Report-Vu-NGUYEN-Final.docx Review v2.- External.doc Deleted Chapters

8/6/2019 Report-Vu-NGUYEN-Final.docx Review v2.- External.doc Deleted Chapters

1/23

MBA module CB951

Kent Business School

University of Kent

Author: Vu NGUYEN

Opportunities and challenges of collaborating with local

innovators to prototype future digital public services in Kent

County Council

Business report

24/08/2010


2/23

Purpose

Kent County Council Technology & Transformation Team: Proposals for Student Projects.

Project 2: To identify the opportunities and challenges of collaborating with local innovators

to prototype future digital public services.

We need to involve more effectively local innovators in the co-creation of innovative

concepts to improve community outcomes. We want to build a better capacity for the council

to unlock local talent to build a digital economy.

Thats why we would like research into the opportunities and challenges of involving

innovators in helping prototype future digital public services and supporting the development

of these prototypes within these services and/or the community. This will include identifying

the situations and issues that could act as drivers or barriers to the introduction of these

processes. Finally, we would like to create a strategic route map for the development of

open innovation.

Kent County Council Technology & Transformation Team

Summary

This report is written to respond to the request mentioned above in collaboration with the

Kent County Council for the MBA business report.

2


3/23

CONTENTS

Purpose...........................................................................................................................2

Summary.........................................................................................................................2

Introduction.....................................................................................................................4

Context, material and method.........................................................................................4Concept of innovation.....................................................................................................5

Definition.............................................................................................................5Type, process and level......................................................................................5

Motivation and need to innovate.....................................................................................6Evolution of innovation in UK public sector.........................................................6Main trends in public sector innovation...............................................................7Managing innovation in the current climate situation.........................................8

Drivers and barriers to innovation in the public sector...................................................8Key building blocks and tools to foster innovation..............................................8Enablers to innovation........................................................................................8Barriers to innovation........................................................................................11

Methods and techniques for a participatory approach.................................................13

Collaboration to innovate with Kent County Council....................................................14Benefits and opportunities for KCC..................................................................14Benefits and opportunities for local innovators................................................14Challenges and issues.....................................................................................15

Capacity and process to attract local innovators.........................................................17Innovation culture within KCC..........................................................................17Difficulties and issues to get involved more effectively...................................19Strength, weak, opportunity and threat to engage in innovation.....................20

Proposal of a model of communication plan................................................................21Resources and supports..................................................................................21Working practices.............................................................................................21Collaborators....................................................................................................21Value creation..................................................................................................22

A strategic approach to manage collaboration............................................................23Clarification of the purpose..............................................................................23Stakeholder Analysis.......................................................................................24Selection of the appropriate involvement technique........................................25Implementation of the involvement technique..................................................27Evaluation, improvement and adjustment........................................................27

Recommendation ........................................................................................................27Conclusion...................................................................................................................28Appendix......................................................................................................................29Glossary.......................................................................................................................30References...................................................................................................................31

3


4/23

INTRODUCTION

Kent County Council (KCC) has drawn up a strategy for innovating new services andconcepts based on the use of technology. This ambition also includes the research on newways of collaborating with innovators and social entrepreneurs to participate in the co-creation of innovative concepts, prototyping of new services and development of openinnovation. In doing so the Council wants to involve stakeholders coming from differentsectors and contributing to tackle local challenges. This report is being written because KCCneeds to unlock local talent and get them involved more effectively to build a digitaleconomy. The purpose of this report is firstly to identify opportunities and challenges ofcollaborating with such local innovators to prototype future digital public services. Then aproposal for overcoming the mentioned issues and challenges which will be drawn upthrough a strategic approach to promote and manage collaboration. This proposal will bealso used for drawing up a strategic route map to develop open innovation. The reportcontains information related to innovation in public service and the connection with externalstakeholders in terms of involvement. Although this report includes some aspects of themanagement of innovation and its issues within KCC, it does not go in detail on how KCC

should improve its innovation culture, neither how KCC should transform its organization andstructure for that purpose. This report focuses on the relationship between KCC and externalstakeholders.The problem is being approached from a practical standpoint. Reviews of factors whichdrive and impede innovation happen in the public sector will be conducted at the first stage.From there the research outcome will be used for drawing up a framework to carry out aninvestigation. It aims at researching on both the current situation within KCC in terms ofinnovation culture and the relationship with local innovators.

