1
The Factors Contributing towards
Innovation in Public Sector
Organisations
Copyright © 2022. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.
Introduction
As a result of its increasing importance to organisational leaders, communities, governments and nations, innovation is an increasingly important concept,
the rationale behind which is that change, reform and the creation of opportunities are essential for organisational, governmental and national survival,
competitiveness, growth, value and even dominance. However, little consensus
exists regarding what public sector innovation is, and to compound the issue
further, there is a scarcity of management frameworks for informing public
sector organisations about innovation processes (Bloch & Bugge, 2013; Parna &
Tunzelmann, 2007; Salge & Vera, 2012; Walker, Jeanes & Rowlands, 2002). For
these reasons, careful attention should be paid to what motivates or obstructs
innovation in the government sector.
While numerous studies have examined the factors contributing to innovation, the results of such research have often been vague and indefinite as there
is a lack of agreement around any definition of ‘innovation’ or particular unit
or tool for its measurement (Delbecq & Mills, 1985; Hage, 1999; Kimberley
& Evanisko, 1981). Although the concept of innovation has had various interpretations and paradigmatic approaches, a common understanding throughout
the literature is that innovation principally relies upon competence and leadership, as opposed to creativity or invention, which depend upon endeavour and
experimentation (Chapman, 2006).
Given the vagueness surrounding public sector innovation and the dearth
of management tools for understanding and fostering innovation processes
in public sector organisations, the conceptual framework developed in this
study seeks to offer a theoretical underpinning that will help individuals and
organisations better understand the forces at work in innovation in the government sector.
Literature Review
The more complex a given innovation, the greater the barriers a workforce
faces in its implementation (Torugsa & Arundel, 2016). In this regard, Torugsa
DOI: 10.4324/9781003191131-2
Moussa, Mahmoud, et al. Innovation and Leadership in the Public Sector : The Australian Experience, Taylor & Francis Group, 2022.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/flinders/detail.action?docID=7071043.
Created from flinders on 2022-10-06 01:38:39.
The Factors Contributing to Innovation 23
and Arundel (2016) argue that, in comparison to a simple innovation, public
sector employees encounter increasing obstacles when attempting to realise
complex innovations, which while being challenging to execute in highly
centralised organisations are more valuable than simple innovations. With this
in mind,Torugsa and Arundel (2016) and Moussa (2021a) suggest that a culture
of complex innovations in public sector employers can be encouraged through:
a
b
c
Developing management competencies.
Avoiding barriers through the recognition of sources of innovation.
Developing conditions to motivate all individuals in the organisation to
innovate.
Such a situation necessitates a system of incentives, in addition to ensuring
the resources required to invest in innovations. Further, the culture of a given
country will go a long way in determining how innovations will develop, for
example, new ideas and processes instead of improvements to existing systems.
Copyright © 2022. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.
Barriers to Organisational Innovation
Given that a significant number of barriers can hinder innovation, especially in
the public sector, this section will examine the barriers that exist to the creation
and development of a culture of innovation in the public sector.
Some bureaucracies depend upon old organisational models to determine
their modes of communication, compliance, order and control, rather than
taking on board novel, creative organisational models that seek to cultivate
commitment and improve communication amongst organisational members
(Moussa, 2021b). However, effective and productive innovation is unable to
thrive in traditional bureaucratic models (Golembiewski & Vigoda, 2000);
thus organisations following such models are frequently inefficient and stifle
efforts that could stimulate innovation. In a similar vein, encouraging public
sector innovation requires the acceptance of processes that help to dismantle
classic, bureaucratic models (Borins, 1998, 2000a, 2000b, 2001; Vigoda-Gadot
et al., 2008).
According to Mulgan and Albury (2003), there are several barriers that
could potentially hinder processes and systems of innovation in public sector
organisations in the UK: (a) delivery pressures and administrative burdens – in
the public sector, service managers are generally understood as being unable
to conceptualise innovations or do things differently with regard to service
delivery since the majority of their time is consumed with responding to
organisational pressures (Matthews, 2009); (b) poor rewards or incentives for
innovating – governments continually ignore the necessity to develop systems
of incentives for the promotion of public sector innovation; and (c) constraining
cultures or organisational arrangements despite technologies being available –
individuals and organisations may oppose rapid or wide-sweeping changes that
run counter to their organisational cultures.
