IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jadmsc/v9y2019i3p51-d249653.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Interactive Political Leadership in Theory and Practice: How Elected Politicians May Benefit from Co-Creating Public Value Outcomes

Author

Listed:
  • Jacob Torfing

    (Department of Social Science and Business, Roskilde University, 4000 Roskilde, Denmark
    Department of Social Sciences, Nord University, 8049 Bodø, Norway)

  • Eva Sørensen

    (Department of Social Science and Business, Roskilde University, 4000 Roskilde, Denmark
    Department of Social Sciences, Nord University, 8049 Bodø, Norway)

Abstract

This paper argues that elected politicians may strengthen their political leadership role by initiating, orchestrating and engaging in the co-creation of public value outcomes. The collaborative turn in public value theory shows how public managers may mobilize the knowledge, ideas and resources of users, citizens and organized stakeholders, but it has so far neglected the role of elected politicians who tend to be reduced to a legitimizing sounding board for public managers aiming to advance public value creation in collaboration with a plethora of public and private actors. This paper seeks to compensate this benign neglect by advancing a new notion of ‘interactive political leadership’. This new construct aims to conceptualize the way that elected politicians may develop new and better policy solutions through a problem-focused interaction with relevant and affected actors from the economy and civil society, including users, volunteers, citizens and other lay actors. The theoretical argument about the development of interactive political leadership, which takes us beyond the traditional forms of sovereign political leadership that perceives politicians as ‘elected kings’, is illustrated by empirical examples drawn from local, national and supranation levels of government.

