Search

This is a mixed-methods field experiment on the effects of an evidence-based creativity training program on public servants’ creativity as a developable skill. Its aim is to determine the effects of an evidence-based creativity training program on multiple dimensions of public servants’ creativity and scrutinize the underlying causal mechanisms. Specifically, it aims to scrutinize whether the training results in positive results on the dimensions ‘radicalism, ‘proactivism’, ‘idealism’ and ‘practices’ of public sector creativity: 1) more radical ideas, 2) more proactive ideas, 3) an increase in idealistic evaluations of ideas and 4) an increase in the degree and diversity of applied practices. Public sector creativity is central to public sector organizations’ performance. Public sector creativity—defined as “public servants coming up with novel and useful ideas through various practices” (Houtgraaf et al. 2021: 3)—is the crucial front-end of the innovation process (Amabile 1996; Anderson, Potocnik, and Zhou 2014); the ideas that public servants generate are the origin of public sector innovations. Public sector creativity is thereby paramount to public sector organizations’ innovativeness and thus their ability to optimally serve the public interest. The salience of public sector creativity has resulted in an increasing focus on this skill and how to improve it. Creativity in the public sector, however, appears atypical. Initially, the public sector was assumed hospitable to stereotypical uncreative public servants (Chen and Bozeman 2014) and inhospitable to creativity (Bommert 2010) due to salient bureaucratic conditions that are at odds with creativity (see e.g., Houtgraaf et al. 2022; Boyne 2002; Chen and Bozeman 2014; Borins 2000; Bozeman and Feeney 2011; Wise 1999; Rainey 1999). However, recent explorations of public sector creativity indicate that public sector creativity has to be approached multidimensionally (Houtgraaf et al. in progress; Rangarajan 2008). Public servants are in fact creative, albeit pragmatic in nature, exemplified by the dimensions of the predominant incremental magnitude of ideas, reactive triggering of creativity and realistic evaluations of ideas (Houtgraaf et al. 2021; Houtgraaf et al. in progress; Houtgraaf in review; Kruyen & Van Genugten 2017); public servants appear to predominantly generate incremental ideas reactively through application of various practices, with usefulness and feasibility as most valued characteristics of the ideas. This illustrates that the concept of public sector creativity encapsulates four dimensions. These dimensions encompass magnitude of ideas (incremental/radical), triggers of ideas (reactive/proactive), perspective on creativity (realism/idealism) as well as the creative practices generally applied (autonomous creative thinking, networking, experimenting etc.) (Houtgraaf 2022; Houtgraaf et al. 2022; Houtgraaf et al. 2021). The pragmatic nature of public sector creativity indicates that there appears to be room for improvement in terms of four dimensions of public sector creativity: radicalism, proactivism, idealism and practices. Creativity training programs may result in the improvements on these four dimensions of public sector creativity. Accordingly, multiple public sector organizations aim to improve their workforce’s creativity. One of the most direct means to accomplish this goal, is through a training in creativity, focusing on improvement in terms of the four dimensions of public sector creativity. However, literature on the effects of creativity training in the public sector is absent. Creativity training programs are implemented in the public sector, but without any scientific underpinnings. Prior training programs generally lacked theoretical substantiation and quantified insight into their effects. In the Netherlands, there are multiple organizations that train public servants in becoming more creative. The largest training organization is Ynnovate; a public sector creativity training organization with an ongoing active network of over 50 organizations featuring over 1500 public servants. In cooperation with Ynnovate, a new training was developed based on the results of novel scientific findings regarding creativity in the public sector (Houtgraaf et al. 2022; Houtgraaf 2022; Houtgraaf et al. 2021). This cooperation allowed for an evidence-based public sector creativity training program regarding creativity in the public sector that is substantiated by valid measurements of its effects, as well as allowing insight into the underlying causal dynamics. Therefore, the researchers and Ynnovate collaborated in the development of the training program and the subsequent measurements of its effects. This led to the ‘Ynnovate in je Werk’ training that is the subject of this research. The aim of this research is to scrutinize whether evidence-based creativity training programs—and the ‘Ynnovate in je Werk’ training program in particular—have an effect on public servants’ creativity, on which dimensions of their creativity these effects apply and what causal dynamics underly these effects. Whether training programs in creativity have effects, is disputed. Firstly, there is a paucity of research on the effect of creativity training (Klijn & Tomic 2010; Ma 2009), a general narrow focus (Woodman et al. 1993) and a complete absence of such research regarding the public sector specifically. For example, some authors argue that creativity in general is not a fixed trait-like quality of individuals, but rather a skill that can be taught, learned, practices and improved (Amabile and Pillemer 2012; Shalley & Gilson 2004). Others argue a more detailed stance, namely that creativity training programs’ effectiveness are contingent on a number of factors, such as the individual versus group-based training programs (Woodman et al. 1993), the stage of the creative process as well as the degree leadership (Basadur 1997) and other social support (Khessina et al. 2014), though also these findings did not always replicate (Klijn & Tomic 2010). However, to the best of our knowledge, this training program is the first to be developed based on scientific theory and in collaboration with academics. Furthermore, the effects of creativity training programs on public sector creativity specifically, despite all its idiosyncrasies, is yet to be scrutinized. Therefore, this research focuses on determining the effects of an evidence-based creativity training program on the four dimensions of public servants’ creativity by means of a quasi-experiment and scrutinize the underlying causal mechanisms by means of semi-structured qualitative interviews.