Moussa, Mahmoud, et al. Innovation and Leadership in the Public Sector : The Australian Experience, Taylor & Francis Group, 2022.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/flinders/detail.action?docID=7071043.
Created from flinders on 2022-10-06 01:38:39.
24 The Factors Contributing to Innovation
Similarly, Borins (2001) and Mulgan and Albury (2003) pinpoint significant
barriers responsible for hindering processes of innovation, albeit not exclusively in the public sector: pressures regarding service delivery and administrative burdens (e.g. demanding workloads and service delivery requirements
resulting in minimising the potential for innovation) and obstacles within bureaucratic organisations (e.g. attitudes, behaviours and activities that run counter
to processes of innovation). Further barriers are recognised by Vigoda-Gadot
(2003) as short-term budgets and planning; a lack of rewards and incentives
for innovation; a culture of risk aversion; deficiencies in risk and change management; and an inability to terminate poorly performing programmes or
organisations. Taking a different approach, Koch and Hauknes (2005) identify
barriers such as the inherent tension between organising and innovating by
taking an organisation’s size into account.
Manimala, Jose and Thomas (2006), in examining large public sector
organisations in India, identify a number of barriers to innovation: A dearth
of systems of analysis, a lack of initiatives, a failure to acknowledge innovations
in non-primary issues, poor understandings of change management processes,
informal team building, a lack of emphasis on dissemination and commercialisation, deficient systems of rewards and recognition, inefficient procedures,
poor preservation of documentation, a lack of access to the latest technologies,
vague strategies on linking innovations with career development, unrecognised
contributions by support functions, little support from bosses or supervisors,
inadequate systems for championing and managing ideas and a lack of facilities
for pilot studies. This compelling evidence informs our first proposition:
Proposition 1: Key potential barriers, such as short-term budgets, inadequate
problem-solving skills and opposition to change have a negative impact on an
organisation’s ability to innovate in the public sector.
Copyright © 2022. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.
Understanding Notions of Leadership
Researchers have utilised various approaches and paradigms to examine the
impact of leadership on innovation. Burns and Stalker (1961) published their
ground-breaking work 50 years ago, which sought to integrate the concepts of
innovation and leadership. Since then, it has become commonly accepted that
leaders are a critical factor in promoting innovation and creativity (e.g. Montes,
Moreno & Garcia-Morales, 2005; Mumford, et al., 2002).Various studies highlight organisational leadership as an essential factor for positive organisational
outcomes and that there is a direct association between leadership and organisational performance at the individual, team and collective levels (Bass, 2008;
Clark, Murphy & Singer, 2014; Kaiser, Hogan & Craig, 2008; Lussier & Achua,
2013; McDermott, Kidney & Flood, 2011; Sarros, 2009; Yukl, 2012). Vroom
and Jago (2007) define innovation leaders as those motivating others towards
collaborative work to achieve new, noteworthy results. Appreciating employees’
work values ethic (WVE) can help augment their productivity and commitment
(Muenjohn & McMurray, 2016). In addition, leaders set priorities and shape
Moussa, Mahmoud, et al. Innovation and Leadership in the Public Sector : The Australian Experience, Taylor & Francis Group, 2022.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/flinders/detail.action?docID=7071043.
Created from flinders on 2022-10-06 01:38:39.
The Factors Contributing to Innovation 25
decision-making and have the authority and dedication that can improve
organisational performance. With all this in mind, the leadership behaviours
enhancing individuals’ innovative behaviour and creativity have thus far been
unidentified, making them an exciting locus of research (Khalili, Muenjohn &
McMurray, 2015).
‘Design leadership’ is understood to play an important role in innovative behaviour; however, it is still a relatively novel, highly debated concept.
