Abstract
Human-centric service innovation in public services means that citizens’ needs, knowledge, and experiences are taken as sources of innovation (Feurstein et al. 2008). Several methodologies have been applied to understand and capture citizens’ needs, knowledge, and experiences. These include focus groups, living labs, and democratic experiments. The aim of this chapter is to explore how a practice-based approach could contribute to a human-centric perspective on service innovation, particularly emphasizing innovation in public services. A practice-based approach recognizes the messy reality of everyday life, the difficulties in controlling the knowledge required for the innovation process, and the real practices of co-innovation. Innovation is not a readymade entity from the beginning, or a specific procedure, but rather an accomplishment. Managers and practitioners would probably prefer linearized models of innovation instead of messy realities. Nevertheless, the chapter finds that managers and employees can have an interest in working with a practice-based approach to mobilize citizens for service co-innovation. The chapter discusses how human-centric service innovation is integrated with co-production in public services, defines how a practice-based model treats knowledge and learning, demonstrates findings from a case study of public services, and discusses the advantage of the practice-based model from a managerial, an employee, and a societal perspective.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Alam, I., & Perry, C. (2002). A customer-oriented new service development process. Journal of Services Marketing, 16, 515–534.
Alford, J., & O’Flynn, J. (2012). Rethinking public service delivery: Managing with external providers (The public management and leadership series). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Alvesson, M., & Kärreman, D. (2007). Constructing mystery: Empirical matters in theory development. Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1265–1281.
Antonacopoulou, E. P. (2008). On the practise of practice: In-tensions and ex-tensions in the ongoing reconfiguration of practices. In D. Barry & H. Hansen (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of new approaches to organization studies (pp. 112–134). London: Sage.
Baker, T., & Nelson, R. E. (2005). Creating something from nothing: Resource construction through entrepreneurial bricolage. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50, 329–366.
Björgvinsson, E., Ehn, P., & Hillgren, P. –A. (2010). Participatory design and democratizing innovation. In Proceedings of the 11th biennial participatory design conference, pp. 41–50.
Boltanski, L., & Thévenot, L. (2006). On justification: Economies of worth. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1980). Le Sens pratique. Paris: Les Ă©ditions de minuit.
Bovaird, T., & Loeffler, E. (2012). From engagement to co-production: The contribution of users and communities to outcomes and public value. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 23, 1119–1138.
Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (1991). Organizational learning and communities-of-practice: Toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovation. Organization Science, 2, 40–57.
Brown, T. (2008). Design thinking. Harvard Business Review, 86(6), 85–92.
Brudney, J. L., & England, R. E. (1983). Toward a definition of the co-production concept. Public Administration Review, 43, 59–65. https://doi.org/10.2307/975300.
Bugge, M. M., & Bloch, C. W. (2016). Between bricolage and breakthroughs–framing the many faces of public sector innovation. Public Money & Management, 36, 281–288. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2016.1162599.
Cooper, R. G. (1990). Stage-gate systems: A new tool for managing new products. Business Horizons, 33, 44–54.
de Souza Bispo, M. (2016). The practice approach: For a praxeology of organisational and management studies. Annals of Tourism Research, 61, 170–179.
Di Domenico, M., Haugh, H., & Tracey, P. (2010). Social bricolage: Theorizing social value creation in social enterprises. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(4), 681–703.
Dutilleul, B., Birrer, F. A., & Mensink, W. (2010). Unpacking European living labs: Analysing innovation’s social dimensions central European. Journal of Public Policy, 4, 60–85.
Echeverri, P., & Skålén, P. (2011). Co-creation and co-destruction: A practice-theory based study of interactive value formation. Marketing Theory, 11, 351–373. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470593111408181.
Edquist, C. (2005). Systems of innovation: Perspectives and challenges. In J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery, & R. R. Nelson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of innovation (pp. 181–208). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Eide, D., Fuglsang, L., & Sundbo, J. (2017). Management challenges with the maintenance of tourism experience concept innovations: Toward a new research agenda. Tourism Management, 63, 452–463.
Engeström, Y., Miettinen, R., & Punamäki, R. L. (1999). Perspectives on activity theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fagerberg, J. (2005). Innovation: A guide to the literature. In J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery, & R. R. Nelson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of innovation (pp. 1–26). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Feldman, M. S., & Orlikowski, W. J. (2011). Theorizing practice and practicing theory. Organization Science, 22, 1240–1253. https://doi.org/10.1287/Orsc.1100.0612.