1. Context, material and method

KCC Technology and Transformation team (KCC3T) is in charge of the identification of

technologies that can improve KCC business and the delivery of its strategic priorities. Itreviews, tests and demonstrates their practical applications while mainstreaming innovation

throughout KCC. This report is written with the support from the members of this team who

provide access to information for conducting researches and interviews. Information and

data come from KCCs sources but also academic literature, government and independent

organisations reports. The areas of information include:

Innovative concepts and projects developed by KCC3T

Organisation of KCC

Innovation in the public sector

General frameworks and tools for innovating successfully in the public sector

General framework for stakeholders analysis and involvement technique

An example of innovative concept is the TransformedByYouevent in which participants

generate ideas to solve local issues and challenges in a day. The concept is an open and

participatory workshop-event, the challenges having been selected by a vote prior to the

event day. The next stage of the implementation of this concept is called Innovation

playground. It is the same principle as TransformedByYoubut operates in a virtual space

with the capacity to develop prototypes in addition.

4


5/23

Another example is the concept ofOpen Kent, a concept of re-using publicly available data;

which can be picked, shared and mixed. It aims at delivering new public services. This

concept is represented through the pilot project Open Kent.

A series of interviews was also conducted through a set of twenty-six questions designed for

KCC members and external stakeholders. Each interview took one hour. Interviewees werelocal innovators or stakeholders who have worked for KCC, it was also addressed to

individuals potentially involved in KCCs projects or for future collaboration. There were also

other stakeholders having feeding back on collaboration with KCC. These interviewees were

selected by KCC3T. The list of interviewees and the questions are in the appendix section.

2. Methods and techniques for a participatory approach

In order to support the analysis of issues regarding the involvement of local innovators in theprototyping of future digital public service, and their contribution to develop innovativeconcepts initiated by KCC, there is a need to understand the concept of participation and

how to build a capacity to get it effective. A participatory approach is a practice that consistsof creating a favourable condition for stakeholders to collaborate and to make theinterdependence between the technical aspect and human, social, and organizationalelements of work systems possible.

The benefits of such an approach enable local innovators to contribute their expertise andknowledge. The participatory approach also gives an opportunity for learning and skillsharing that benefits both the public organization and stakeholders. It is also recognized thatdirect engagement with potential users and stakeholders provides an invaluable knowledgebase about their needs and characteristics. In doing so, promoting and encouraging them atkey stages in the design or prototyping of future digital public service should take intoconsideration their diverse objectives and aspirations, and define the strategy to attract them

efficiently. Obviously this participatory approach can apply to any end users or otherstakeholders related to the projects in which they would be involved.

However, the management of this participatory approach is complex and uncertain, whichrequires significant skills in communication and consultation, especially for those who are incharge of designing innovative concepts or prototypes. As a result there is a need to build acapacity for effective participation and engagement. Such requirement includes knowledgeof initiating, facilitating and managing participation. There is also some basic and goodpractice in communication techniques that could bring a far more favourable outcome.

Yet it is not just those who are in charge to implement and manage participation who formthis capacity. Capacity building also refers to a definite opportunity for stakeholders to

collaborate, their confidence in public organization and their competence related to theactivity they are supposed to contribute. Obviously this capacity building can be applied inthe context with end users or other stakeholders.

The list below resumes what resources and tasks are required to build an effectiveparticipatory approach:

Skills in communications and consulting to manage participation

Enable stakeholders to learn how to make contribution by using their knowledge,creativity and experience

Give an opportunity for learning and skill sharing

Understand stakeholders needs and characteristics

Consideration of stakeholders objectives and aspirations Address clearly opportunities for stakeholder to collaborate

5


6/23

Ensure that participants have a role in the decision making

Trust and confidence

3. Collaboration to innovate with Kent County Council

This section analyses the findings from the research on how local innovators can contributeto future digital public services. It also shows the results from the research on how localinnovators benefit from working on innovative concepts and projects developed throughKCCs R&D and what challenges this collaboration process faces. The research is based ona set of interviews with innovators who have or havent worked with KCC. The design ofthese interviews and questionnaire are detailed in the appendix.

The intention of innovative concept such as TransformedByYouorPic&Mixproject is to workon future digital public services in collaboration with external stakeholders. Innovators arealready identified. With the willingness to create, change and share their ideas, thosestakeholders are essential to build the innovation process. But there is a need tounderstand their knowledge, skills and experience in working with the public sector in order

to identify potential contributions to achieve KCCs objectives. The result of this is reported inthe table Table1.

3.1. Benefits and opportunities for KCC

The list below describes the contributions that local innovators can potentially provide:

Provide ExpertiseA. External expertise in innovative products or services specifically designed for the

public sector and social benefits based on web technologyB. Technical expertise in the usage of web Technology for social benefits (web 2.0,

widgets, digital social networks)

C. Expertise in promotion, communication, branding and identityD. Experience in supporting local communities by engaging their creative expertise in

cultural and arts regeneration, social and business enterpriseE. Advice of practical ways to use a mix of different communication methods, online and

face-to-face in order to help local innovators and KCC to collaborate better. Adviceon the use of social technology for social impact

Distribute KCC ideas/plansF. Social networking activities to spread out KCCs innovative concepts

Other BenefitsG. Provide the framework, research and test findings from Reboot Britain program and

connect to reliable and viable new innovatorsH. Develop and evaluate the Pic &Mix pilot. Development of projects from the TBYou

challenges with smart phone applications

The potential contributions that local innovators can provide are shown in the Table1 andFigure1 with their respective knowledge, skill and experience.

3.2. Benefits and opportunities for local innovators

These contributions can help KCC build its capacity to innovate and generate new servicesbased on the digital community. In return the digital community should be able to see

benefits from collaborating with KCC otherwise it would not have any motivation and

6


7/23

incentive to maintain such a relationship. The list below describes some benefits in questionfrom working on innovative concepts developed through R&D:

Financial BenefitsA. Financial incomeB. Reducing and sharing cost and riskC. A space for sponsorship and promoting their organizationD. Gain in legitimacy to access to resource and funding

Partnership/ Networking BenefitsE. Extend the network of partners in the public sector and access to wider audienceF. New social networking and channels of communicationG. Knowledge transfer and a space for R&D collaborationH. Develop new partnership working models. Reinforce relationship in terms of working

between private sector and local authorities.I. The opportunity to discuss and share ideas with other internal KCC members. In

addition the creation of new forum enabling dialogue between external stakeholdersand internal members

Promote New Creative IdeasJ. Take ownership of innovative ideas and develop it within their organization.K. CreativityL. KCC is in advanced in term of engagement in innovation culture compared with other

counties ( NESTA )M. Take advantage of the environment to build innovative applications and websitesN. Support to prototype end-user innovation for wider scale developmentO. Support collaborative development of ideas and communication between innovation

participants (KCC 3T as a hub for local innovators)

Encourage Community EngagementP. Enable participants to track the status of ideas submitted and facilitate

communications between submitter and evaluator (external or internal)Q. Personal benefit including good mind, keep going with government changes,

engaging in citizenship

Other BenefitsR. ReputationS. Enrichment from developing new activities with the Public sector

3.3. Challenges and issues

The interview outcome also brings to light criticism and worries with regards to thecollaboration process with KCC and the general perception of the public sector by somelocal innovators. The list below shows feedbacks from them .

Communication issues1. Lack of communication between KCC3T and local innovators in terms of their vision

and intentions2. Insufficient involvement at the earliest stage of the design of concepts and projects

(TBYou for example)3. Ownership agreement not clearly defined4. Language with local innovators is not appropriate for example stakeholder,

influencing5. Importance of personal relationships, openness and dialogue

7


8/23

6. Needs and objectives not communicated enough7. Project initiators are not proficient in communication, suggestion to have internal

work with initiator and external stakeholder before engaging in any events or work8. Requirement of relevant KCC staff to discuss with local innovatorsCommitment & Preparation Issues9. Reluctance to involve in the stage after the development of the concept e.g.

implementation stage10. Not enough enthusiasm to collaborate with KCC11. Not enough preparation work to select and assess audience group in the Pic&Mix

prototyping stage12. A preparation of networking to build confidence and trust in people before engaging

in any development process or event13. Necessity of preparing business model and cash flow

Financial Issues14. Waste of money with previous projects implemented by KCC

Bureaucracy Issues15. Strong hierarchical structures and organization16. Need to unlock rigidity of internal staff17. Unfairness of achieving a project and not having support from internal staff18. Need contractual terms in involvement in the pilot stage

Other Issues19. Worries about not having enough influence and contribution to the decision making

process in working with KCC3T20. Issue with commissioning and procurement process21. Willing to engage in piloting and prototyping but there is no formal relationship22. Innovation concepts and project should demonstrate a clear public and social value

23. Perception of laziness in the public sector24. Event TBYou should have different stages: everything in one day was not

appropriate25. Necessity of valuing and measuring prototype project in term of risks (appropriate

funding, outcomes and share benefit)26. Transparency is needed

Figure1

4. Capacity and process to attract local innovators

8


9/23

4.1. Innovation culture within KCC

For the purpose of this research on how to get local innovators involved more effectively withKCC, an understanding of how internal KCC members perceive innovation is necessary.This is done by setting interviews and questionnaires which are detailed in the appendix.According to the framework and tools mentioned above relating to drivers and barriers toinnovation, the following result is used for setting a map of criterions to assess the capacityand process to attract local innovators. This result tells us the reasons that impedeinnovation to flourish and barriers to implement it. In addition this outcome shows somepositive aspects in the consideration of innovation by KCC members and externalstakeholders. The tables Table2 and Table3 below are a synthesis of perception extractedfrom KCC members interviews.

Table2

Enablers to innovate General perception Comment

Top management must drive andsupport an innovative culture

Medium Support is verbal, no innovation culture andno leadership

Individual/team rewards andincentives must be promoted andincreased

Strong Existing rewards events

Resources and funds are wellappropriate and sufficient

Poor Huge waste for many programmes, impactedby the spending cut

Diversity of staff Strong

Learn from external environment Medium Some teams do it but complain to not haveenough time allocated

Innovation is everyonesresponsibility

Poor

Scope for experimentation Poor Some teams do it but complain to not haveenough time allocated

Evaluation Strong

Accurate views of all relevantstakeholders( to detect resistance)

Medium Generally middle line management areresistant

Ensuring that full range of skill isavailable

Medium Communication and management skills arenot always present where it is required

Involvement of end users at all stage Medium Not always a priority

Innovation champion Poor

Table3

Barriers to innovate KCC internal members generalperception

Comment

9


10/23

Bureaucracy Strong extremely hierarchical and rigidstructural organization

Political environment:Inappropriate funding and resource

Strong Difficulty in the current climate butinnovation is necessary.

External environment

Public not confident in the usefulnessand effectiveness of the programme

Medium

Difficulty to set up a target group forthe programme

Medium

Poor incentive and reward toinnovate

Insignificant Existing policies to reward andincentive but need to improve itspromotion.

Short term budgeting and planninghorizon

Strong Difficulty in the current climate butinnovation is a necessary.

Culture of risk aversion Strong General perception in the publicsector

Poor skill in risk and changemanagement

Strong Lack of leadership

Reluctance to close down failingprogramme or organization

Medium Some programmes were notuseful and costly

Cultural and organizationalarrangement resist to the integrationof technology

Medium Middle management & Internalend-users are more often reluctant

Delivery pressure and administrativeafflictions

Strong Not enough time

4.2. Difficulties and issues to get involved more effectively

According to the previous results from interviews and research, the internal issues impactthe collaboration process with external stakeholders and end users. There is evidence thatdifficulties to involve more effectively local innovators come from:

- The management of participatory approach- The lack of structured and formalized proposal to involve- The public sector reputation- The lack of trust in working with KCC

Participatory approaches are not sufficiently managed because project initiators or designgroup dont have an effective strategy to show, attract and convince local innovators toparticipate. The objective and intention are not clearly demonstrated, these issues arerelated to the fact that information is not readily available and understandable. However thislack of skill in consulting and communication is not a result from their capacity because theyare not in charge to take responsibility for that. It seems that there is no support for theseparticular tasks.

In addition, some local innovators dont know how to contribute and where they are going,although they are keen to engage to work with KCC by making their knowledge available,creativity and experience. As a result there are worries about the degree of their involvement

and ownership issues. These could be conveyed by their participation in decision making ordesign and conception stage.

10


11/23

Opportunity for learning and skill sharing might not be sufficiently highlighted; therefore localinnovators dont have enough interest and enthusiasm to engage in working with KCC.Indeed apart from the financial aspect, transfer knowledge and access to wider audience arealso sources of motivation for local innovators. Some external stakeholders gave the feelingthat there is no creation of value for them to collaborate with KCC.

A participatory approach necessitates understanding and taking into consideration of localinnovators characteristics, needs aspirations and objectives. It appears that this part is notwell perceived by local innovators in the sense that some of them have insisted on theimportance of personal relationship, openness and dialogue.

Finally, a participatory approach requires a confident and trustworthy atmosphere to facilitateinvolvement, the reputation of KCC as a rigid and strong hierarchical organization hindersthe development of such collaboration with external stakeholders, and specifically with localinnovators who use to work and act freely. Their perception of waste in public servicecontrasts with what they claim as producing more efficiently with less, might deteriorate their

confidence in collaborating in a public sector environment.

The lack of formal and structured proposal doesnt convince local innovators efficiently toengage in the process of involvement. Therefore there is not enough motivation to attractthem to work with KCC in such a context. Whatever the level of involvement in which localinnovator is appointed, a structured proposal would enable participants to understand theobjectives, their contributions and their benefits. In doing so local innovators are insured towork in a partnership context of which most of them have requested.

The findings from the investigation within KCC (interviews, internal documents, reports)and research (academic, public and independent organizations publications) enable to drawup a map of strengths, weaknesses, opportunity and threat factors in the process of better

involving local innovators in collaborating with KCC.