According to Muenjohn and McMurray (2017), WVE and ‘design leadership’
have a significant effect on leadership behaviour and the four dimensions of
workplace innovation, respectively (McMurray & Dorai, 2003). In a survey of
154 teams working in Chinese and Indonesian enterprises,Yoshida, et al. (2014)
found that servant leadership enhances employee creativity and team innovation through encouraging identification with the leader. Through empirically examining the influence of leadership style and innovation in American
and Japanese research-intensive sectors, Osborn and Marion (2009) discovered
that transformational leadership is significantly associated with lower innovation. Whereas Cheung and Wong (2011) analysing different service sectors in
Hong Kong found a positive correlation between transformational leadership
and employee creativity, in addition to showing that such a positive relationship
is greater when a higher degree of leader encouragement exists.
In a survey of German research and development (R&D) employees
working in high-tech medical engineering, electronics, semiconductor, software, chemistry or biology industries, Eisenbeiss and Boerner (2013) observed
that employees show more creativity under transformational leadership. Finally,
in a cross-cultural study of 951 organisations in different industries across eight
countries, Engelen, et al. (2014) highlight that transformational leadership at
the organisational level positively influences innovation. The identified studies
inform the development of our second proposition:
Copyright © 2022. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.
Proposition 2: Key leadership behaviours, such as fostering self-awareness,
effective coordination and decisiveness, have a positive impact on an
organisation’s ability to innovate in the public sector.
Organisations’ Climates for Promoting Innovation
There is a plethora of reasons why organisations struggle to build the capacity
to be innovative. Therefore, a major challenge for practitioners is the development of systems, processes and environments for fostering both innovation
and creativity. In this sense, developing a supportive climate for enhancing the
innovative behaviour of employees is a necessity. When employees ‘feel good’
about their organisation’s environment, they perform their tasks to a higher
level, and, in turn, leaders anticipate that they will display innovative behaviours
and creativity (Tan, Smyrnios & Xiong, 2014). The literature conceptualises
organisational climate in various ways, one of which is focusing on individuals’
perceptions regarding organisational characteristics; in this regard, Schneider
(1990) interprets organisational climate as employees’ perceptions of events,
Moussa, Mahmoud, et al. Innovation and Leadership in the Public Sector : The Australian Experience, Taylor & Francis Group, 2022.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/flinders/detail.action?docID=7071043.
Created from flinders on 2022-10-06 01:38:39.
Copyright © 2022. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.
26 The Factors Contributing to Innovation
practices and procedures, in addition to the types of behaviours that are
rewarded, encouraged and anticipated in an organisation.
Another school of thought perceives organisational climate as an organisation’s
objective property or attribute, wherein organisational life exists independently
of organisational members’ perceptions (Ekvall, 1996). Climate has also been
construed with regard to its impact on organisational (e.g. problem-solving,
decision-making and communication) and psychological processes (e.g.
committing, creating and motivating) (Ekvall & Ryhammer, 1999).
In addition, research on organisational climate has shifted focus from a general conceptualisation to different aspects of organisational climate for different
purposes, e.g. a climate for safety (Flin, et al., 2000), for service (De Jong, De
Ruyter & Lemmink, 2004), initiative (Baer & Frese, 2003) or innovation (Ekvall,
1996; Hunter, Bedell & Mumford, 2007; Scott & Bruce, 1994).
Depending on their priorities, organisations may have different climates
within their midst, in that one organisation may have a service climate in
the service division, an innovation climate in the R&D department and a
shared overall climate of organisational citizenship and behaviour (Schneider,
Gunnarson & Niles-Jolly, 1994). Consequently, a number of climates have
emerged for evaluating the different dimensions supporting innovation and
creativity (Amabile, et al., 1996; Ekvall, 1996; Isaken, et al., 2001; Siegel &
Kaemmerer, 1978). According to Bamel, Budhwar and Bamel (2013), a significant amount of research into organisational climate is empirical and quantitative,
such as Von Treuer and McMurray (2012), who adopt a social constructionist
(objectivist) research design, or Hassan and Rohrbaugh (2012), who utilise a
general psychological climate (subjectivist) approach.