Feurstein, K., Hesmer, A., Hribernik, K. A., Thoben, K.-D., & Schumacher, J. (2008). Living labs: A new development strategy. In J. Schumacher & V. P. Niitamo (Eds.), European living labs-a new approach for human centric regional innovation (pp. 1–14). Berlin: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag.
Fuglsang, L. (2011). Bricolage as a way to make use of input from users. In M. Toivonen & J. Sundbo (Eds.), User-based innovation of services. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Fuglsang, L. (2018). Towards a theory of a practice-based approach to service innovation within spheres of interaction. In A. Scupola & L. Fuglsang (Eds.), Services, experiences and innovation: Integrating and extending research (pp. 147–164). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Fuglsang, L., & Sørensen, F. (2011). The balance between bricolage and innovation: Management dilemmas in sustainable public innovation. Service Industries Journal, 31, 581–595.
Fuglsang, L. & Møller, J.K. (forthcoming). The challenge of bridging public and private innovation patterns. In D. Billis & C. Rochester (Eds), Handbook on Hybrid Organisations. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Fuglsang, L., & Sundbo, J. (2005). The organizational innovation system: Three modes. Journal of Change Management, 5, 329–344.
Garud, R., & Karnoe, P. (2003). Bricolage versus breakthrough: Distributed and embedded agency in technology entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 32, 277–300.
Gherardi, S. (2006). Organizational knowledge: The texture of workplace learning. Oxford: Blackwell.
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Grönroos, C., & Voima, P. (2013). Critical service logic: Making sense of value creation and co-creation. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 41, 133–150.
Helkkula, A., Kelleher, C., & Pihlstrom, M. (2012). Characterizing value as an experience: Implications for service researchers and managers. Journal of Service Research, 15, 59–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670511426897.
Jarzabkowski, P., Balogun, J., & Seidl, D. (2007). Strategizing: The challenges of a practice perspective. Human Relations, 60, 5–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726707075703.
Jensen, J. F., & Sørensen, F. (2018). Front-line employee-based experience innovation in tourism. In A. Scupola & L. Fuglsang (Eds.), Integrating service, innovation and experience research. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Jensen, M. B., Johnson, B., Lorenz, E., & Lundvall, B. Å. (2007). Forms of knowledge and modes of innovation. Research Policy, 36, 680–693.
Karlson, J. (2018). Frontline employees’ role in service innovation and value creation. Doctoral thesis. Karlstad Univcersity Studies, Karlstad.
Københavns Kommune. (2015). Livskvalitet for ældre i almene boligområder [Life quality for elderly in social housing]. Project document. Sundheds- og omsorgsforvaltningen, Københavns Kommune.
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. In Clarendon lectures in management studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Law, J., & Singleton, V. (2005). Object Lessons. Organization, 12, 331–355.
Lawrence, T. B., & Suddaby, R. (2006). Institutions and institutional work. In S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy, T. B. Lawrence, & W. R. Nord (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organization studies (2nd ed., pp. 215–254). London: Sage.
Lounsbury, M., & Crumley, E. T. (2007). New practice creation: An institutional perspective on innovation. Organization Studies, 28, 993–1012. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840607078111.
Luhmann, N. (2002). Deconstruction as second-order observation. In W. Rasch (Ed.), Theories of distinction. Redescribing the descriptions of modernity (pp. 94–112). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Mouffe, C. (2000). The democratic paradox. London: Verso.
Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D., & Hillier, J. (2013). Social innovation: Intuition, precept, concept. In F. Moulaert, D. MacCallum, A. Mehmood, & A. Hamdouch (Eds.), The international handbook on social innovation: Collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research (pp. 13–24). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Nabatchi, T., Sancino, A., & Sicilia, M. (2017). Varieties of participation in public services: The who, when, and what of coproduction. Public Administration Review, 77, 766–776.
Nesti, G. (2017). Living labs: A new tool for co-production? In A. Bisello, D. Vettorat, R. Stephens, & P. Elisei (Eds.), Smart and sustainable planning for cities and regions. Cham: Springer.
Nicolini, D. (2009a). Articulating practice through the interview to the double. Management Learning, 40, 195–212.
Nicolini, D. (2009b). Zooming in and out: Studying practices by switching theoretical lenses and trailing connection. Organization Studies, 30, 1391–1418.
