This paper presents the results of the content analysis of 139 Web of Science papers focused on collaborative innovation with external stakeholders of public administration, specifically on co-production and co-creation. The analysis included papers published between 2009 and 2018 and was based on a coding scheme consisting of 12 parameters grouped into four groups: paper descriptors, financial support of the research, methodological framework, and co-creation characteristics. The results reveal a considerable increase in researchers’ interest in co-production and co-creation in the context of public administration in the last few years. This is particularly the case in Northern and Western Europe, where Anglo-Saxon and Nordic administrative traditions dominate. Furthermore, the results show that co-creation is most often placed in the contexts of social policy and welfare, as well as health care. Over the selected period, research seldom addressed companies as a target group in the co-creation of public services—in comparison to citizens and internal users. More than three quarters of the papers observed were empirical and less than 20% were quantitative. In general, a lack of conceptual clarity was often identified through the interchangeable usage of the terms co-creation and co-creation and the low level of international comparison—the majority of the papers focused on case descriptions at a national level, even though collaborative innovation is strongly related to administrative traditions dominating in specific regions.

The academic contribution to the field is twofold. Firstly, the paper identifies co-creation drivers and barriers from the professionals’ point of view ‒ a largely overlooked perspective in the relevant literature. Secondly, by being placed in the Slovenian administrative context, the paper complements and enriches the debate on co-creation shaped predominantly by the experience of Northern and Western Europe. Purpose: By focusing on the Slovenian public sector, as a traditionally hierarchical administrative context, the paper aims to identify factors that stimulate professionals to implement co-creation in their everyday work, as well as factors that impede their decision and behaviour in this direction. Design/methodology/approach: The paper relies on two Slovenian case studies capturing the experience of professionals from the Ministry of Public Administration and the Municipality of Ljubljana. The key data-gathering methods were qualitative open-ended interviews with ‘lead professionals’ (at managerial positions) and focus groups with professionals who have regular contact with service users/external stakeholders and/or experience with co-creation. Findings: The findings of the paper indicate that professionals implement co-creation even in ‘unfavourable’ hierarchical and centralised settings. A key driver for them to co-create in such a context is strong political support at the highest level. However, a more profound internalisation of co-creation depends on the redefinition of their professional identity, as well as on the (personal or collective/organisational) interest in co-creation. Originality/significance: The paper makes a pioneer step in providing an in-depth look into the drivers and barriers professionals face when implementing co-creation in the Slovenian public sector. As such, it provides valuable input for further comparative analyses of co-creation drivers and barriers faced by professionals across Central and Eastern Europe.

Purpose: The paper adopts a holistic approach to studying the scale and scope of organisational change resulting from the COVID-19 crisis within the Slovenian public administration. It aims to go beyond the relatively narrow research focus of existing literature, which is confined to short-term responses to the crisis affecting specific organisational aspects of public administration. Design/methodology/approach: Theoretically underpinned by Nograšek and Vintar’s (2014) upgrade of Leavitt’s diamond model, the paper employs a multi-case study design to explore the long-term implications of COVID-19-induced changes within the Slovenian public administration. Findings: The findings reveal an uneven impact of the COVID-19 crisis across Slovenian state administration organisations in terms of the scale and scope of changes, noting that the two key long-term changes – telework and new digital communication channels – have not become equivalent alternatives to traditional work and communication methods. Moreover, the paper identifies changes within the element “people” as the primary disruptors of organisational equilibrium, triggering a ripple effect of changes within other organisational elements. Originality/value: The paper debunks the myth about the “radical” impact of COVID-19 by concluding that long-term changes have not altered the essence of (Slovenian) public organisations, characterised as traditional public administration. Theoretically, it demonstrates the need for a new adaptation of Leavitt’s diamond model to explain organisational changes in turbulent/crisis times.