Glisson and James (2002) and Reichers and Schneider (1990) argue that
organisational climate is observable through organisational culture, while Schein
(2004) understands organisational climate as only a small part of organisational
culture, one which may be modified through adjusting certain practices and
processes. Such ‘local micro-climates’ may affect behavioural characteristics,
knowledge-sharing and workplace innovation (Moffett, McAdam & Parkinson,
2003;Van den Hooff & de Ridder, 2004;Von Treuer & McMurray, 2012). Bamel,
Budhwar and Bamel (2013) argue that while organisational climate is limited to
the workgroup, organisational culture may be connected to workgroup, departmental or organisational levels. According to Ren and Zhang (2015), challenge
stressors are positively associated with idea generation, and hindrance stressors
are negatively associated with idea generation, suggesting that the influence of
stressors on idea generation could be better understood if we analyse whether
the stressor is a challenge or a hindrance. In addition, a climate of organisational
innovation has a positive impact on both idea generation and implementation,
inferring that a climate of organisational innovation is significant to innovative
behaviours, particularly in the implementation stage (Ren & Zhang, 2015).
However, while a climate of organisational innovation is beneficial for innovative behaviour, the outcomes of such a climate of innovation may depend on
hindrance stressor levels. Thus, the present study recommends that employers
Moussa, Mahmoud, et al. Innovation and Leadership in the Public Sector : The Australian Experience, Taylor & Francis Group, 2022.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/flinders/detail.action?docID=7071043.
Created from flinders on 2022-10-06 01:38:39.
The Factors Contributing to Innovation 27
add more challenges to employees’ tasks and eliminate or remove hindrance
stressors so as to encourage the creation and development of innovative ideas.
Further, practitioners need to develop climates that cultivate innovation within
organisational structures and minimise hindrance stressors. This literature
informs our third and final proposition:
Leadership
Behaviour
/Skills
Copyright © 2022. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.
Organisation’s
Climate Issues
Barriers
❖ Foster Greater Self-Awareness and SelfDevelopment.
❖ Realistic; Optimistic; Reliable; Persistent;
Impartial; Considerate.
❖ Integrity/Honesty; Problem-Solving; DecisionMaking; Commitment; Support; Inspiring Others.
❖ Effective Coordination; Persuasive
Communication; Resilience; Courtesy and
Respect; Strategic Thinking; Conflict
Management.
❖ Prudence; Courage; Delegation/Empowerment;
Forward Thinking; Decisiveness.
❖ Psycho-Social Conditions.
❖ Physical Conditions and
Exposure.
❖ Work Wellbeing Practice.
❖ Productivity.
Workplace
Innovation
❖ Short-Term Budgets & Planning Issues; Lack of
Training & Coaching; Inaccurate Organisational
Structure.
❖ Lack of Problem-Solving Skills and Dialogue;
Severe Rules and Regulations; Deficiencies in
System Development.
❖ Lack of Managing Conflicts; Feelings of Biases
and Mistrust; Aggressive Attitudes or Activities;
Heavy Workloads.
❖ Old Organisational Models; Ineffective
Leadership Style.
❖ Administrative Burdens; Inadequate Rewards and
Incentives; Lack of Resources; Cultural
Differences.
❖ Resistance to Change; Top-Down Dictates;
Reinforcing a Culture of Inferiority; Workplace
Politics.
❖ Lack of Risk Management Competencies; Change
Management.
Figure 1.1 Conceptual Model.
Source: Authors.
Moussa, Mahmoud, et al. Innovation and Leadership in the Public Sector : The Australian Experience, Taylor & Francis Group, 2022.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/flinders/detail.action?docID=7071043.
Created from flinders on 2022-10-06 01:38:39.
28 The Factors Contributing to Innovation
Proposition 3: Positive organisational climate, such as physical conditions,
psycho-social conditions and well-being practices, has a positive impact on an
organisation’s ability to innovate in the public sector.
