Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Human-Centric Service Co-innovation in Public Services from a Practice-Based Perspective: A Case of Elderly Care

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Human-Centered Digitalization and Services

Part of the book series: Translational Systems Sciences ((TSS,volume 19))

  • 1612 Accesses

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alam, I., & Perry, C. (2002). A customer-oriented new service development process. Journal of Services Marketing, 16, 515–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alford, J., & O’Flynn, J. (2012). Rethinking public service delivery: Managing with external providers (The public management and leadership series). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Alvesson, M., & Kärreman, D. (2007). Constructing mystery: Empirical matters in theory development. Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1265–1281.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, T., & Nelson, R. E. (2005). Creating something from nothing: Resource construction through entrepreneurial bricolage. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50, 329–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boltanski, L., & Thévenot, L. (2006). On justification: Economies of worth. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1980). Le Sens pratique. Paris: Les éditions de minuit.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T. (2008). Design thinking. Harvard Business Review, 86(6), 85–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, R. G. (1990). Stage-gate systems: A new tool for managing new products. Business Horizons, 33, 44–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Souza Bispo, M. (2016). The practice approach: For a praxeology of organisational and management studies. Annals of Tourism Research, 61, 170–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engeström, Y., Miettinen, R., & Punamäki, R. L. (1999). Perspectives on activity theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fuglsang, L., & Sørensen, F. (2011). The balance between bricolage and innovation: Management dilemmas in sustainable public innovation. Service Industries Journal, 31, 581–595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuglsang, L., & Sundbo, J. (2005). The organizational innovation system: Three modes. Journal of Change Management, 5, 329–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garud, R., & Karnoe, P. (2003). Bricolage versus breakthrough: Distributed and embedded agency in technology entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 32, 277–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gherardi, S. (2006). Organizational knowledge: The texture of workplace learning. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. B., Johnson, B., Lorenz, E., & Lundvall, B. Å. (2007). Forms of knowledge and modes of innovation. Research Policy, 36, 680–693.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karlson, J. (2018). Frontline employees’ role in service innovation and value creation. Doctoral thesis. Karlstad Univcersity Studies, Karlstad.

    Google Scholar 

  • Københavns Kommune. (2015). Livskvalitet for ældre i almene boligområder [Life quality for elderly in social housing]. Project document. Sundheds- og omsorgsforvaltningen, Københavns Kommune.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. In Clarendon lectures in management studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Law, J., & Singleton, V. (2005). Object Lessons. Organization, 12, 331–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Mouffe, C. (2000). The democratic paradox. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicolini, D. (2009a). Articulating practice through the interview to the double. Management Learning, 40, 195–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicolini, D. (2009b). Zooming in and out: Studying practices by switching theoretical lenses and trailing connection. Organization Studies, 30, 1391–1418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peirce, C. S. (1998). The essential Peirce. Selected philosophical writings vol 2 (1893–1913). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reckwitz, A. (2002). Toward a theory of social practices: A development in culturalist theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory, 5, 243–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schau, H. J., Muniz, A. M., & Arnould, E. J. (2009). How brand community practices create value. Journal of Marketing, 73, 30–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1996). The sciences of the artificial (3rd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sundbo, J. (1997). Management of innovation in services. Service Industries Journal, 17, 432–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sundbo, J. (1998). The organisation of innovation in services. Frederiksberg: Roskilde University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyulenev, S. (2012). Applying Luhmann to translation studies: Translation in society. New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warde, A. (2005). Consumption and theories of practice. Journal of Consumer Culture, 5, 131–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (2000). Communities of practice and social learning systems. Organization, 7, 225–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Roskilde University, Roskilde, Denmark

    Lars Fuglsang

Authors
  1. Lars Fuglsang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lars Fuglsang .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland

    Marja Toivonen

  2. Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Helsinki, Finland

    Eveliina Saari

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

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

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation