Innovation in public sector organisations: a study of Australian state government departments
Creators: name: MOUSSA, Mahmoud
Publisher: name: RMIT University
Year: 2024
Subjects: classificationCode: 350704
subject: Entrepreneurship

description: There is little consensus about how innovation occurs in Australian state government departments. This lack of knowledge impedes the growth and execution of innovation in the Australian public sector. The three major objectives of this thesis are to: (1) identify specific barriers to innovate in public sector organisations in Australia; (2) identify leadership characteristics that promote a culture of innovation; and (3) investigate the relationship between barriers, leadership characteristics, organisational climate and workplace innovation at four different levels in Australian public sector organisations. Hence, this thesis explores the dynamics of innovation in these organisations and specifically State government departments. The diversity of interpretations of public sector innovation leads to a plethora of management tools. These tendencies are also evident in the literature. This thesis seeks to clarify the factors that impact on innovation in Australian public sector organisations. This thesis is framed by 'innovation systems theory', which emphasises that innovation does not function in isolation. It depends on the interaction between numerous actors, entities and external stakeholders. In this thesis, the author argues that from an innovation systems perspective, barriers to innovation, leadership characteristics, and organisational climate are activities that influence innovation processes at four different levels. These determinants are not independent of each other but instead support and reinforce or offset one another. This thesis by analysing the determinants/dynamics of innovation in Australian State government departments, will deploy a sequential exploratory mixed methods research design consisting of qualitative data from annual reports, newsletters, and websites of several state government departments in Australia and quantitative survey as a method of inquiry. The thesis formulates a conceptual framework that comprises organisational barriers to innovation, leadership characteristics, and organisational climate. A qualitative research approach served to address the three thesis research questions. The researcher employed both thematic and content analyses through multiple methods of qualitative and quantitative approaches employing NVivo Pro11 and Pro12 software. The first stage analysis involved an analysis of Federal governments¿ initiatives, action plans and advice to State governments. The second stage analysis involved an analysis of the policies and strategies of each State government. The third stage analysis involved an examination of the strategies and implementation policies of specific State government departments, namely: the Department of Education; the Department of Environment; the Department of Health and Human Services; and the Department of the Premier and Cabinet across six States and two territory governments of Australia. As well, a quantitative research approach was applied to test hypotheses using statistical procedures and generalising to a large population from the sample. The first stage of the quantitative analysis involved the first generation of multivariate data analysis techniques, these being statistical methods such as correlations and regressions. Meanwhile, the second stage of analysis was conducted at four different levels of innovation to show in-depth analysis. Hence, a partial least squares-structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) analysis was applied. PLS-SEM added more depth to the regression employed. The findings were constructed by providing a comprehensive description of the research settings. Based on the quantitative analysis of the hypothesised relationships, the findings revealed that H1 was fully supported and indicated that key barriers do impact on the ability to innovate in public sector organisations at the individual level.  H2, H3, and H4 were not supported and indicated that key barriers have no impact on the ability to innovate in public sector organisations at the organisational, team, and climate levels. Moreover, H5, H6, H7, and H8 were fully supported and indicated that leadership characteristics wield an impact on the ability to innovate in such institutions at the individual, organisational, team, and climate levels. Likewise, H9, H10, H11, and H12 were fully supported and indicated that organisational climate has an impact on the ability to innovate in the public sector at the individual, organisational, team, and climate levels. Based on the qualitative analysis, the data revealed three critical issues and its mechanisms that could stimulate or hinder a culture of innovation in public sector organisations in Australia: organisational barriers (e.g. staff resistance; severe rules and regulations; old organisational models; lack of resources and autonomy; lack of measurement tools; budget and funding; and lack of professional development plans); leadership characteristics (e.g. supportive and risk-taker; passionate, practical and persistent; leading by example; influential and inspirational; decisiveness, courtesy and respect; decision-making; coaching; strategic leadership; national leadership; and inclusive leadership); and organisational climate (e.g. policy development; organisation¿s size and structure; a culture of sharing; initiatives; labs; incentives; collaboration and networking; measurement tools; embracing diversity; commitment; behavioural insights; and workplace planning). Based on these findings, the researcher attempted to clarify all aspects by developing some figures under each piece of finding (theme). The thesis findings provided strong and comprehensive empirical evidence for a relationship between several factors that affect the ability to innovate in the Australian public sector and for the first time address innovation at four levels (individual, organisational, team, and climate). Ultimately, the researcher developed a model for workplace innovation, as well as recommendations for scholars and practitioners.