OPEN GOVERNANCE FOR IMPROVED SERVICE DELIVERY INNOVATION IN SOUTH AFRICA

Yıl 2020, , 33 - 47, 30.06.2020

Danielle Nel Lucia Masilela

https://doi.org/10.34111/ijebeg.202012103

Cited By: 5

Öz

The Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR) is the current and developing environment in which changing technologies and trends such as the Internet of Things (IoT) and artificial intelligence (AI) are changing the way governments function. Governments are increasingly facing new risks and opportunities due to the advancement of the 4IR. Governments need to find ways to adapt to the 4IR. Innovation is a prerequisite for adapting to the 4IR. The aim of this article is to determine the level of public service delivery innovation (SDI) in South Africa in the context of the 4IR. The analysis in this article is based on secondary data and documentary analysis, including unsolicited government documents, reports and legislation, and authoritative scholarly literature. A number of innovation measures for improved service delivery have been adopted in South Africa. These efforts are not, however, embedded within the wider public service, and efforts to improve SDI should be considered. In a global environment of resource constraints and constant change, open governance through multi-stakeholder collaboration may present strategic opportunities to facilitate innovation. The aim of these initiatives is to enhance transparency and accountability, and to facilitate public service delivery and citizen participation

Anahtar Kelimeler

Fourth Industrial Revolution, innovation, open governance, partnerships, public service delivery