Suggested Citation

  • Jacob Torfing & Eva Sørensen, 2019. "Interactive Political Leadership in Theory and Practice: How Elected Politicians May Benefit from Co-Creating Public Value Outcomes," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-18, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jadmsc:v:9:y:2019:i:3:p:51-:d:249653
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3387/9/3/51/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3387/9/3/51/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jacob Torfing, 2019. "Collaborative innovation in the public sector: the argument," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(1), pages 1-11, January.
    2. Stephen P Osborne & Zoe Radnor & Kirsty Strokosch, 2016. "Co-Production and the Co-Creation of Value in Public Services: A suitable case for treatment?," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(5), pages 639-653, May.
    3. Ostrom, Elinor, 1973. "On the meaning and measurement of output and efficiency in the provision of urban police services," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 1(2), pages 93-111.
    4. Myerson, Roger B., 1982. "Optimal coordination mechanisms in generalized principal-agent problems," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 67-81, June.
    5. Taco Brandsen & Victor Pestoff, 2006. "Co-production, the third sector and the delivery of public services," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(4), pages 493-501, December.
    6. Zoe Radnor & Stephen P. Osborne, 2013. "Lean: A failed theory for public services?," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 265-287, February.
    7. John Bryson & Alessandro Sancino & John Benington & Eva Sørensen, 2017. "Towards a multi-actor theory of public value co-creation," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(5), pages 640-654, May.
    8. Jacob Torfing & Christopher Ansell, 2017. "Strengthening political leadership and policy innovation through the expansion of collaborative forms of governance," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(1), pages 37-54, January.
    9. McFarland, Andrew S., 1987. "Interest Groups and Theories of Power in America," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(2), pages 129-147, April.
    10. Barbara C. Crosby & Paul ‘t Hart & Jacob Torfing, 2017. "Public value creation through collaborative innovation," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(5), pages 655-669, May.
    11. Ostrom, Elinor, 1996. "Crossing the great divide: Coproduction, synergy, and development," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 1073-1087, June.
    12. Ank Michels & Albert Meijer, 2008. "Safeguarding public accountability in horizontal government," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(2), pages 165-173, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Candel, Melissa & Paulsson, Jenny, 2023. "Enhancing public value with co-creation in public land development: The role of municipalities," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Floriana Fusco & Marta Marsilio & Chiara Guglielmetti, 2018. "La co-production in sanit?: un?analisi bibliometrica," MECOSAN, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2018(108), pages 35-54.
    2. Noella Edelmann & Ines Mergel, 2021. "Co-Production of Digital Public Services in Austrian Public Administrations," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-21, February.
    3. Jinpeng Wu & Jing Xiong, 2022. "How Governance Tools Facilitate Citizen Co-Production Behavior in Urban Community Micro-Regeneration: Evidence from Shanghai," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-18, August.
    4. Manila Bonciani & Ilaria Corazza & Sabina Rosis, 2022. "The COVID-19 emergency as an opportunity to co-produce an innovative approach to health services provision: the women's antenatal classes move on the web," Italian Journal of Marketing, Springer, vol. 2022(1), pages 59-85, March.
    5. Manuel Alméstar & Sara Romero-Muñoz & Nieves Mestre & Uriel Fogué & Eva Gil & Amanda Masha, 2023. "(Un)Likely Connections between (Un)Likely Actors in the Art/NBS Co-Creation Process: Application of KREBS Cycle of Creativity to the Cyborg Garden Project," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-25, May.
    6. Barrutia, Jose M. & Echebarria, Carmen & Aguado-Moralejo, Itziar & Apaolaza-Ibáñez, Vanessa & Hartmann, Patrick, 2022. "Leading smart city projects: Government dynamic capabilities and public value creation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    7. Lorenzo Dorigo & Giuseppe Marcon, 2014. "A caring interpretation of stakeholder management for the social enterprise. Evidence from a regional survey of micro social cooperatives in the Italian welfare mix," Working Papers 01, Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    8. Ada Scupola & Lars Fuglsang & Faiz Gallouj & Anne Vorre Hansen, 2021. "Understandings of Social Innovation within the Danish Public Sector: A Literature Review," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-18, May.
    9. Aksel Ersoy, 2016. "The spread of coproduction: How the concept reached the northernmost city in the UK," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 31(3), pages 410-423, May.
    10. Holstenkamp, Lars, 2019. "What do we know about cooperative sustainable electrification in the global South? A synthesis of the literature and refined social-ecological systems framework," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 307-320.
    11. Klimczuk, Andrzej & Gawron, Grzegorz & Szweda-Lewandowska, Zofia, 2021. "Starzenie się populacji. Aktywizacja, koprodukcja i integracja społeczna osób starszych [Population Ageing: Activation, Co-Production, and Social Integration of Older People]," MPRA Paper 108238, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Zabolotnaya Galina & Larionov Andrey, 2019. "Arrangements for the Transfer of Social-Services Delivery to Non-Governmental Providers (Regional Practices, Russia)," NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, Sciendo, vol. 12(2), pages 251-274, December.
    13. Iqra Sadaf Khan & Osmo Kauppila & Noureen Fatima & Jukka Majava, 2022. "Stakeholder interdependencies in a collaborative innovation project," Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 1-17, December.
    14. Desmarchelier, Benoît & Djellal, Faridah & Gallouj, Faïz, 2021. "Which innovation regime for public service innovation networks for social innovation (PSINSIs)? Lessons from a European cases database," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    15. Andrea BASSI & Alessandro FABBR, 2022. "Co-production paradigm: Threat or Opportunity for Social Economy?," CIRIEC Studies Series, in: Philippe BANCE & Marie-J. BOUCHARD & Dorothea GREILING & CIRIEC (ed.), New perspectives in the co-production of public policies, public services and common goods, volume 3, chapter 5, pages 99-123, CIRIEC - Université de Liège.
    16. Nicolette van Gestel & Marlot Kuiper & Wiljan Hendrikx, 2019. "Changed Roles and Strategies of Professionals in the (co)Production of Public Services," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-15, August.
    17. Karen Johnston, 2015. "Public governance: the government of non-state actors in 'partnerships'," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(1), pages 15-22, January.
    18. Jim Broch Skarli, 2021. "Creating or Destructing Value in Use? Handling Cognitive Impairments in Co-Creation with Serious and Chronically Ill Users," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-17, February.
    19. Philippe BANCE & Marie-J. BOUCHARD & Dorothea GREILING, 2022. "Conclusions and Directions for further Research," CIRIEC Studies Series, in: Philippe BANCE & Marie-J. BOUCHARD & Dorothea GREILING & CIRIEC (ed.), New perspectives in the co-production of public policies, public services and common goods, volume 3, chapter 0, pages 259-274, CIRIEC - Université de Liège.
    20. Pwint Kay Khine & Jianing Mi & Raza Shahid, 2021. "A Comparative Analysis of Co-Production in Public Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-13, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jadmsc:v:9:y:2019:i:3:p:51-:d:249653. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.