Reducing the gap between rhetoric and reality: Use of Digital Service Standards for public service innovation through digital transformation in Australia

IF 2.1 4区 管理学 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Australian Journal of Public Administration Pub Date : 2023-10-31 DOI:10.1111/1467-8500.12615
Eric Patterson, Renu Agarwal
{"title":"Reducing the gap between rhetoric and reality: Use of Digital Service Standards for public service innovation through digital transformation in Australia","authors":"Eric Patterson,&nbsp;Renu Agarwal","doi":"10.1111/1467-8500.12615","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <p>Nearly a decade ago, the Australian Federal Government introduced a Digital Service Standard (DSS) for new and redesigned government services. This was an opportunity to encourage digital services and disruptive innovations to help the government improve citizens outcomes, and indeed there was a significant uptake in the digital services assessments offered by the program with key government agencies across health, human services, taxation, and education on board. However, by the 2020s the number of publicly visible assessments had significantly reduced. The initial broad adoption and recent reduction in numbers present an opportunity to explore the effectiveness of this government innovation management program that was ahead of its time. This paper reviews the impact of the DSS in fostering public service innovation and presents lessons learnt from the program. To perform this analysis, this research evaluates to what extent the DSS applied common private sector innovation management approaches of Innovation Process Management and Innovation Portfolio Management in the public sector. It also looks at the impact of these programs in encouraging specific types of modern digital innovations. The analysis draws on DSS assessments from 2015 to 2021 and considers how the program demonstrated public sector innovation leadership. This paper proposes a framework to improve the DSS by tailoring its approach for new and existing services, adopting specific standards to encourage incremental and disruptive innovations, and promoting more transparent reporting and funding of innovation management programs. This evaluation found that the DSS exemplifies Innovation Process Management in its use of stages and gates, and Innovation Portfolio Management in its use of targeted assessment criteria across innovation portfolios of various government agencies. The analysis also identified design limitations in the DSS as a whole of government innovation management approach due to its limited uptake in multiple large agencies and lack of specific standards to encourage different types of innovation. The impact of this research is to increase the adoption of the DSS and increase the innovation outcomes delivered by this government program. We conclude by reflecting some of the unique considerations in applying private sector innovation management practices in the public sector.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Points for practitioners</h3>\n \n <div>\n <ul>\n \n <li>Innovation management techniques are emerging but remain immature in the public sector.</li>\n \n <li>Australia has shown leadership in Government Innovation Process and Portfolio Management.</li>\n \n <li>Government must remain committed to innovation management programs and sharing the outputs of these programs.</li>\n \n <li>Government Innovation Management Programs should build in flexibility to encourage different types of innovation.</li>\n </ul>\n </div>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47373,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","volume":"82 4","pages":"557-589"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-8500.12615","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8500.12615","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Nearly a decade ago, the Australian Federal Government introduced a Digital Service Standard (DSS) for new and redesigned government services. This was an opportunity to encourage digital services and disruptive innovations to help the government improve citizens outcomes, and indeed there was a significant uptake in the digital services assessments offered by the program with key government agencies across health, human services, taxation, and education on board. However, by the 2020s the number of publicly visible assessments had significantly reduced. The initial broad adoption and recent reduction in numbers present an opportunity to explore the effectiveness of this government innovation management program that was ahead of its time. This paper reviews the impact of the DSS in fostering public service innovation and presents lessons learnt from the program. To perform this analysis, this research evaluates to what extent the DSS applied common private sector innovation management approaches of Innovation Process Management and Innovation Portfolio Management in the public sector. It also looks at the impact of these programs in encouraging specific types of modern digital innovations. The analysis draws on DSS assessments from 2015 to 2021 and considers how the program demonstrated public sector innovation leadership. This paper proposes a framework to improve the DSS by tailoring its approach for new and existing services, adopting specific standards to encourage incremental and disruptive innovations, and promoting more transparent reporting and funding of innovation management programs. This evaluation found that the DSS exemplifies Innovation Process Management in its use of stages and gates, and Innovation Portfolio Management in its use of targeted assessment criteria across innovation portfolios of various government agencies. The analysis also identified design limitations in the DSS as a whole of government innovation management approach due to its limited uptake in multiple large agencies and lack of specific standards to encourage different types of innovation. The impact of this research is to increase the adoption of the DSS and increase the innovation outcomes delivered by this government program. We conclude by reflecting some of the unique considerations in applying private sector innovation management practices in the public sector.

Points for practitioners

  • Innovation management techniques are emerging but remain immature in the public sector.
  • Australia has shown leadership in Government Innovation Process and Portfolio Management.
  • Government must remain committed to innovation management programs and sharing the outputs of these programs.
  • Government Innovation Management Programs should build in flexibility to encourage different types of innovation.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
缩小修辞与现实之间的差距:通过澳大利亚的数字化转型,使用数字服务标准进行公共服务创新
大约十年前,澳大利亚联邦政府为新的和重新设计的政府服务引入了数字服务标准(DSS)。这是一个鼓励数字服务和颠覆性创新以帮助政府改善公民成果的机会,事实上,该方案提供的数字服务评估得到了卫生、公共服务、税收和教育等关键政府机构的大力接受。然而,到本世纪20年代,公开可见的评估数量大幅减少。最初的广泛采用和最近的数量减少提供了一个机会来探索这个领先于时代的政府创新管理计划的有效性。本文回顾了决策支持计划在促进公共服务创新方面的影响,并介绍了该计划的经验教训。为了进行这一分析,本研究评估了决策支持系统在公共部门应用创新过程管理和创新组合管理等常见的私营部门创新管理方法的程度。它还着眼于这些项目在鼓励特定类型的现代数字创新方面的影响。该分析借鉴了2015年至2021年的DSS评估,并考虑了该计划如何展示公共部门创新领导力。本文提出了一个改进决策支持系统的框架,方法包括:为新的和现有的服务量身定制其方法,采用具体标准鼓励渐进式和颠覆性创新,促进创新管理项目的报告和资助更加透明。评估发现,决策支持系统在阶段和门的使用上体现了创新过程管理,在不同政府机构的创新组合中使用了有针对性的评估标准,体现了创新组合管理。该分析还指出了决策支持系统作为一个整体政府创新管理方法的设计局限性,因为它在多个大型机构中的应用有限,而且缺乏鼓励不同类型创新的具体标准。这项研究的影响是增加了决策支持系统的采用,并增加了政府项目所带来的创新成果。最后,我们反映了一些在公共部门应用私营部门创新管理实践的独特考虑。创新管理技术正在兴起,但在公共部门仍不成熟。澳大利亚在政府创新过程和投资组合管理方面发挥了领导作用。政府必须继续致力于创新管理项目,并分享这些项目的成果。政府创新管理计划应建立灵活性,以鼓励不同类型的创新。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
9.10%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Aimed at a diverse readership, the Australian Journal of Public Administration is committed to the study and practice of public administration, public management and policy making. It encourages research, reflection and commentary amongst those interested in a range of public sector settings - federal, state, local and inter-governmental. The journal focuses on Australian concerns, but welcomes manuscripts relating to international developments of relevance to Australian experience.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information - TOC Issue Information - TOC Knowledge brokering for public sector reform ‘We're trying to get out of here, that's what we're doing’: A Bourdieusian examination of ‘choice’ in the National Disability Insurance Scheme Knowing what not to know: Unravelling the dynamics of selective knowledge in government policymaking
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1