4.3. Strength, weak, opportunity and threat to engage in innovation

There is the capacity to attract local innovators in the sense that KCC does promoteinnovation. It takes initiative to research on new ways of involving people to build a digitalcommunity to serve the public. It has also appropriate resources. However innovation cultureis not effective within KCC and processes for collaborating with external stakeholders, arenot well structured neither fully formal. Identifications of positive and negative aspectsimpacting the process of collaboration with local innovators are listed as below:

Strength

- Kent is advanced in terms of initiative for promoting innovation compared with otherregions

- Innovative approach in designing a strategy to future digital public services with theparticipation of local innovators

- Innovate08 winner- Development of innovative concept based on the Barcamp such TransformedByYou- Policies to support and promote new ideas into viable solution

Weakness- Lack of business process in managing collaboration and participatory approach- Reputation of strong hierarchical organization and risk aversion attitude- Lack of leadership to instil innovation culture

Opportunity

11


12/23

- Potential and wide range of competences from local innovators to sustain thePic&Mixproject and future digital public services

- Build up digital community with local innovators- Development of a place for open innovation

Threats

- Lack of resources and funding due to the current political and economic climate- Insufficient support from public to maintain and sustain innovative programmes such

as Pic&Mix

5. Proposal of a model of communication plan

The purpose of this second part is to propose a solution to overcoming the barriers andweakness issues mentioned previously. It aims at defining a strategic approach whichencompasses both the promotion of the KCCs concepts and collaboration of local

innovators. KCC has a strategy to future digital public service, it also has some methods tocontact local innovators through informal and formal communication channels but there is aneed to better promote innovative concepts and KCCs intention. This is due to the lack ofbusiness process and participatory approach which impedes the implementation of thisstrategy.

The following framework is about a guideline for promoting the collaboration by showing theadvantage and benefit in engaging with KCC so that local innovators can see the valuecreation and synergy that can be generated. Then I will propose a strategic approach tomanage this collaboration with local innovators whatever the context of prototyping of newservices, co-creation of innovative concepts or development of open innovation. I suggestthat the collaboration should be promoted through a model of communication plan with four

components.

5.1. Resources and supports

The first component refers to the available resources and supports, it should be emphasisedso that local innovators are convinced that KCC makes certain a safe and efficientenvironment to experiment and develop solutions for future digital public services. Forexample; the Open Kent or Innovation playground platform have a coming technologyinfrastructure ready to be exploited including storage services, access to a wide range ofdata base, connection with external provider such as Google or Amazon. Apart from thehardware and facilities offered by KCC, there are also supports for achieving prototypes ofnew services such as ownership and partnership agreements while minimising bureaucracy

and waste. Finally as a supporter for the development of innovation, KCC can act as aninterface between local innovators and other local authorities, for example; the KentEconomic Board to help local innovators businesses grow. This first component of themodel is called Resources and supports.

5.2. Working practices

Secondly, the promotion of KCCs concept should also take into account the messageaddressing to local innovators in terms of working practices, as they are extremely sensitiveto these according to the interviews outcomes. In order to make them confident in engagingwith KCC, this latter should commit to collaborate in the ethical and rules manner, it isimportant to show this commitment via the warranty of dialogue and transparency. In doingso concerns about relationship and openness have a chance to be mitigated at the earlierstage. Therefore trust in working with KCC would be reinforced. In addition, empowerment

12


13/23

should be given to local innovators to put into light the desire for KCC to share with them thedecision making and control. This rule is a key factor to give collaboration a character muchmore attractive, because local innovators will not solely have the feeling that they cancontribute to generate benefit for themselves and the community, but they can also take partto improve or adjust innovative concepts. These form the second component called workingpractices.

5.3. Collaborators

The next component of the model is about the relationship between potential stakeholdersinvolving in the test and development of new services through Innovation playground, OpenKent or further innovative concepts. KCC should demonstrate the possibility to work withvarious types and profile of stakeholders collaborating together for delivering these newservices. But the word stakeholder is not fully appropriate to the language and messagethat local innovators want to hear, at least for some interviewees. As a result it is suggestedthat the word collaborator or associate would be used instead of stakeholder especiallywhen they are already involved. In addition the term collaborators encompass not solely

local innovators but it can also include volunteers, professional related to SME or corporate,academic and government stakeholders. In doing so, local innovators are sure that theirengagement with KCC is also an opportunity to exchange experiences and knowledge withother collaborators through the diversity of participants. Therefore the involvement wouldfoster innovation as collaborators bring original and complementary approaches to solvechallenges. Moreover, the promotion of the participation should highlight the opportunity forpartnership and team working between collaborators themselves and with KCC as well. Allthese elements would contribute to instil enthusiasms and interests to local innovators. As aresult, the communication plan must put in light the interaction between participants whichform the collaborators component in the model.

5.4. Value creation

The final component of this model is about value creation generated by the composite of thethree last components. It reflects the credibility of the resources and supports to developprototypes, the diversity of participants and the quality of relationship in term of workingpractices. Participants must be convinced that this involvement with KCC for developingfuture digital public services is an opportunity to create values both for the community andfor them. Value for the community means developing services that citizens find consistentlyuseful. In todays economy such services are based on understanding citizen needs withincreasing speed and precision. Therefore local innovators contributions are invaluable forthe community because their commitment, energy and imagination make innovationhappens. Value for local innovators means ownership, network and wider audience, beinginvolved in decision-making, meaningful work, compensation opportunities, reputation;

continued development...There is also value for opportunity to growth business. The lastcomponent is extremely important to attract local innovators because it represents theoutcome of this involvement in terms of interest and sustainability.

