Challenges and Barriers in Public Services Innovations in Malaysia

Nor Ashikin Mohamed Yusof; Salwa Ahmad Rafee; Aspah Aini Ishak; Muhammad Rohaizad Razali; Intan Sazrina Saimy

doi:10.14203/STIPM.2022.326

Challenges and Barriers in Public Services Innovations in Malaysia

Nor Ashikin Mohamed Yusof, Salwa Ahmad Rafee, Aspah Aini Ishak, Muhammad Rohaizad Razali, Intan Sazrina Saimy

Abstract

For the last two decades, the government of Malaysia has been moving away from the traditional roles of managing, governing and providing services for the country. The government is actively encouraging the public or civil servants to join the bandwagon and create innovations in the course of their works, protect their innovations with intellectual property protection and whenever possible commercialize them. Such a giant leap is in line with the provisions of Science, Technology and Innovation Policy 2020 in the efforts of converting Malaysian’s economy from manufacturing-based to knowledge and innovation-based instead. It also provides is a good opportunity for the government to create a new source of financial and economic income, save resources and increase the intellectual property index and ranking globally. A lot of incentives, resources and supports were re-channeled for that purpose. To date, the implementation, real outcomes, outputs and impacts of the government’s servant in the innovative activities remain largely unmeasured. Whether the return of investment for such undertakings is commensurate with the efforts or otherwise. What happens to the “innovators” and their inventions are untraced. This paper presents part findings on Malaysian’s experiences towards creating innovations and fulfilling the STI Policy’s objectives. The article focuses on the civil servants’ involvement in developing or creating innovative products or services and their challenges in materializing that policy objective. The study was conducted amongst public servants. Primary data was collected through interviews and focus group discussions with the winning organizations or units of the National Award for Public Sector Innovations. In total, 86 participants from four winning organizations were involved. The civil servants’ efforts are commendable and encouraging. This shows the objectives of the STI Policy are correct. Secondly, the strategies of the STI Policy are only workable if they are supported with a correct support system and well-designed implementation plan or programs, The result also shows that the STI Policy document is broad-ranging, inclusive and unlimited for private sectors, big companies or intended for machines, engineering or hardware only. It includes public sector as well as “soft” innovations in terms of service and management processes, produced by the civil servants are equally valuable, useful and should not be disregarded. However, the government must iron out few challenges in ensuring the innovation program for civil servants are sustainable. The findings of this paper are useful as policy input in improving the support systems, designing action plans or policy interventions for STI Policy in the future.

Keywords: public sector innovation, service innovation, National Science Technology and Innovation Policy 2013-2020

Full Text:

PDF

References

Amara, Nabil & D'Este, Pablo & Landry, Réjean & Doloreux, David, (2016). "Impacts of obstacles on innovation patterns in KIBS firms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 4065-4073.

Ali & Buang, (2016) Administrative reforms in Malaysia – toward enhancing public

service performance”, Governance, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 423-37.

Ali, A.H. (2001), “Serving the knowledge age: realigning the public service for the knowledge advantage”, International Review of Administrative Sciences, Vol. 67 No. 2, pp. 273-85.

Arduini et al., (2013) Arduini, D., Denni, M., Lucchese, M., Nurra, A., & Zanfei, A. (2013). The Role of Technology, Organization and Contextual Factors in The Development of E-Government Services: An Empirical Analysis on Italian Local Public Administrations. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 27, 177–189

Arundel, A., Bloch, C., & Ferguson, B. (2019). Advancing innovation in the public sector : Aligning innovation measurement with policy goals. Research Policy, 48(3), 789–798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.12.001

Axtell et al., (2000), Axtell, C. M., Holman, D. J., Unsworth, K. L., Wall, T. D.,Waterson, P. E., & Harrington, E. (2000). Shopfloor innovation: Facilitating the suggestion and implementation of ideas. Journal of Occupational &Organizational Psychology, 73(3), 265–285. doi:10.1348/096317900167029

Bekkers, V.J.J.M., J. Edelenbos and B. Steijn. (2011). Innovation in the Public Sector. Linking Capacity and Leadership. New York: Palgrave Macmillan Bloch, C., Bugge, M., 2013. Public sector innovation – from theory to measurement. Journal of Economic Dynamics 27, 133–145

Bernier, L., Hafsi, T., Deschamps, C., (2015). Environmental determinants of public sector innovation: a study of innovation awards in Canada. Public Manag. Rev. 17, 834–856.

Bloch, C., Bugge, M., (2013). Public sector innovation – from theory to measurement.Structure Change of Economics Dynamics. 27, 133–145.

