MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2194893515

What Have We Learned? Twenty Years of the Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal

2015· article· en· W2194893515 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Eleanor D. Glor, Mario A. Rivera

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œinnovation journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRegional Development and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTreasuryGovernment (linguistics)LoanPublic sectorRecessionDebtEconomicsFinanceBusinessPolitical scienceEconomyLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is the 20th anniversary of publication for The Innovation Journal/La Revue de l'innovation, an anniversary that presents an opportunity to consider what have we learned, what the journal has and has not accomplished, and what remains to be addressed.Public sector innovation was a matter of keen interest when I (EG) created the journal and the Innovation Salon, a dinner meeting, from within the Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS) of the Government of Canada during the mid-1990s. Personnel of the TBS believed that innovation was a potential major contributor to deali ng with the Government of Canada's (G°C) deficit and debt, when had grown to worrisome amounts during the economic recession of the late 1980s and early 1990s. The TBS government introduced a program of loans to departments to fund cost-sharing innovations but the loans had to be paid back, whether the innovation was successful at saving money or not; accepting a loan was therefore a risky proposition for departments, and the entire risk was to be assumed by the department. Around the same time, the Treasury Board introduced a policy requiring departments to self-fund any new programs. Interest in innovation in the G°C has never been the same.By 1995, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) came to call with the message that the G°C had to deal with its deficit through restraint. The G°C complied and introduced a major cut-back program that reduced all grants and contributions by thirty per cent and most programs. TBS eliminated its innovation and quality program. I decided to continue TIJ outside government, and secured permission to do so. The government abolished almost all its periodicals at this time.TIJ has been a success, in our opinions, in all ways except one. We have:1) Created a venue for publishing material on public sector innovation2) Published in both English and French3) Created an open access source for finding information about public sector innovation worldwide by publishing: Prior to this issue, we published:a) Five booksb) 238 peer-reviewed papersc) 146 discussion papers (also peer-reviewed)d) 57 case studiese) 22 Review Essaysf) 172 book reviewsWe have solidly contributed to the process of creating an international literature on public sector innovation, and for some authors on innovation we are the journal of first choice for such material. TIJ is a resource that all can access freely. During this time, TIJ and LRI have also become widely read, with around 100,000 individuals reading TIJ per year. In 2014, for example, TIJ was visited by 99,402 unique IPs (unique visitors) who returned to read TIJ an average of 6.24 times. TIJ has also become widely cited, ranking 39th among 1157 public administration journals during 20121 and 68th among the top public administration journals in 2013.We have published about public sector innovation in many places (e.g. Malaysia, Norway, Denmark, India, the Middle East, Canada, Great Britain, the USA, etc.). With this issue, we expand that scope to Russia. We have also published on many subjects, including health, education, public administration, ethics, collaboration and many others. We have published special issues at the forefront of innovation, such as those on leadership, processes and tools, education, empowerment, research, policy informatics, the Middle East, collaboration and democracy. We have also published on innovation patterns and a framework for a research program on the fate of organizations that innovate. The scope and depth of our work is remarkable.Consider a selection of topics covered in TIJ over the last five years, which might give a tangible sense of the extent and reach of coverage of the field in the journal, with topics ranging from healthcare system innovation to regional governance, network governance, informatics, and public ethics:1. Volume 20 (1), 2015. Special Issue on Innovations in Health Care System Reform in OECD Countries, with peer-reviewed papers on System Reform in OECD Countries, key competencies for promoting service innovation in the health sector, the role of regional agencies in performance management for innovation, New Governance and its influence in the long-term care sector in Ontario, Canada, innovation through public-private partnerships in the Greek healthcare sector, and applications of a Systemic Innovation Model for public sector Innovation Practice. …

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.539
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.008
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.151
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.205 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œinnovation journalSame topicRegional Development and PolicyFrench-language works237,207