This model of promoting the innovative concepts and collaboration can be applied in thecommunication plan and advertisement on the KCCs website for example. It can be appliedto any purpose of involvement such as prototyping new services, co-creation of concepts ordevelopment of open innovation.

13


14/23

Graph1

6. A strategic approach to manage collaboration

According to the TransformedByYouand Prototyping reports the questions of identificationof local innovators and issues to retain them have already been arisen. The purpose of thissection is to design a framework to attempt to respond both to these questions and mitigatethe weakness mentioned previously. Similarly to the model of communication plan thisstrategic approach can be applied in any context of involvement such as prototyping, co-creation or open innovation.

The framework is formed by a cycle of consecutive activities as described below:- Clarification of the purpose for which the stakeholder is involved

- Stakeholders analysis (identification, understanding characteristic, patterns ofinteraction between local innovators)- Selection of the appropriate involvement technique- Implementation of the involvement technique- Evaluation- Improvement and adjustment

6.1. Clarification of the purpose

The first stage of this framework is to clarify the purpose of local innovator involvement. Forexample; in the prototyping context local innovators are required to generate idea anddesign a solution to solve the challenge defined beforehand (TransformedByYou

challenges). Therefore the purpose is to set up a joint implementation which means thatlocal innovators are directly involved in realizing this prototype and make a significantcontribution to realization. Another example that related to the co-creation of innovativeconcept is the consultation of stakeholders in order to get their views and feedbacks beforea design is planned. This could be applied to the TransformedByYouevent design, indeedsome interviewees regretted to not being involved at its earliest stage. Other purposes canbe considered according to the context such as getting approval from stakeholders topersuade stakeholders to agree to a project, group decision-making to share and controldecision-making involving directly stakeholders, consensus-building to reach consensus onthe project whatever the stakeholders interests, giving information to inform stakeholdersabout a project then persuading them to do something specific with (for example Pic&Mix).

14


15/23

Graph2

6.2. Stakeholder Analysis

6.2.1. Identification

The second stage is to identify the stakeholder from the purposes defined previously. KCCalready has very good ways to identify them for example the face to face meetingevents(Twuttle, Tuttle 101 ), digital social media network, events listings, national innovationprogrammes, students or people who have worked in similar activities.

In addition, information from written records and population data would be useful to identifypotential stakeholders as well.

6.2.2. Understanding stakeholders characteristic

The third stage is to understand the characteristics, interests and circumstances of thestakeholders which represent the key to gain and ensure their cooperation. Methods areinterviews, brainstorming, research on data from reports, newspapers and so on. The resultof this stage is a map of stakeholders interests and issues, their desired supports andproject roles coupled with their skills. An example of this map is shown in the first part wherefeedbacks, benefits and competencies from interviewees are thoroughly listed. It also shouldshow the current status of each stakeholder in term of attitude such as advocate, supporter,

critic or blocker. For example; one of the interviewees is an advocate and supporter of theTransformedByYou innovative concept but criticises the Cloud System platform in theInnovation Playground. This stage is crucial to detect factors that drive or hindermotivations.

6.2.3. Patterns of interactions between stakeholders

The fourth stage is to identify the patterns of interactions between stakeholders. Theelements of interactions should be recognized including conflict and cooperation, ethnic andreligious, cultural divisions, historical contexts and authority relationships. In addition anassessment of the influence and importance of stakeholder is useful as well. Influence refersto the power and attitude that a stakeholder wields over others. It conveys to an ability ofpersuasion to take particular decision and act in certain ways. Importance refers to thedegree of the impact that affects the stakeholder involving with KCC according to hisinterests, needs and problems. It is essential to have an insight of risks and opportunities ofworking in group, this is essential to manage efficiently the relationship betweenstakeholders and with KCC project initiator as well. The interview conducted previously didnot enable to draw the patterns of interactions between stakeholders because it was notdesigned for purpose.

Once stakeholders are identified and selected for the purpose of prototyping, co-creation ordevelopment of open innovation, it is necessary to establish fruitful dialogue between themand with KCC designer group; some key actions as follow reflect this dialogue:

- allow stakeholders to take part in the identification of other stakeholders- ensure parties are prepared to have well-informed opinions and decisions

15


16/23


17/23

Table5Purpose Involvement technique

Pressurize*

Incentive

MediaCampaign

Giveinformation

Focusgroup *

Survey

Roundtablegroups

Scenarioworkshop

Sub-grouptodevelopactionsprogrammes

Futureworkshop

Advocacyplanning

Consensusconference

Mediation

Gettingapprovalfromstakeholder

+ ++ +

Information ++ ++

Consultation

+ ++ + ++

Forming-consensus

+ + ++ ++

Groupdecision-making

++ + ++ +

Jointimplementing

+ ++ +

Empty= not suitable += suitable ++=very suitable

* Pressurize: to put pressure on stakeholders so that they are more or less forced to do something.Focus group: To moderate discussion in a small group.