Borins, S. (2001). ‘Encouraging innovation in the Public Sector’, Journal of Intellectual Capital, 2, 3, 310-319.

Bugge, M., Coenen, L., Branstad, A., (2016). Governing socio-technical change: orchestrating demand for assisted living in ageing societies. Sci. Public Policy 45 (4), 468–479.

Business News Wales, 24th August (2021)

Caverley, N. (2005). Civil Service resiliency and coping. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 18(5), 401–413. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513550510608868.

Chen, Yin, & Mei, (2018) Holistic Innovation: An Emerging Innovation Paradigm International Journal of Innovation Studies 2 (2018)

Damanpour, F. and M. Schneider. (2009). 'Characteristics of Innovation and Innovation Adoption in Public Organizations: Assessing the Role of Managers', Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19, 3, 495-522.

Djellal, F., Gallouj, F., Miles, I., 2013. Two decades of research on innovation in services:

which place for public services? Structure Change Economics Dynamics

De Jong, J. P. J. (2007). Individual Innovation: The Connection Between Leadership and Employees’ Innovative Work Behavior. In Scales Research Reports. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612459060

Ikmal Razul Ramli, Norihan A.Hassan, Aini Suzana Arifin, Adibah Najihah Jasmi. (2017) Factors Influencing Public Sector Innovation Performance in Malaysia: Structural Equation Modelling Approach. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences 2017, Vol. 7, No. 2 ISSN: 2222-6990

Edquist, C., L. Hommen and M.D. McKelvey. 2001. Innovation and Employment: Process versus Product Innovation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing

Engelen, A., Schmidt, S., Strenger, L., & Brettel, M. (2014). Top management’s transformational leader behaviors and innovation orientation: A cross-cultural perspective in eight countries. Journal of International Management, 20(2), 124–136. doi:10.1016/j.intman.2013.04.003

Economic Planning Unit (EPU) (2016), The 11th Malaysia Plan, EPU: Prime Minister’s Department, EPU, Prime Minister’s Department, Putrajaya

Fagerberg, 2018; Fagerberg, J., D.C. Mowery and R.R. Nelson (eds). 2005. The Oxford Handbook of Innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Fagerberg, Martin, & Andersen, 2013). Fagerberg, J., Martin, B. R., & Andersen, E. S. (2013). Innovation studies: Evolution and future challenges. Oxford (UK): Oxford University Press.

Fagerberg, J. (2018). Mission (im)possible? The role of innovation (and innovation policy) in supporting structural change & sustainability transitions. In TIK WORKING PAPERS on innovation studies No. 20180216.

Fagerberg, J., Mowery, D. C., & Nelson, R. R. (2006). The Oxford Handbook of Innovation. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press

Gault, F. (2013). Handbook of Innovation Indicators and Measurement. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited

Gieske, H., Buuren, A. V., & Bekkers, V. (2016).Conceptualizing public innovative capacity: A framework for assessment. The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal, 21(1), 1–25.

Godin, B. (2015). Innovation contested. The idea of innovation over the centuries. New York (US): Routledge.

Government Transformation Plan (GTP)

Guideline of Cultivating and Strengthening the Innovation in Public Sector in 2016)

Gumusluoglu, L., & Ilsev, A. (2009). Transformational leadership, creativity, and organizational innovation.Journal of Business Research, 62(4),

Gupta, A. K., Sinha, R., Koradia, D., Patel, R., Parmar, M., Rohit, P., et al. (2003). Mobilizing grassroots' technological innovations and traditional knowledge, values and institutions: Articulating social and ethical capital. Futures, 35(9), 975.

Hidalgo & D’Alvano, (2014). Systemic innovation and risk: Technology assessment and the challenge of responsible innovation. Technology in Society, 25, 36

Kahai, S. S., Sosik, J. J., & Avolio, B. J. (2003). Effects of leadership style, anonymity, and rewards on creativity relevant processes and outcomes in an electronic meeting system context. The Leadership Quarterly,

Kassim, S. M., & Mokhber, M. (2015). Improving Employee Outcome through Human Resource Management Practices and Public Service Motivation : A Study of Malaysia Public Sector. Journal of Advanced Review on Scientific Research, 11(1), 1–12.

Koch, P., & Hauknes, J. (2005). On innovation in the public sector – today and beyond. PUBLIN Project on Innovation in the Public Sector, Report no. D20, Oslo: Nifu Step

MAMPU, (2010)

MOSTI, (2019)

Matthews, M. (2009). Fostering creativity and innovation in cooperative federalism– The uncertainty and risk dimensions. In J. Wanna (Ed.), Critical reflections on Australian public policy, Australia New Zealand School of Government (ANZSOG). Monograph (pp. 59–70). Canberra: ANU E Press.