As shown in Figure 1.1, the authors present the antecedents of innovation
at different levels.
Conclusion
As a result of serious global competition, COVID-19 and the rapid development of technology, public sector organisations are increasingly viewing the
development of new ideas and innovations as both inevitable and of utmost
importance.This in-depth literature review was carried out to better understand
how to foster innovation in public sector organisations effectively. Rather than
offering any straightforward answers, particularly with regard to encouraging a
culture of innovation in the public sector (Management Advisory Committee,
2010), administrators and decision-makers should make themselves aware of
the many complications, restrictions and barriers outlined in this chapter, since
a better understanding of ways to augment, measure and encourage innovation
in the public sector would benefit both governments and nations as a whole.
Copyright © 2022. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.
References
Amabile, T.M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., & Herron, M. (1996). “Assessing
the Work Environment for Creativity”. Academy of Management Journal, 39(5),
pp. 1154–1184.
Baer, M., & Frese, M. (2003). “Innovation Is Not Enough: Climates for Initiative
and Psychological Safety, Process Innovations, and Firm Performance”. Journal of
Organisational Behavior, 24(1), pp. 45–68.
Bamel, U.K., Budhwar, P., & Bamel, N. (2013). “Revisiting Organisational Climate:
Conceptualization, Interpretation and Application”. Paper Presented to 3rd Biennial
Conference of the Indian Academy of Management (IAM), Indian Institute of Management,
Ahmedabad (IIMA), 12–14 December, 2013. Retrieved from http://vslir.iima.
ac.in:8080/xmlui/handle/11718/11533, accessed January 5, 2017.
Bass, B.M. (2008). The Bass Handbook of Leadership: Theory, Research and Managerial
Application (4th ed.). New York, NY: The Free Press.
Bloch, C., & Bugge, M.M. (2013). “Public Sector Innovation: From Theory to
Measurement”. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 27(null), pp. 133–145.
Borins, S. (1998). Innovation with Integrity.Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Borins, S. (2000a). “Loose Cannons and Rule Breakers or Enterprising Leaders?
Some Evidence about Innovative Managers”. Public Administration Review, 60(6),
pp. 498–507.
Borins, S. (2000b). “What Border? Public Management Innovation in the United States
and Canada”. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 19(1), pp. 46–74.
Borins, S. (2001). “The Challenge of Innovating in Government. The Pricewaterhouse
Coopers Endowment for the Business of Government”. Retrieved from www.strate
gie- cdi.ro/ spice/ admin/ UserFi les/ File/ CA%20The%20Ch alle nge%20of%20inn
ovating%20in%20government.pdf, accessed February 20, 2017.
Moussa, Mahmoud, et al. Innovation and Leadership in the Public Sector : The Australian Experience, Taylor & Francis Group, 2022.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/flinders/detail.action?docID=7071043.
Created from flinders on 2022-10-06 01:38:39.
Copyright © 2022. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.
The Factors Contributing to Innovation 29
Burns, T., & Stalker, G.M. (1961). The Management of Innovation. London: Tavistock.
Chapman, M. (2006). “Building an Innovative Organization: Consistent Business and
Technology Integration”. Strategy and Leadership, 34(4), pp. 32–38.
Cheung, M.F.Y., & Wong, C.S. (2011). “Transformational Leadership, Leader Support,
and Employee Creativity”. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 32(7), pp.
656–672.
Clark, J.R., Murphy, C., & Singer, S.J. (2014). “When Do Leaders Matter? Ownership,
Governance and the Influence of CEOs on Firm Performance”. The Leadership
Quarterly, 25(2), pp. 358–372.
De Jong, A., De Ruyter, K., & Lemmink, J. (2004). “Antecedents and Consequences of
the Service Climate in Boundary-Spanning Self-Managing Service Teams”. Journal
of Marketing, 68, pp. 18–34.
Delbecq, A.L., & Mills, P.K. (1985). “Managerial Practices that Enhance Innovation”.
Organizational Dynamics, 14(1), pp. 24–34.