The project brings two lines of earlier research together: neuropolitical research and the BPA. Neuropolitical research aims to understand the neural mechanisms underlying political information processing and decision making, focusing on specific brain regions that are involved in affective and evaluative processing such as the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), the insular cortex and the amygdala (Haas et al., 2020; Jost et al., 2014). Jost et al.’s review study also shows that a more conservative political preference is positively associated with certain personality traits: resistance to change, negativity bias, authoritarianism, need for closure, sensitivity or fear of threats, anxiety, and conscientiousness. It is negatively associated with openness to new experiences, complexity, uncertainty and ambiguity. Several of these variables have also been studied in the BPA studies and proven to be related to citizens’ opinions and satisfaction with public service delivery (cf. references above). Therefore, we aim to explore whether there is also a direct or indirect effect of personality traits and cognitive neural correlates on citizens’ knowledge, preferences and expectations of public service delivery.

The main question addressed in this book chapter is: Are the OECD transparency and BEPS Framework the right framework for a global and sustainable tax governance that benefits not only OECD and G20countries but also non-OECD and non-G20 countries, including developing countries? In order to answer this question, this chapter will provide an analysis of sustainable tax governance taking into account the sustainable development goals (SDGs) that the global tax initiatives aim to address and the mechanisms to achieve these goals.

Negotiation is ubiquitous in the public sector, from policy formation to budget allocation or the coordination of public–private partnerships. The focus on negotiations has nevertheless been somewhat limited in public administration research, but in neighboring disciplines such as behavioral economics and social psychology, negotiations have been studied extensively. This chapter aims at filling this gap.This chapter discusses negotiations by focusing on the individual negotiator. I focus on what a negotiation is and who negotiates in the public sector by discussing some substantive examples. Distributive and integrative negotiations are discerned and are accompanied by some public sector illustrations. Specific attention is given to public sector distinctiveness in context and its workers and its potential consequences for negotiations.

Autonomy and control are important dynamics in each advisory system. Autonomy is important because it ensures independent and critical advice and allows advisors to ‘speak truth to power’ (Wildavsky 1989; Pielke 2010). At the same time, government control is also an important aspect (Van Twist et al. 2015; Craft and Halligan 2015; Halligan 1995) to assure that advices are on-topic, on-time, in the right format, and relevant for government decision-making,- and policymaking processes. This paper describes the trade-off the Netherlands, Sweden, and the United Kingdom make with regard to the level of ‘autonomy’ and ‘control’ of their policy advisory bodies. We make a distinction between legal, economic, and operational means (Kunneke 1991) through which autonomy is stimulated or control is exercised on a managerial and policy (primary processes) level of policy advisory bodies.

This chapter identifies how electronic public service delivery has diffused in various public sector organizations in Europe. Three, in practice intertwined, sources of influence are identified: opportunity (the seemingly inevitable and autonomous impact of technologies), inscription of normative structures (the materialization of abstract ideas and rhetoric in specific types of information and communication technologies) and enthusiasms (the sometimes overstated beliefs, held by various stakeholders, that technology is the answer to all kinds of questions). The way these sources of influences work out in practice is demonstrated by discussing the diffusion of a specific type of electronic government, that is personalized electronic service delivery, in ten Dutch municipalities. The chapter is ended with reflections and directions for future research.

Many empirical studies of European public administration and public management are case studies. In light of a trend towards more quantitative research and the rise of behavioural public administration, this chapter makes an argument for the continuity of case study research, as it is often better equipped to deal with macro-level phenomena and processes. This chapter then ventures into the practice of case study research by European scholars, providing information concerning the nature of 103 case studies published by Governance and Public Administration in 2001, 2006, 2010 and 2015. Based on this review and recent developments in case study methodology, we provide some suggestions for case study designs, including theoretically informed case selection, competitive theory testing and more sensitivity to “time” and its various manifestations.

Contains fulltext : 141078.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) This article aims to contribute to recent debates on research methods in public administration by examining the use of quantitative methods in public administration research. We analyzed 1,605 articles published between 2001–2010 in four leading journals: Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory (JPART), Public Administration Review, Governance, and Public Administration (PA). Results show that whereas qualitative methods are still predominant compared to quantitative methods (56% versus 44%), the field is becoming increasingly quantitative. Of quantitative methods used, surveys are most dominant, while a combination of methods is used far less often. In general, very few studies use a mixed methods design. As to the areas of research, we found that the use of quantitative methods is unequally distributed; some subfields (public management) use quantitative methods more often than others (policy and politics), and some journals (JPART, PA) publish articles on quantitative research more than others (Governance). Implications for public administration research are discussed. 26 p.

Contains fulltext : 141063.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) Public employees are confronted with various pressures, such as increased work demands and the need to implement controversial policies. This study uses work alienation and policy alienation models to analyze work and policy pressures. Based on a survey of 790 respondents, it was first found that work alienation results in less work effort and more intention to leave. Second, policy alienation negatively affects behavioral support for a policy and the intention to implement it. These results suggest that work alienation and policy alienation have different—but both important—effects on (intended) behavior on the job. 22 p.