Odprti podatki javnega sektorja (OPJS) so javno dobro, katerih vpliv presega okvir javnega sektorja ter lahko prispevajo k razvoju gospodarstva in družbeni blaginji. Vendar podatki sami po sebi ne ustvarjajo vrednosti, saj zgolj objava podatkov ne zagotavlja samodejnih pozitivnih učinkov in vpliva v praksi. Ključno vlogo pri tem imajo javne organizacije, ki morajo zagotavljati kakovostne, dostopne in pravočasno objavljene podatke ter konstruktivno sodelovati v širšem ekosistemu uporabnikov podatkov. Čeprav ima Slovenija ugoden zakonodajni in institucionalni okvir za OPJS, se največji izzivi pojavljajo na organizacijski ravni. Z namenom lažjega razumevanja teh izzivov in načinov, kako jih premagati, prispevek analizira znanstvene članke (iz baz WoS in Scopus) ter prepoznava spodbujevalne in zaviralne dejavnike znotraj javnih organizacij, ki vplivajo na odpiranje podatkov. Sistematični pregled teh »univerzalnih« dejavnikov ponuja osnovo za poglobljeno razumevanje slovenskih posebnosti in premagovanje izzivov pri odpiranju podatkov javnega sektorja.

Although open government data (OGD) and co-creation are increasingly recognised as important components of smart public governance (SPG), less is known about the organisational capacities relevant to the development of OGD-driven co-creation. This study examines the extent to which Slovenian ministries, as central government organisations responsible for policymaking, possess selected OGD-related and co-creation-related organisational capacities that may represent potential preconditions for OGD-driven co-creation. This study draws on a focused re-analysis of semi-structured interview material collected in eight Slovenian ministries and examines seven capacities: data stewardship and institutional data governance, data-driven policymaking and decision-making, monitoring of data reuse, sensitive-data awareness and responsible openness, stakeholder participation, feedback mechanisms, and co-creation practices. Based on participants’ accounts, data stewardship arrangements and awareness of sensitive-data requirements were reported across all eight ministries, while data-driven policymaking and decision-making and monitoring of data reuse showed greater variation. Stakeholder participation was reported in all eight ministries, although its extent and form varied, while feedback mechanisms were well established across the ministries. At the same time, reported co-creation practices were predominantly at lower or intermediate levels of the co-creation ladder. Participation practices primarily reflected stakeholder input, while feedback mechanisms mainly reflected institutional responsiveness rather than co-creation in themselves. This study provides an empirical assessment of the reported presence and extent of seven selected organisational capacities relevant to OGD-driven co-creation in the participating Slovenian ministries.

Prispevek predstavlja celovito analizo stanja in trendov na področju odprtih podatkov javnega sektorja (OPJS) v Sloveniji z vključeno mednarodno primerjavo. Analiza zasleduje dva cilja: (1) kronološko opredeliti in slediti trendom ter napredkom znotraj države ter (2) umestiti Slovenijo na globalni oz. regionalni ravni glede stanja na področju OPJS. Prvi vidik omogoča vpogled v dinamiko razvoja politike OPJS skozi čas. Kronološki prikaz trendov implementacije OPJS omogoča boljše razumevanje določenih dosežkov (oz. stagnacije ali celo neuspehov) v luči širše politične, ekonomske in družbene situacije. Strateška prizadevanja in implementacija OPJS se ne izvajajo v vakuumu, ampak so podvrženi vplivu širšega konteksta. Zato vpogled v širšo sliko omogoča boljše razumevanje nacionalnega okolja, bodisi kot (ne)posrednega spodbujevalnega dejavnika bodisi kot ovire pri izvajanju OPJS. Drugi vidik opredeli pozicijo, ki jo je Slovenija dosegla na globalni oz. regionalni ravni v obravnavanem časovnem obdobju. Predstavljene so pomembnejše mednarodne raziskave, ki merijo zrelost OPJS in v te meritve redno vključujejo tudi Slovenijo: (1) indeks EU Open Data Maturity, ki ga spremlja Evropska komisija; (2) indeks OURdata, ki ga spremlja OECD, in (3) ODIN (Open Data Inventory), ki ga pripravlja organizacija Open Data Watch. S tem prispevek zapolnjuje manko usklajene predstavitve sicer kompatibilnih raziskav, ki vse stremijo k istemu cilju – izboljšanju stanja OPJS. Analiza vseh treh raziskav na enem mestu omogoča preglednejšo in celovitejšo sliko o napredku Slovenije in globalnih trendih.