Kaynakça

• Alam, I. (2002). An exploratory investigation of user involvement in new service development. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 30(3), 250-261.
• Alipour, S.P., Ustundag, A., Cevikcan, E., Kaya, I. & Cebi, S. (2018). Technology roadmap for Industry 4.0. In A. Ustundag & E. Cevickan (Eds.) Industry 4.0: Managing the Digital Transformation (pp. 95-103). Switzerland: Springer.
• Applied Research and Communications Fund (2013). Innovation in the Public Sector: State-of-the-Art Report. Sofia: Bulgaria.
• Baker, W.E. & Sinkula, J.M. (2007). Does market orientation facilitate balanced innovation programs? An organizational learning perspective. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 24(4), 316-334.
• Baskara, S. & Mehta, K. (2016). What is innovation and why? Your perspective from resource-constrained environments. Technovation, 52(53), 4-17.
• Bingham L.B., Nabtachi, T. & O’Leary, R. (2005). The new governance: Practices and processes for stakeholder and citizen participation in the work of government. Public Administration Review, 65(5), 547-558.
• Bock, A.J., Eisengerich, D., Sharapoy, D. & George, G. (2015). Innovation and leadership. Sage Open, 5(2), 1-14.
• Borins S. (2006). The Challenge of Innovating in Government: Innovation Series. Washington, D.C.: IBM Center for Business of Government.
• Bourgon. J. (2011). Responsive, responsible and respected government: Towards a New Public Administration theory. International Review of Administrative Science, 73(1), 7-26.
• Bryman, A. (2000). Understanding Social Research. Buckingham: Open University Press.
• Caboz, J. (2018). This emergency safety app is big in Soweto – here’s how it works. Business Insider SA, 2 September. https://www.businessinsider.co.za/this-accident-alert-app-is-transforming-the-way-sowetans-respond-to-emergencies-heres-how-it-works-2018-8. Accessed 2019/07/08.
• Centre for Public Sector Innovation (CPSI) (n.d.). A Pocket Guide to Innovation in the South African Public Sector. http://www.cpsi.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/cpsipocketguide.pdf. Accessed 2019/02/01.
• Centre for Public Sector Innovation (CPSI) (2018). Innovation trailblazers: Celebrating public service developers. The South African Public Sector Innovation Journal, 8(2), 5-58.
• Costello, T. & Prohaska, B. (2013). Innovation. Information Technology Professional, 15(3), 62-64.
• Dawnson, R. & Horenkamp, M. (2007). Service Delivery Innovation: Creating Client Value and Enhancing Profitability. USA: SAP America.
• Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA) (2000). Draft Report on Alternative Service Delivery Mechanisms. Pretoria: DPSA.
• Department of Service Delivery Administration (DPSA) (2018). Fourth Industrial Revolution and the future of government: SA’s e-government strategy showing progress – Positioning Gauteng as a smart province. Service Delivery Review, 11(3), 1-34. http://fliphtml5.com/fnjti/gnnq/basic. Accessed 2019/05/09.
• Department of Telecommunications and Postal Services (DTPS) (2018). Concept Document: Establishment of the Presidential Commission on the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Pretoria: Government Printers.
• Edwards, D. & McGee, R. (2008). Opening governance. Institute of Development Studies Bulletin, 47(1), 16.
• Ford, R. & Zussman, D. (Eds.) (1997). Alternative Service Delivery: Sharing Governance in Canada. Toronto: The Institute of Public Administration of Canada and KPMG Centre for Government Foundation.
• Gildenhuys, J.S.H. & Knipe, A. (2000). The Organization of Government: An Introduction. Pretoria: Van Schaik.
• Government Gazette (2018). Invitation to Nominate Candidates for the Presidential Commission on Fourth Industrial Revolution. https://www.gov.za/sites/default/ files/gcis_document/201812/42078gen764.pdf. Accessed 2019/05/12.
• Harlan, Y. & Robinson, D.G. (2012). The new ambiguity of open government. UCLA Law Review Discourse, 58, 178-208
• Johnston, R. & Clark, G. (2001). Service Operations Management. Harlow: Prentice Hall.
• Kaul, M. (1998). Introducing New Approaches: Improved Public Service Delivery. London: Commonwealth Secretariat.
• Kaul, M. (2000). Management Reforms in Government: A Review of International Practices and Strategies. London: CAPAM.
• Kekana. N. (2004). One country, two economies: How the state can intervene. Service Delivery Review, 3(1), 20-23.
• Leitão, J., Alves, H. & Pereira, D. (2016). Open Innovative Governance, Transparency and Citizens’ Quality of Life: An Application to Portuguese Municipalities. http://infogen.webs.uvigo.es/WPB/WP1606.pdf. Accessed 2019/05/07.
• Lin, C. (2006). A study on the organizational innovations in Taiwan’s logistics industry. The Business Review, Cambridge, 5(1), 270-285.
• Lin, C.Y. (2007). Factors affecting innovation in logistics technologies for logistics service providers in China. Journal of Technology Management in China, 2(1), 22-37.
• Lovelock, C.H. & Wright, L. (1999). Principles of Service Management and Marketing. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
• Manzini. S.T. (2015). Measurement of innovation in South Africa: An analysis of survey metrics and recommendations. South African Journal of Science, 111(12), 1-8.
• Martins, N. & Ledimo, O. (2015). The perceptions and nature of service delivery innovation among government employees: An exploratory study. Journal of Governance and Regulation, 4(1), 78-87.
• Mzekandaba, S. (2018). Fourth Industrial Revolution and the future of government. Service Delivery Review, 11(3). http://fliphtml5.com/fnjti/gnnq/basic. Accessed 2019/05/09.
• Ministry of Public Service, Youth and Gender Affairs (2017). Public Service Delivery Innovation Strategy. Nairobi: The Presidency: Ministry of Public Service, Youth and Gender Affairs.
• Nolan, B.C. (2001). Public Sector Reform: An International Experience. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
• Open Governance Partnership (OGP) (2011). Open Government Declaration. https://www.opengovpartnership.org/process/joining-ogp/open-government-declaration/. Accessed 2019/05/12.
• Open Governance Partnership (OGP) South Africa (2016). The 3rd South African Open Government Partnership Country Action Plan, 2016-2018. http://www.ogp.gov.za/documents/OGP%203rd%20Country%20Action%20plan%202016-2018.pdf. Accessed 2019/05/12.
• Ordanini, A. & Parasuranam, A. (2011). Service innovation viewed through a service-dominant logic lens: A conceptual framework and empirical analysis. Journal of Service Research, 14(1), 3-23.
• Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2005). Oslo Manual: Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Innovation Data. Paris: OECD.
• Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2016). Open Government: The Global Context and the Way Forward. OECD: Paris.
• Osborne, S.P. & Brown, L. (2011). Innovation, public policy and public services delivery in the UK: The word that would be king? Public Administration, 89(4), 1335-1350.
• PwC (2014). Industry 4.0 – Opportunities and Challenges of the Industrial Revolution. Germany: PwC LLP.
• Responsive Cities Challenge (2016). Media Statement on Responsive Cities Challenge. http://www.ogp.gov.za/documents/media%20statement%20Responsive%20cities%20Challenge.pdf. Accessed 2018/12/12.
• Robbins, S.P. (2001). Organisational Behaviour. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
• Salge, T.O. & Vera, A. (2012). Benefiting from public sector innovation: The moderating role of customer and learning orientation. Public Administration Review, 72(4), 550-559.
• SA News (2018). Fourth Industrial Revolution and the Future of Government. Service Delivery Review, 11(3). Available at: http://fliphtml5.com/fnjti/gnnq/basic. Accessed 2019/05/12.
• Simons, B. (2018). Fourth Industrial Revolution and the Future of Government. Service Delivery Review, 11(3). Available at: http://fliphtml5.com/fnjti/gnnq/basic. Accessed 2019/05/12.
• Sørensen, E. & Torfing, J. (2011). Enhancing collaborative innovation in the public sector. Administration & Society, 43(8), 842-868.
• The Observatory of Public Sector Innovation (OPSI) (n.d.). OPSI Case Studies. https://oecd-opsi.org/case_type/opsi/?_countries=south-africa. Accessed 2019/06/03.
• United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) (n.d.). Partnership with the Centre for Public Service Innovation. http://www.za.undp.org/content/south_africa/en/home/operations/projects/ democratic_governance/partnership-with-the-centre-for-public-service-innovation--.html. Accessed 2019/06/06.
• Vaccaro, G.I., Jansen, P.J., Van den Bosch, F.J. & Volberda, W.H. (2012). Management innovation and leadership: The moderating role of organizational size. Journal of Management Studies, 49(1), 28-51.