For example the prototyping of new services based on the challenges for the nextTransformedByYou event (Innovation playground) could refer to the purpose of jointimplementation, therefore there is a need to involve stakeholders in the design of scenarioworkshops and advocate the planning to develop the prototype. Then there is a creation ofsub-group of stakeholders who represent the new service developed. Therefore thetechniques for involving them are the design of scenario workshop, advocacy of planningand creation of sub-group for developing specifically the prototype.

Another example is the involvement of stakeholders as consulting in order to help to designinnovative concept. They are involved at the earliest stage by forming a focus group then asurvey is designed to collect their opinions and recommendations. Then scenario workshopsare created for evaluating with them the feasibility of the concept, its efficiency and impact.

6.4. Implementation of the involvement technique

The next stage is the implementation of the selecting involvement technique. Once thepurpose and involvement technique is selected it is important to promote this collaborationby using the model of the communication plan described previously. In addition furtherpoints must be clarified in doing this implementation such as shared interests, transparency,

resources, competencies of participants and their motivations. Finally stakeholders should

17


18/23

be informed as to their role within this involvement process and as to what they can expectfrom the results in order to prevent any misunderstanding or disappointment.

6.5. Evaluation, improvement and adjustment

After the implementation of the involvement technique according to the intended purpose,there is a need to evaluate the previous activities and improve it or adjust it as necessary.The design of the stakeholder involvement technique is also impacted by this evaluation.These could be done by asking the stakeholders their satisfaction with regards to the form,development and result. This evaluation can also impact the role of stakeholders and thestage of decision making at which stakeholders became involved.

Recommendation

The result from the research and interview with internal KCC members has shown thatleadership in innovation culture is needed. Without this leadership successful involvement oflocal innovators or others stakeholders is impeded. It also leads to mitigate the reputation of

rigidity and hierarchical organization such as within KCC. As a result local innovators wouldbe keener to participate and involvement technique mentioned above would be easier toimplement.

The whole process forming the strategic approach to collaboration is described in thediagram below including the communication plan model and action to be taken from KCC.

Graph4

CONCLUSION

Opportunities and challenges of collaborating with local innovators are identified based onthe general framework of managing innovation in the public sector and interviews withinternal and external stakeholders. Opportunities are seen as the mutual benefits andadvantages for both KCC and local innovators. Among these opportunities there are transfer

18


19/23

of knowledge and experience, acquisition of resource and support, extension of audienceand network. The challenges are seen as the difficulties and issues of collaborating withKCC. These are about administrative process, value creation and relationship. The researchhas also identified internal issues such as the lack of innovation culture within the entireKCCs organization, the leadership to foster this culture and the reputation of being rigid orhierarchical structure. As a result these issues hinder the involvement process of beingsuccessful to prototype new services for tackling local challenges co-create innovativeconcepts and develop open innovation.

It is useful to design a strategy to promote and manage the collaboration with a localinnovator. For that purpose, a model of communication plan for attracting local innovatorswas designed. It aims at highlighting the commitment of KCC to work with externalstakeholders in an ethical and rule manner. It also demonstrates the benefits andadvantages described previously. In addition a model of participatory approach andinvolvement technique was designed for delivering a guideline to manage the collaboration.This latter is coupled with the model of communication plan for drawing up a strategicperspective to collaborate with local innovators more effectively. This is not solely suitable to

the context of prototyping future digital public services but it can also be extended to othercontext such as co-creation of innovative concepts. Therefore the proposed strategicapproach to collaboration can be seen as a strategic route map to develop open innovation.

19


20/23

APPENDIX

A. List of interview questions

1) How do you identify appropriate local innovators to get them involved in thedevelopment of a specific prototype?

2) Do you think that an innovative culture is supported from the top management?3) Do you know any form of developing organizational priorities to guide innovation?4) Is there any recognition to encourage experimentation to take place?5) Have you seen any increase or existing rewards for innovative team/individual

(financial, recognition based, efforts value are clearly communicate)?6) How can you measure the necessary resources for innovation (organizational,

structure, technology, space, time, central fund)?7) Do you believe that the diversity of your staff in term of background and perspective

is sufficient to foster innovation and prototyping?8) Do you look at what is being done externally in term of similar projects and

prototypes that you want to achieve?