Eisenbeiss, S.A., & Boerner, S. (2013). “A Double-Edged Sword: Transformational
Leadership and Individual Creativity”. British Journal of Management, 24(1), pp. 54–68.
Ekvall, G. (1996). “Organizational Climate for Creativity and Innovation”. European
Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 5(1), pp. 105–124.
Ekvall, G., & Ryhammar, L. (1999).“The Creative Climate: Its Determinants and Effects
at a Swedish University”. Creativity Research Journal, 12(4), pp. 303–310.
Engelen, A., Schmidt, S., Strenger, L., & Brettel, M. (2014). “Top Management’s
Transformational Leader Behaviours and Innovation Orientation: A Cross-Cultural
Perspective in Eight Countries”. Journal of international Management, 20(2), pp. 124–136.
Flin, R., Mearns, K., O’Connor, P., & Bryden, R. (2000). “Measuring Safety
Climate: Identifying the Common Features”. Safety Science, 34(1–3), pp. 177–192.
Glisson, C., & James, L.R. (2002). “The Cross-Level Effects of Culture and Climate in
Human Service Teams”. Journal of Organisational Behaviour, 23(6), pp. 767–794.
Golembiewski, R.T., & Vigoda, E. (2000). “Organizational Innovation and the Science/
Craft of Management”. In M.A. Rahim, R.T Golembiewski & K.D. Mackenzie
(eds.), Current Topics in Management,Vol. 5. (pp. 263–280). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Hage, J.T. (1999). “Organisational Innovation and Organisational Change”. Annual
Review of Sociology, 25, pp. 597–622.
Hassan, S., & Rohrbaugh, J. (2012). “Variability in the Organisational Climate of
Government Offices and Affective Organisational Commitment”. Public Management
Review, 14(5), pp. 563–584.
Hunter, S.T., Bedell, K.E., & Mumford, M.D. (2007). “Climate for Creativity: A
Quantitative Review”. Creativity Research Journal, 19(1), pp. 69–90.
Isaksen, S.G., Lauer, K.J., Ekvall, G., & Britz, A. (2001). “Perceptions of the Best and
Worst Climates for Creativity: Preliminary Validation Evidence for the Situational
Outlook Questionnaire”. Creativity Research Journal, 13(2), pp. 171–184.
Kaiser, R.B., Hogan, R., & Craig, S.B. (2008).“Leadership and the Fate of Organizations”.
American Psychologist, 63(2), pp. 96–110.
Khalili, A., Muenjohn, N., & McMurray, A. (2015). “Leadership Behaviour, Creativity
and Innovative Behaviour: Instrument Development Inquiry”. Hawaii, USA, February
04–06, 2015 (pp. 322–326). Bank Administration Institute (BAI).
Kimberley, J.R., & Evanisko, M.J. (1981). “Organizational Innovation: The Influence
of Individual, Organizational, and Contextual Factors on Hospital Adoption of
Technological and Administrative Innovations”. Academy of Management Journal,
24(4), pp. 689–713.
Moussa, Mahmoud, et al. Innovation and Leadership in the Public Sector : The Australian Experience, Taylor & Francis Group, 2022.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/flinders/detail.action?docID=7071043.
Created from flinders on 2022-10-06 01:38:39.
Copyright © 2022. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.
30 The Factors Contributing to Innovation
Koch, P., & Hauknes, J. (2005).“On Innovation in the Public Sector – Today and Beyond”.
PUBLIN Project on Innovation in the Public Sector, Report no. D20. Oslo: Nifu Step.
Lussier, R.N., & Achua, C.F. (2013). Leadership: Theory, Application & Skill Development
(5th ed.). Mason, OH: South Western Cengage Learning.
Management Advisory Committee (2010). Empowering Change: Fostering Innovation
in the Australian Public Service. Commonwealth of Australia. Retrieved from www.
apsc.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/53499/empoweringchange.pdf, accessed
March 25, 2016.
