to deliver better services to users, others for the purpose of insti-
tutional legitimacy (Feller 1982). Innovations may result from many sources.
Public service organizations may respond to internal and external changes
and independently develop and implement innovations ( Osborne 1998;
Richard M. Walker is Professor in Public Management in the University of Hong Kong and Cardiff
School of City and Regional Planning, Cardiff University.
312 RICHARD M. WALKER
© Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2006 Public Administration Vol. 84, No. 2, 2006 (311–335)
Newman et al. 2000; Walker et al. 2001; Downe et al. 2004 ). Some innovations
may emerge through interactions involving central and local government –
not only does central government press local authorities to roll out some
nationally developed programmes but some national programmes have
been inspired by practice in local government (for example, Right to Buy and
the Citizen ’ s Charter). Governments put in place strategies to encourage the
adoption of innovation – the Labour government ’ s public service improve-
ment strategy recognizes the innovative capacity of public organizations and
has developed mechanisms to diffuse innovations, including learning
( Downe et al. 2004 ) and contestability (OPSR 2002). Case study evidence
suggests that variations in the adoption of ‘ innovative programmes of man-
agement reform’ are a product of the differences in councils, structures,
cultures and values ( Newman et al. 2001 ). Consequently, the factors that
drive the adoption of innovation need clarifi cation.
The evidence that draws out the impact of different infl uences on the
adoption of innovation is typically case study based and does not consider
the factors resulting in the diffusion of different types of innovation. This
paper seeks to occupy this space in the literature by providing an empirical
analysis of the diffusion of innovation across English local government by
isolating types of innovations and the factors associated with their adoption.
Innovation diffusion is concerned with the diffusion of innovation through
a population of potential adopter organizations over time and/or space
( Wolfe 1994 ). The cumulative adoption of an innovation over time is de-
picted as a horizontal S-shaped curve when an innovations saturation point
is reached ( Rogers 1995 ). However, the research evidence is incon clusive and
it is ‘ not known when or why the curve applies’ ( Wolfe 1994 , p. 408). Factors
infl uencing the diffusion of innovations have included: the characteristics of
an innovation (for example, the extent to which an innovation is compatible
with the organization); the complexity of the innovation; the type of innova-
tion decision; the way information about an innovation is communicated;
the social system; and, the role of change agents ( Rogers 1995 ). However,
models such those of Rogers were developed by observing the behaviour of
individuals not organizations. Where models have been applied to organiza-
tions the research has only considered one type of innovation ( Berry 1994;
Damanpour et al. 2004 ) or one set of determinants ( Damanpour 1987 ). This
paper seeks to examine if different environmental, organizational and diffu-
sion variables infl uence the adoption of different types of innovation. If in-
novations in public organizations are not homo geneous and their adoption
is effected by different factors then the processes by which innovation is
diffused across a population of local authorities is more complex than hith-
erto shown. If this is the case it has implications for the theory and practice
of innovation and its management.
The balance of the paper is structured as follows. The section that follows
defi nes innovation and its types. The model of diffusion used in this study is
then discussed. The methods of data collection for the 120 English upper tier
To continue reading
Request your trial