dc.description.abstract | The underlying assumption in the discourse of innovation is often that ‘innovation is good’. The public sector is frequently characterised as not being sufficiently geared towards innovation and hence unable to address the grand societal challenges we face, and further, to add to the deficiency rhetoric, that public servants are not up for the job (yet). This thesis explores the interconnections between social processes of self and the paradox of continuity and transformation, in that wherever there is an imperative for innovation and change there is paradoxically also an imperative for (the potential security of) sameness. Through its four projects and synopsis, it explores experiences of public servants taking upon themselves to innovate services and practices within the public sector and the logic of public sector practice. The thesis explores various breakdowns and how innovative solutions get to be seen as threats to identity. It problematises the idealisation of innovation.
The thesis posits that realising the potential of innovation is a multi-faceted process. Innovation of practices necessitates a breakdown of (embodied) habits. Furthermore, it requires reflexive processes that are grounded in narratives, ultimately a reimagining of the selves.
These narrative-based reflections could help navigate the complexities of innovation in public service, which are essential in understanding the disruptions that innovative solutions can cause. The thesis argues that hermeneutic dialogues could support negotiating the interpretations of the experiences and interactions in the public sector. Alongside this, dynamic power-related negotiations also come into play. This could be called negotiating the judgements of taste – of judging the good, the bad and the ugly – and by that exploring the paradox of continuity and transformation, which might facilitate the adoption of innovation.
Key words: Innovation, practice, breakdown, narrative, power, judgement, taste,
Key writers: H. Arendt, N. Elias, H.G. Gadamer, I. Kant, C. Mowles, D. Nicolini, P. Ricoeur, J. Scott, L. Svendsen, R. Stacey, T. Sørhaug, C. Taylor, M. Weber, L. Wittgenstein | en_US |