McMurray, A. M., Henly, D., Chaboyer, W., Calpton, J.,Lizzio, A., & Teml, M. (2012). Leadership succession management in a university health faculty. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 34(4), 365–376. doi:10.1080/

Meeus, M.T.H. and C. Edquist. (2006) ‘Introduction to Part I: Product and Process Innovation’, in Hage, J. and M.T.H. Meeus (eds), Innovation, Science, and Institutional Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 23–37.

Ministry of Finance (2018).

Moore, M. and J. Hartley. 2008. 'Innovations in Governance', Public Management Review, 10, 1, 3-20.

Moussa, Mahmood, Adela McMurray & Nuttawuth Muenjohn (2018). Innovation in public sector organisations, Cogent Business & Management, 5:1, 1475047, DOI:10.1080/23311975.2018.1475047

Mumford, M. D., & Licuanan, B. (2004). Leading for innovation: Conclusions, issues, and directions. The Leadership Quarterly, 15(1), 163–171. doi:10.1016/j.

Mulgan, G., & Albury, D. (2003,). Innovation in the public sector. London: Government of the United Kingdom.

National Key Result Areas (NKRA)

National Science Technology and Innovation Policy (STIP) 2013-2020

Osborn, R. N., & Marion, R. (2009). Contextual leadership, transformational leadership and the performance of international innovation seeking alliances. The Leadership Quarterly, 20(2), 191–206.

Perel W. (2002), Collaborative innovation: a viable alternative to market competition and organizational entrepreneurship. Public Administration Review 73,821–830.

Ramli, R. I., Hassan, N. A., Arifin, A. S., & Jasmi, A. N. (2017). Factors Influencing Public Sector Innovation Performance in Malaysia : Structural Equation Modelling Approach. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 7(2), 629–645. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v7-i2/2671Schachter M.E., (2018) The nature and variety of innovation International Journal of Innovation Studies 2 (2018) 65e79

Siddiquee, N.A. (2008)Transforming Government: People,Process and Policy, Vol. 2 No. 3, 2008, pp. 194-213. DOI 10.1108/17506160810902194

Shin, S. J., & Zhou, J. (2003). Transformational leadership, conservation and creativity: Evidence from Korea. Academy of Management Journal, 46(6), 703–714.doi:10.5465/30040662doi:10.1348/096317900167029

Schumpeter, J. A. (1967). The theory of economic. Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

System of National Accounts (SNA), (2008).

Tahir N. & Sam., M.F.M (2010). Innovation Activities In The Malaysian Public Sector: Factors Promoting The By-product Of Ict Usage IJRRAS 2 (3) 2010

Tidd, J., Bessant, J., & Pavitt, K. (2001). Managing innovation: Integrating technological. Market and Organizational Change, Third Edition, Wiley.

Torfing, J., Ansell, C.,(2017). Strengthening political leadership and policy innovation through the expansion of collaborative forms of governance. Public Manag. Rev. 19,37–54

Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2003). Managing collaboration in public administration: Governance, businesses, and citizens in the service of modern society. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Walker, R.M. (2014). ‘Internal and External Antecedents of Process Innovation: A Review and Extension’, Public Management Review, 16, 1, 21-44

Wang, Rode, Shi, Luo, & Chen (2013) Wang, P., Rode, J. C., Shi, K., Luo, Z., & Chen, W. (2013). A workgroup climate perspective on the relationships among transformational leadership, workgroup diversity, and employee creativity. Group & Moussa et al., Cogent Business & Management (2018), 5: 1475047 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2018.1475047

West, M.A. (2002). Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: An integrative model of creativity and innovation implementation in work groups. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51(3), 355–387. doi:10.1111/

Wynen, Verhoest, Ongaro, and Van Thiel (2014) Wynen, J., Verhoest, K., Ongaro, E., & Van Thiel, S.; in Cooperation with the COBRA Network. (2014). Innovation-oriented culture in the public sector: Do managerial autonomy and result control lead to innovation? Public Management Review, 16(1), 45–66.

Zhou, J., & Shalley, C. E. (2003). Research on employee creativity: A critical review and proposal for future research directions. In Research in personnel and human resources management (research in personnel and human resources management 22) (pp.165–217 14(4–5), 499–524. doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(03)00049

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14203/STIPM.2022.326