Digital innovation strategies in the public sector
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the increasing attention on digital innovations in the private sector, little is known about digital innovation strategies in the public sector. This knowledge gap is growing as public sector employees are increasingly embracing new digital tools and ideas. Drawing on rich qualitative data from practitioners in 25 cities across 18 countries, this study analyzes the digital innovation strategies pursued in the public sector, with specific attention placed on digital orientation and the foci of value creation activities. Extending the OECD's Observatory of Public Sector Innovation (OPSI) framework, we identify four distinct digital innovation strategies in the public sector: enhancement-oriented, anticipatory, adaptive, and persistent. Our findings reveal that enhancement-oriented and persistent strategies are the most prevalent, reflecting a strong focus on internal value creation through process optimization and long-term organizational change. In contrast, adaptive and anticipatory strategies are less common. We find a near-equal prevalence of incremental and transformational goals, indicating balanced strategic orientation. Our findings also suggest that practitioners often employ multiple strategies, reflecting the multifacetedness of driving digital innovation in the public sector. We provide valuable insights into various activities linked to the four identified innovation strategies, ending with a comprehensive discussion of our findings, conclusions, study limitations, and future research directions.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it