Nicolini, D., & Monteiro, P. (2017). The practice approach: For a praxeology of organisational and management studies. In A. Langley & H. Tsoukas (Eds.), The SAGE handbook on organizational studies (pp. 110–126). London: SAGE.
Osborne, S. P., Radnor, Z., & Strokosch, K. (2016). Co-production and the co-creation of value in public services: A suitable case for treatment? Public Management Review, 18, 639–653.
Palumbo, R., Vezzosi, S., Picciolli, P., Landini, A., Annarumma, C., & Manna, R. (2018). Fostering organizational change through co-production. Insights from an Italian experience. International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, 15, 371.
Pantzar, M., & Shove, E. (2010). Understanding innovation in practice: A discussion of the production and re-production of Nordic walking. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 22, 447–461. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537321003714402.
Peirce, C. S. (1998). The essential Peirce. Selected philosophical writings vol 2 (1893–1913). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Reckwitz, A. (2002). Toward a theory of social practices: A development in culturalist theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory, 5, 243–263.
Schatzki, T. R. (2002). The site of the social: A philosophical account of the constitution of social life and change. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
Schau, H. J., Muniz, A. M., & Arnould, E. J. (2009). How brand community practices create value. Journal of Marketing, 73, 30–51.
Schuurman, D., & Tõnurist, P. (2017). Innovation in the public sector: Exploring the characteristics and potential of living labs and innovation labs. Technology Innovation and Management Review, 7, 7–14.
Simon, H. A. (1996). The sciences of the artificial (3rd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Skålén, P., Gummerus, J., Koskull, C. V., & Magnusson, P. R. (2013). Exploring value propositions and service innovation: A service-dominant logic study. Journal of the Acadademy of Marketing Science, 43, 137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-013-0365-2.
Skålén, P., Gummerus, J., von Koskull, C., & Magnusson, P. R. (2015). Exploring value propositions and service innovation: A service-dominant logic study. Journal of Academy of Market Science, 43, 137–158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-013-0365-2.
Ståhlbröst, A. (2008). Forming future IT – The living lab way of user involvement. Doctoral thesis. Luleå University of Technology, Department of Business Administration and Social Sciences, Division of Informatics, Luleå.
Sundbo, J. (1997). Management of innovation in services. Service Industries Journal, 17, 432–455.
Sundbo, J. (1998). The organisation of innovation in services. Frederiksberg: Roskilde University Press.
Thévenot, L. (2001). Pragmatic regimes governing the engagement with the world. In T. R. Schatzki, K. D. Knorr-Cetina, & E. Savigny (Eds.), The practice turn in contemporary theory (pp. 56–73). London: Routledge.
Tõnurist, P., Kattel, R., & Lember, V. (2017). Innovation labs in the public sector: What they are and what they do? Public Management Review, 19, 1455–1479. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2017.1287939.
Tyulenev, S. (2012). Applying Luhmann to translation studies: Translation in society. New York: Routledge.
Van Dyck, B., & Van den Broeck, P. (2013). Social innovation: a territorial process. In F. Moulaert, D. MacCallum, A. Mehmood, & A. Hamdouch (Eds.), The international handbook on social innovation: Collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research (pp. 131–141). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Voorberg, W. H., Bekkers, V. J. J. M., & Tummers, L. G. (2015). A systematic review of co-creation and co-production: Embarking on the social innovation journey. Public Management Review, 17, 1333–1357. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2014.930505.
Warde, A. (2005). Consumption and theories of practice. Journal of Consumer Culture, 5, 131–153.
Wenger, E. (2000). Communities of practice and social learning systems. Organization, 7, 225–246.
Windrum, P. (2013). Multi-agent framework for understanding the success and failure of ServPPINs. In F. Gallouj, L. Rubalcaba, & P. Windrum (Eds.), Public private innovation networks in services (The dynamics of co-operation in service innovation). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Witell, L., Gebauer, H., Jaakkola, E., Hammedi, W., Patricio, L., & Perks, H. (2017). A bricolage perspective on service innovation. Journal of Business Research, 79, 290–298.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Fuglsang, L. (2019). Human-Centric Service Co-innovation in Public Services from a Practice-Based Perspective: A Case of Elderly Care. In: Toivonen, M., Saari, E. (eds) Human-Centered Digitalization and Services. Translational Systems Sciences, vol 19. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-7725-9_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-7725-9_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-13-7724-2
Online ISBN: 978-981-13-7725-9
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)