通过设计实验收获共同创造的成果

IF 2.9 4区 管理学 Q1 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
J. Torfing, E. Sørensen, M. Dečman
{"title":"通过设计实验收获共同创造的成果","authors":"J. Torfing, E. Sørensen, M. Dečman","doi":"10.1177/09520767231197802","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Co-creation has received a growing attention in the public sector as a tool for mobilizing resources, spurring public innovation, and enhancing democratic legitimacy. Reaping the fruits of co-creation largely depends on the attempts made by local leaders to facilitate effective collaboration, overcome emerging problems and obstacles, and cope with the emerging dilemmas and paradoxes. There is limited knowledge about how this is done in practice. Hence, public administration researchers must team up with local leaders of co-creation to jointly test different ways of improving the processes and results of co-creation processes. This endeavour calls for an interactive research strategy where researchers and practitioners work together to conduct design experiments aimed at improving the design of a process by iteratively diagnosing problems and obstacles that prevent goal achievement, seeking to remove the hindrances through targeted interventions, and finally measuring the impact of the interventions vis-à-vis the stated goals. This article serves the dual purpose of producing new context-dependent insights into how leaders of co-creation can tackle emerging problems and obstacles and evaluating the use of design experiments in the field of public administration. It analyses and compares six design experiments conducted in relation to local cases of co-creation that are studied using mixed methods. The main finding is that: (1) the problems emerging in co-creation processes are for the most part manageable; (2) the leadership interventions are relatively undemanding; and (3) the positive impact of most of the interventions finds support in the extant research literature.","PeriodicalId":47076,"journal":{"name":"Public Policy and Administration","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reaping the fruits of co-creation through design experiments\",\"authors\":\"J. Torfing, E. Sørensen, M. Dečman\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09520767231197802\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Co-creation has received a growing attention in the public sector as a tool for mobilizing resources, spurring public innovation, and enhancing democratic legitimacy. Reaping the fruits of co-creation largely depends on the attempts made by local leaders to facilitate effective collaboration, overcome emerging problems and obstacles, and cope with the emerging dilemmas and paradoxes. There is limited knowledge about how this is done in practice. Hence, public administration researchers must team up with local leaders of co-creation to jointly test different ways of improving the processes and results of co-creation processes. This endeavour calls for an interactive research strategy where researchers and practitioners work together to conduct design experiments aimed at improving the design of a process by iteratively diagnosing problems and obstacles that prevent goal achievement, seeking to remove the hindrances through targeted interventions, and finally measuring the impact of the interventions vis-à-vis the stated goals. This article serves the dual purpose of producing new context-dependent insights into how leaders of co-creation can tackle emerging problems and obstacles and evaluating the use of design experiments in the field of public administration. It analyses and compares six design experiments conducted in relation to local cases of co-creation that are studied using mixed methods. The main finding is that: (1) the problems emerging in co-creation processes are for the most part manageable; (2) the leadership interventions are relatively undemanding; and (3) the positive impact of most of the interventions finds support in the extant research literature.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47076,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Public Policy and Administration\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Public Policy and Administration\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09520767231197802\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Policy and Administration","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09520767231197802","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

作为调动资源、促进公共创新和增强民主合法性的工具,共同创造在公共部门越来越受到关注。共同创造的成果在很大程度上取决于地方领导人为促进有效合作、克服新出现的问题和障碍以及应对新出现的困境和悖论所做的努力。关于如何在实践中做到这一点的知识有限。因此,公共行政研究人员必须与地方共创领导者合作,共同测试改善共创过程和结果的不同方法。这项工作需要一种互动研究策略,研究人员和从业者共同进行设计实验,旨在通过反复诊断阻碍目标实现的问题和障碍来改进流程设计,寻求通过有针对性的干预措施消除障碍,最后衡量干预措施对既定目标的影响。这篇文章的双重目的是,对共同创造的领导者如何应对新出现的问题和障碍,以及评估设计实验在公共管理领域的使用,产生新的基于上下文的见解。它分析并比较了使用混合方法研究的与当地共同创作案例相关的六个设计实验。主要发现是:(1)共同创造过程中出现的问题在很大程度上是可控的;(2) 领导层的干预要求相对较低;以及(3)大多数干预措施的积极影响在现有的研究文献中得到了支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reaping the fruits of co-creation through design experiments
Co-creation has received a growing attention in the public sector as a tool for mobilizing resources, spurring public innovation, and enhancing democratic legitimacy. Reaping the fruits of co-creation largely depends on the attempts made by local leaders to facilitate effective collaboration, overcome emerging problems and obstacles, and cope with the emerging dilemmas and paradoxes. There is limited knowledge about how this is done in practice. Hence, public administration researchers must team up with local leaders of co-creation to jointly test different ways of improving the processes and results of co-creation processes. This endeavour calls for an interactive research strategy where researchers and practitioners work together to conduct design experiments aimed at improving the design of a process by iteratively diagnosing problems and obstacles that prevent goal achievement, seeking to remove the hindrances through targeted interventions, and finally measuring the impact of the interventions vis-à-vis the stated goals. This article serves the dual purpose of producing new context-dependent insights into how leaders of co-creation can tackle emerging problems and obstacles and evaluating the use of design experiments in the field of public administration. It analyses and compares six design experiments conducted in relation to local cases of co-creation that are studied using mixed methods. The main finding is that: (1) the problems emerging in co-creation processes are for the most part manageable; (2) the leadership interventions are relatively undemanding; and (3) the positive impact of most of the interventions finds support in the extant research literature.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Public Policy and Administration
Public Policy and Administration PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION-
CiteScore
11.30
自引率
6.50%
发文量
18
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Public Policy and Administration is the journal of the UK Joint University Council (JUC) Public Administration Committee (PAC). The journal aims to publish original peer-reviewed material within the broad field of public policy and administration. This includes recent developments in research, scholarship and practice within public policy, public administration, government, public management, administrative theory, administrative history, and administrative politics. The journal seeks to foster a pluralistic approach to the study of public policy and administration. International in readership, Public Policy and Administration welcomes submissions for anywhere in the world, from both academic and practitioner communities.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信