Social innovation in the public sector has become an important focus for governments around the world over
the last decade, as they try to solve intractable policy problems. The pressure on governments to do more
with less in response to shrinking budgets and expanding community expectations and obligations has
increased attention on how the public sector manages change and innovation. This heightened focus has
created a need to understand the social innovation capacity of public sector environments. Work package 1
of the LIPSE project on social innovation, examined this for four municipalities in different nations.
Document analysis of the organizational structure of the municipalities, a survey of administrators and
politicians, and interviews with community-based innovators were used to gather information on the
innovation capacity of the municipalities (Copenhagen, Rotterdam, Barcelona and West Lothian - adjacent to
Edinburgh).
Innovation capacity is related to the innovation environment. For municipalities, this includes national
governance structures and societal traditions, the local socioeconomic context, and formal organizational
structures. There are some striking similarities in the socioeconomic challenges faced by the municipalities
(demographic changes, economic growth, unemployment, health care and educational problems). In regard
to innovations, a mixture of internally driven innovations, concrete products, service delivery innovations
and externally driven innovations were described. Each of the municipalities nominated different drivers for
innovation. Copenhagen had the most positive view of its structures, procedures and context as supporting
innovation.
Municipalities rated their own innovativeness differently to what could be expected based on local
socioeconomic conditions, international innovation rankings, and the perceptions of those outside the
municipality. Copenhagen leads the international rankings (out of these four), and the community rating of
its innovativeness, but has the lowest self-rating. The socioeconomic challenges and significant innovations
nominated by the community were very similar to the nominations from within the municipality for
Copenhagen and Rotterdam, but quite different for Barcelona.
Informal networking activities are crucial to innovation, because they provide the means for overcoming the
‘hard wiring’ of formal structures, allowing people to meet in more open and informal spaces, inside and
outside an organization. Openness is important for innovation, as are boundary spanners who can bridge the
gaps between groups to improve information flows. Barcelona stands out as having the most external contact
and doing the most boundary spanning.
Network ties to generate new information and ideas, and closeness to support smooth exchanges, are both
important for innovation. In each of the municipalities, the informal networks are shaped by the formal
organizational structure. Brokers play an important function in innovation through their capacity to draw
upon diverse sources of information. Two types of brokers were observed in each of the municipalities – one
with diverse and unconnected ties, and one with ties that are linked to each other. Both types might be
necessary in public sector environments.
Finally, leadership is also important to innovation capacity. It influences individuals’ scope to put forward
new ideas within an organization. A ‘motivator-risk taker’ leadership type is regarded as important in each
municipality, which combines skills in motivation, collaboration and risk-taking.
6
LIPSE Research Report no. 1
This report provides an important advance in linking innovation environments to innovation capacity in the
public sector (specifically, municipalities). Additional research will progress this even further and generate
much needed information on how to increase social innovation capacity.