Manimala, M.J., Jose, P.D., & Thomas, K.R. (2006). “Organizational Constraints on
Innovation and Intrapreneurship: Insights from Public Sector”. The Journal for
Decision Makers, 31(1), pp. 49–60.
Matthews, M. (2009). “Fostering Creativity and Innovation in Cooperative
Federalism – the Uncertainty and Risk Dimensions”. In J. Wanna (ed.), Critical
Reflections on Australian Public Policy, (pp. 59–70). Australia New Zealand School of
Government (ANZSOG) Monograph.
McDermott, A., Kidney, R., & Flood, P. (2011). “Understanding Leader Development:
Learning from Leaders”. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 32(4),
pp. 358–378.
McMurray, A.J., & Dorai, R. (2003). “Workplace Innovation Scale: A New Method
for Measuring Innovation in the Workplace”. Refereed Paper, Organizational
Learning & Knowledge 5th International Conference, 30th May–2nd June, 2003, Lancaster
University, UK.
Moffett, S., McAdam, R., & Parkinson, S. (2003). “Technology and People Factors
in Knowledge Management: An Empirical Analysis”. Total Quality Management &
Business Excellence, 14(2), pp. 215–224.
Montes, F.J.L., Moreno, A.R., & Garcia-Morales, V. (2005). “Influence of Support
Leadership and Teamwork Cohesion on Organizational Learning, Innovation and
Performance: An Empirical Examination”. Technovation, 25(10), pp. 1159–1172.
Moussa, M. (2021a). “Examining and Reviewing Innovation Strategies in Australian
Public Sector Organisations”. In A. McMurray, N. Muenjohn & C.Weerakoon (eds.),
The Palgrave Handbook of Workplace Innovation (pp. 317–333). Cham, London: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Moussa, M. (2021b).“Barriers on Innovation in Australian Public Sector Organisations”.
In A. McMurray, N. Muenjohn & C. Weerakoon (eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of
Workplace Innovation (pp. 179–196). Cham, London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Muenjohn, N., & McMurray, A. (2016). “The Impact of Leadership on Workplace
Innovation in Thai and Vietnamese SMES”. The Journal of Developing Areas,
50(5), pp. 479–486. Special Issue on Kuala Lumpur Conference held in November
2015.
Muenjohn, N., & McMurray, A. (2017). “Design Leadership, Work Values Ethic and
Workplace Innovation: An Investigation of SMEs in Thailand and Vietnam”. Asia
Pacific Business Review, 23(2), pp. 192–204.
Mulgan, G., & Albury, D. (2003). Innovation in the Public Sector. Strategy Unit, Cabinet
Office, October 2003. Retrieved from www.sba.oakland.edu/faculty/mathieson/
mis 524/ resour ces/ readi ngs/ inn ovat ion/ innovati on_ i n_ th e_ pu blic _ sec tor.pdf,
accessed February 21, 2017.
Mumford, M.D., Scott, G.M., Gaddis, B., & Strange, J.M. (2002). “Leading Creative
People: Orchestrating Expertise and Relationships”. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(6),
pp. 705–750.
Moussa, Mahmoud, et al. Innovation and Leadership in the Public Sector : The Australian Experience, Taylor & Francis Group, 2022.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/flinders/detail.action?docID=7071043.
Created from flinders on 2022-10-06 01:38:39.
Copyright © 2022. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.
The Factors Contributing to Innovation 31
Osborn, R.N., & Marion, R. (2009). “Contextual Leadership, Transformational
Leadership and the Performance of International Innovation Seeking Alliances”. The
Leadership Quarterly, 20(2), pp. 191–206.
Parna, O., & Tunzelmann, N.V. (2007). “Innovation in the Public Sector: Key Features
Influencing the Development and Implementation of Technologically Innovative
Public Sector Services in the UK, Denmark, Finland and Estonia”. The International
Journal of Government and Democracy in the Information Age, 12(3), pp. 109–125.