9) Do you feel that the innovativeness is encouraged at your staff level?10) Is there a promotion of learning and evaluation of success or failure from previousdevelopment of prototype or ideas?

11) Do you know a staff member considered as an innovation champion?12) Do you consider that innovation is a distinct activity from your own task and

responsibilities?13) Do you think that innovation is a part of your personal development plan?14) Is there any policy to achieve stakeholder participation and engagement in the

development of ideas and prototypes?15) Do you see obstacles to implement innovation such as:

a. hostile and sceptical attitudeb. difficulty in coordinating organizations

c. logistical problemsd. difficulty in maintaining the enthusiasme. introduction of new technologyf. middle management resistance

16) In term of political environment do you experience difficulties to implement innovationsuch as :

a. inadequate funding or resourcesb. legislative or regulatory constraintc. political opposition

17) Do you feel that external stakeholder doubts the effectiveness of your prototypes orinnovation that you would like to implement with them?

18) Do you have regular feedback from participants and demonstrate early ongoing

success?19) Do you believe that communication is efficient between stakeholders and project

initiators with regards to the appeal to get more involved in the process ofprototyping new ideas?

20) Do you think that you have little opportunity or legitimate role to influence the designof development or implementation of the prototype by working with KCCinnovation?

21) Is there any lack of communication and document in the development of prototype?22) Is there any lack of communication and document in the development innovative

project designed by KCC?23) Do you feel to have opportunity, confidence and competence to help KCC in the

development of new ideas and prototypes?24) Have you had any formal proposal from KCC to help them to prototype new ideas?

20


21/23

25)What is your expectation in term of rewards/incentive in working with KCC toimplement prototypes or new ideas?

26) Do you believe that your contribution to KCC for prototyping its ideas would have abenefit for your creativity, imagination and social inclusion?

21


22/23

GLOSSARYNetwork: this word is used in the sense of social network and refers to a group of peoplesharing the same interests and needs.

Local challenge: this refers to an issue or problem that KCC attempts to solve by submittingit to potential local innovators. The issue can be arisen by the general public or KCC. Theobjective is to elaborate new idea for responding to this issue then local innovator search todevelop a prototype. An example is the reporting problem via the use of smart-phoneapplication.

Digital public service (DPS): This refers to the applications of Internet Technology that aredesigned to respond to the citizens need and to improve community outcomes. The use ofthose applications also intensifies the access to and delivery of services for citizens,business partners and employees.

REFERENCES

David Adbury (2005): Fostering Innovation in Public Services, Public Money &Management, Jan2005, Vol. 25 Issue 1, p51-56, 6p.

Hans-Joachim Mosler(2004): A framework for stakeholder analysis and stakeholderinvolvement, International Water Management Course 2004.

United States Government Accountability Office (2006): Fisheries management: Coreprinciples and a strategic approach would enhance stakeholder participation in developingQuota-Based Programs, Report to Congressional Requesters, GAO-06-289.

Robert Robertson, Rob Ball: Innovation and Improvement in the Delivery of Public Services:The Use of Quality Management Within Local Government in Canada, Public Organization

Review: A Global Joumai 2: 387-405 (2002)

Lemuria Carter, France Blanger (2005): The utilization of e-government services: citizentrust, innovation and acceptance factor, Info Systems J (2005)15, 525 s

Paul Joyce: Management and innovation in the public services, Strategic Change, StratChange 7, 1930 (1998)

John Taylor, Miriam Lips and Joe Organ: Information-Intensive government and the layeringand sorting of citizenship, PUBLIC MONEY & MANAGEMENT APRIL 2007

Benjamin Mosse* & Edgar A. Whitley (2009): Critically classifying: UK e-governmentwebsite benchmarking and the recasting of the citizen as customer, Info Systems J(2009)19, 149173

Wendy Olphert, Leela Damodaran: Citizen Participation and engagement in the Design ofe-Government Services: The Missing Link in Effective ICT Design and Delivery, Journal ofthe Association for Information Systems, Volume 8, Issue 9, Article 4, pp. 491-507,September 2007

David Boyle, Anna Coote, Chris Sherwood, Julia Slay: Right here, right now- Taking co-production into the mainstream, Discussion paper, NESTA, July 2010

Kent Economic Board: Kent and Medway Local Enterprise Partnership: Towards apragmatic solution for economic growth, July 2010

22


23/23

Kent County Council: 21st Century Kent- A blue print for the countys future, Jan 2010.

Kent County Councils websites:http://transformedbyyou.blogspot.com/http://picandmix.org.uk/

23
http://transformedbyyou.blogspot.com/http://picandmix.org.uk/http://transformedbyyou.blogspot.com/http://picandmix.org.uk/

Documents

Report-Vu-NGUYEN-Final.docx Review v2.- External.doc Deleted Chapters