Critical Literature Review Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Critical - Literature review Example But one thing which certainly can be implemented is innovation in governance, the way of operating of its public sector organizations. This review critically examines cases of innovation in governance style and differentiates them from private sector product and process innovation. Critical Review Lot has been written on private sector innovations of products and processes but not much on public sector innovation. Governance innovations in public sector require and deserve greater attention as they go beyond the organizational boundaries to involve other public/private sector organizations, leads to a network based decision making leading to a more efficient implementations and tap new pools of resources among existing resources (Moore and Hartley, 2008). The focus of their paper is on how public sector innovation is different from private innovation in two distinct ways of the latter being very narrow and specific and two the changes are far more concentrated than general as compare d to public sector. They focus on how public sector innovation is much more macro than private sector involving a change in thinking patters of management, change in complex social systems and its restructuring, financial changes, process changes and end result is a changed social delivery. Since these are changes in the existing way of operating and managing, they are tangentially different than inventions (Bessant 2003). Moore and Hartley (2008, p. 4) quotes Lynn (1997) that: ‘Innovation must not simply be another name for change, or for improvement, or even for doing something new lest almost anything qualify as innovation. Innovation is properly defined as an original, disruptive, and fundamental transformation of an organization’s core tasks’. Today many public sector organizations are leading their way in redefining the reason for their existence. There is enough criticism which is found in literature which states that only process level innovation in publi c sector will not lead to any significant change in society and it is unlikely for one best practice to exist for all public sector organizations (Habday, 2005). Savory (2009, p. 150) writes about building knowledge translation capability into public sector innovation process and its special application to National Health Service (NHS) of the UK. this organization thrives on innovation in public health sector in all respects of technology, service and service delivery. This is possible due to two different modes of innovation which is practice based and research based. Both are effective in their own respect, but needs a lot of support from the structure of the organization, policy making and financial resource allocation for the process of real innovation take place. Power lobbies in health care sector and interests of various stake holders also effect the innovation process in NHS, which means that any worthy change to occur at ground level, a network wide change has to occur whic h reemphasizes the importance of Innovation in Governance. NHS modernization agency was proposed in 2000 for promoting change management the way it’s done in private sector. unlike private sector, change management was divided in two parts, innovation of services and innovation of technology. Though this paper emphasize that similar capacity management can be applied at in similar way for

Modernizing Rulers in the Middle East Assignment

Modernizing Rulers in the Middle East - Assignment Example Ataturk was a well-known military man. His victories and losses defined his role as a leader. While Reza Shah was in the military, the people did not gain trust in him due to the lack of victories and losses in actual battle. Since Ataturk was respected more, he could implement the changes and secularization of his country. Reza Shah had to fight for secularization and eventually back down to the pressure from the Shi’ite faction. Although it might seem that Reza Shah was not as successful as Ataturk, the two men faced different problems. Ataturk unified Turkey as Turkish. Reza Shah had to deal with many different tribes, religious leaders, and other factions. Ataturk did not face the severe opposition as Reza Shah. Ataturk did face opposition; however he managed to unite the Turkish people with a sense of nationalism. Reza Shah did not inspire the same nationalism within his people. Ataturk created a government that would not be successor based. Reza Shah’s son succeeded his father. Ataturk’s government had a solid base of elections and fundamental principles. He wanted to create a government, but one that could go on without him. Reza Shah, on the other hand, wanted to create his own personal goals of government with him as the center. That was the main difference between the two men. Ataturk created a secular government that lasted, whereas Reza Shah created one that was not as