Reichers, A.E., & Schneider, N. (1990). “Climate and Culture: An Evolution of
Constructs”. In B Schneider (ed.), Organizational Climate and Culture (pp. 5–39). San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Ren, F., & Zhang, J. (2015). “Job Stressors, Organizational Innovation Climate, and
Employees’ Innovative Behaviour”. Creativity Research Journal, 27(1), pp. 16–23.
Salge,T.O., &Vera,A. (2012).“Benefiting from Public Sector Innovation:The Moderating
Role of Customer and Learning Orientation”. Public Administration Review, 72(4),
pp. 550–559.
Sarros, J.C. (2009). Contemporary Perspectives on Leadership: Focus and Meaning for Ambiguous
Times (1st ed.). Melbourne: Tilde University Press.
Schein, E.H. (2004). Organizational Culture and Leadership (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Schneider, B. (1990). “The Climate for Service: An Application of the Climate
Construct”. In B. Schneider (ed.), Organizational Climate and Culture (pp. 383–412).
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Schneider, B., Gunnarson, S.K., Niles-Jolly, K. (1994). “Creating the Climate and
Culture of Success”. Organizational Dynamics, 23(1), pp. 17–29.
Scott, S.G., & Bruce, R.A. (1994). “Determinants of Innovative Behavior: A Path Model
of Individual Innovation in the Workplace”. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3),
pp. 580–607.
Siegel, S.M., & Kaemmerer, W.F. (1978). “Measuring the Perceived Support for
Innovation in Organisations”. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63(5), pp. 553–562.
Tan, C.S.L., Smyrnios, K.X., & Xiong, L. (2014). “What Drives Learning Orientation
in Fast Growth SMEs?” International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research,
20(4), pp. 324–350.
Torugsa, N.A., & Arundel, A. (2016). “Complexity of Innovation in the Public Sector: A
Workgroup-Level Analysis of Related Factors and Outcomes”. Public Management
Review, 18(3), pp. 392–416.
Van Den Hooff, B., & De Ridder, J.A. (2004). “Knowledge Sharing in Context: The
Influence of Organizational Commitment, Communication Climate and CMC Use
on Knowledge Sharing”. Journal of Knowledge Management, 8(6), pp. 117–130.
Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2003). Managing Collaboration in Public Administration: Governance,
Businesses, and Citizens in the Service of Modern Society. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Vigoda-Gadot, E., Shoham, A., Schwabsky, N., & Ruvio, A. (2008). “Public Sector
Innovation for the Managerial and the Post-Managerial Era: Promises and Realities
in a Globalizing Public Administration”. International Public Management Journal, 8(1),
pp. 57–81.
Von Treuer, K., & McMurray, A.J. (2012). “The Role of Organizational Climate Factors
in Facilitating Workplace Innovation”. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and
Innovation Management, 15(4), pp. 292–309.
Vroom,V.H., & Jago, A.G. (2007). “The Role of the Situation in Leadership”. American
Psychologist, 62(1), pp. 17–24.
Moussa, Mahmoud, et al. Innovation and Leadership in the Public Sector : The Australian Experience, Taylor & Francis Group, 2022.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/flinders/detail.action?docID=7071043.
Created from flinders on 2022-10-06 01:38:39.
32 The Factors Contributing to Innovation
Copyright © 2022. Taylor & Francis Group. All rights reserved.
Walker, R.M., Jeanes, E., & Rowlands, R. (2002). “Measuring Innovation: Applying
the Literature-Based Innovation Output Indicator to Public Services”. Public
Administration, 80(1), pp. 201–214.
Yoshida, D.T., Sendjaya, S., Hirst, G., & Cooper, B. (2014). “Does Servant Leadership
Foster Creativity and Innovation? A Multi-Level Mediation Study of Identification
and Prototypicality”. Journal of Business Research, 67(7), pp. 1395–1404.
Yukl, G.A. (2012). Leadership in Organizations (8th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education
Limited.
Moussa, Mahmoud, et al. Innovation and Leadership in the Public Sector : The Australian Experience, Taylor & Francis Group, 2022.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/flinders/detail.action?docID=7071043.
Created from flinders on 2022-10-06 01:38:39.