ADMINISTRATIVE INNOVATION IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT BUREAUCRACIES: CASE STUDY OF THESABAN, PHETCHABUN PROVINCE, THAILAND

  • Suebsawad Vutivoradit Suan Sunandha Rajabhat University, Bangkok
  • Keratiwan Kalayanamitra Suan Sunandha Rajabhat University, Bangkok
  • Sunhanat Jakkapattarawong Pathumthani University

Abstract

Thai public sector always described as a highly centralized system, with an inflexible hierarchical structure and high levels of formal relationships channeling its communications through public enterprises and institutions. Even establishing the local administration system as an approach of decentralization, is still highly connected and governed by the central government. On the other hand, innovation in public sector studies and application in last two decades gained much interest from scholars, practitioners and even leaders and policy makers as an approach to enhance public sector efficiency and effectiveness. Accordingly, this study aims to explore innovation in the public sector in Thesaban Mueang Phetchabun Thailand. 

It can represent the public sector in Thailand on a larger scale. The study evaluates the laws, structures and dynamics that constitute the framework of the local administration system. Furthermore, it explores the main constraints on innovation within the system. To develop and support the argument, which emerges from the literature review, this study employs qualitative research methods, namely interviews, as a method to collect data from various informants working in and/or with the public sector.

The results of the study indicated that the innovative administration implemented by local administrative organization was distinct and different from each other based on its own main mission. Specifically, while the top-down innovation was implemented by big local administrative organizations. The initiating process comprised three steps. First, there were meetings among involved personnel. After that, there was an attempt to network with external organizations. Finally, there were processes of monitoring and follow-up evaluation as well as the establishment of learning center. Concerning factors in relation to initiating processes, they comprised six factors which included leadership for change, corporate culture, knowledge and competency of practitioners, public participation, supports from external organizations, and social capitals.

Author Biographies

Suebsawad Vutivoradit, Suan Sunandha Rajabhat University, Bangkok

works  in College of Innovation and management, Suan Sunandha Rajabhat University, 

Bangkok, Thailand, member of evaluation team

Research interests : local administration, political strategy, national politic, community, problems pf democracy

Keratiwan Kalayanamitra, Suan Sunandha Rajabhat University, Bangkok

works  in College of Innovation and management, Suan Sunandha Rajabhat University, 

Bangkok, Thailand, member of evaluation team

Research interests : local administration, political history

Sunhanat Jakkapattarawong, Pathumthani University

works  in Pathumthani University, Pathumthani, Thailand, Thailand,

department of political science

Research interests : local administration, political history

References

Albury D. (2005). Fostering innovation in Public Services. Public Money &Management, 25:1, 51-56.

Arundel, A., & Huber, D. (2013). From too little to too much innovation? issues inmeasuring innovation in the public sector. Structural Change andEconomic Dynamics, 27, 146-159.

Bessant, J. R. (2003). High-involvement innovation: Building and sustaining competitive advantage through continuous change. Chichester: Wiley.

Bloch, C., Bugge, M. (2013). Public sector innovation—From theory to measurement. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, (27), 133-145.

Bommert, B. (2010). Collaborative innovation in the public sector. International Public Management Review, 11, 15–33.

Charoensethom, S. (2008). Guidelines for innovation in the organization. Ramkhamhaeng Journal, 25 (4), 130-140.

Denhardt, R., Denhardt, J. (2009). Public administration: An action orientation. Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth.

Gow, J. I. (2014). Public sector innovation theory Revisited. The Innovation Journal,19(2), 1.

Jantaravanich, S. (2013). Data analysis in qualitative research, Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University Press.

Kattel, R. (2015). What would max weber say about public-sector innovation? Journal of Public Administration and Policy, 8(1), 9-19.

Klas P., Johan L., Håkan W., (2015). Agencies, it’s time to innovate! International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 7, 1. 34 – 49.

Phuangngam, K. (2007). Thai local government: the main textbook. Conducting a Bachelor of Public Administration course Local government branch Academic City, Local Government, Thailand. Bangkok: Extranet.

Phuangngam, K. (2010). Synthesis and removal of lessons on local innovation and public service of local government organizations (Master of mission management Transfer) Office of the Distribution Commission Power to the administrative organization Local area. Research Report. Bangkok: Prime Minister's Office.

Prapysatok, S., Jakkapattarawong, S. (2018). The participation of the community in cultural and environmental conservation for sustainable tourism. Case study in Samphanthawong District Bangkok. Research report, Research and Development Institute, Suan Sunandha Rajabhat University.
Published
2019-06-25
How to Cite
Vutivoradit, S., Kalayanamitra, K., & Jakkapattarawong, S. (2019). ADMINISTRATIVE INNOVATION IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT BUREAUCRACIES: CASE STUDY OF THESABAN, PHETCHABUN PROVINCE, THAILAND. The EUrASEANs: Journal on Global Socio-Economic Dynamics, (3(16), 25-31. https://doi.org/10.35678/2539-5645.3(16).2019.25-31