Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Striving to Become Agile in the Public Sector: A Context Theory Perspective

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Towards Digital and Sustainable Organisations (ItAIS 2022)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation ((LNISO,volume 65))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 48 Accesses

Abstract

With an increasing number of digitalization initiatives in the public sector, public shared service providers that deliver and steering bodies that orchestrate the realization of those initiatives are under pressure to become agile, i.e., to adopt agile activities, principles, and an agile mindset. This study investigates challenges and corresponding mitigation measures of scaled agile transformations of such organizations. Based on data gathered through Action Research based multiple case studies and drawing on context theory, it identifies obstacles related to the political, environmental, and internal context as well as transformation management itself. Among them are siloed actions and individual interests, IT legacy, complexity of customer requirements, insufficient resources, no shared vision, low professionalization, and a missing holistic picture. Value stream thinking, architectural thinking, successful pilot projects, constructive criticism, and a culture of failure are suggested as countermeasures. The identified obstacles and measures fit well into and extend the findings from a systematic literature review. Our contribution is to contextualize and extend insights and recommendations related to the large-scale agile transformation of public shared service providers and steering bodies that both serve multiple customers, i.e., other public sector organizations. Further research can quantitatively test the measures, develop maturity models for them, or identify obstacle-measure-patterns. Practitioners receive insights that should also contribute to a more successful transformation of the public sector in the benefit of society and economy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Mergel, I., Edelmann, N., & Haug, N. (2019). Defining digital transformation: Results from expert interviews. Government Information Quarterly, 36(4), 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Clarke, A. (2019). Digital government units: what are they, and what do they mean for digital era public management renewal? International Public Management Journal, 23(3), 358–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Verhoef, P. C., Broekhuizen, T., Bart, Y., Bhattacharya, A., Dong, J. Q., Fabian, N., & Haenlein, M. (2021). Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary reflection and research agenda. Journal of Business Research, 122, 889–901.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bennett, N., & Lemoine, G. J. (2014). What a difference a word makes: Understanding threats to performance in a VUCA world. Business Horizons, 57(3), 311–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. van Manen, H., & van Vliet, H. (2014). Organization-wide agile expansion requires an organization-wide agile mindset. In A. Jedlitschka, P. Kuvaja, M. Kuhrmann, T. Männistö, J. Münch, & M. Raatikainen (Eds.), 15th international conference on product-focused software process improvement, PROFES 2014, LNCS (Vol. 8892, pp. 48–62). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Horlach, B., & Drechsler, A. (2020). It’s not easy being agile: Unpacking paradoxes in agile environments. In Agile processes in software engineering and extreme programming—Workshops, LNBIP (Vol. 396, pp. 182–189). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Teece, D., Peteraf, M., & Leih, S. (2016). Dynamic capabilities and organizational agility: Risk, uncertainty, and strategy in the innovation economy. California Management Review, 58(4), 13–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Klimenko, R., Winter, R., & Rohner, P. (2019). Designing capability maturity model for agile transformation excellence. In: MCIS2019 proceedings (pp. 1–9).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Edison, H., Wang, X., & Conboy, K. (2021). Comparing methods for large-scale agile software development: A systematic literature review. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Vacari, I., & Prikladnicki, R. (2015). Adopting agile methods in the public sector: A systematic literature review. In: 27th international conference on software engineering and knowledge engineering proceedings (pp. 1–6).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Mohagheghi, P., & Lassenius, C. (2021). Organizational implications of agile adoption: A case study from the public sector. In ESEC/FSE 2021: Proceedings of the 29th ACM joint meeting on European software engineering conference and symposium on the foundations of software engineering (pp. 1444–1454). Association for Computing Machinery.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Fuchs, C., & Hess, T. (2018). Becoming agile in the digital transformation: The process of a large-scale agile transformation. In ICIS 2018 Proceedings (pp. 1–17).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Gabryelczyk, R. (2020). Has COVID-19 accelerated digital transformation? Initial lessons learned for public administrations. Information Systems Management, 37(4), 303–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Agostino, D., Arnaboldi, M., & Lema, M. D. (2020). New development: COVID-19 as an accelerator of digital transformation in public service delivery. Public Money & Management, 41(1), 69–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Obstacle Definition & Meaning. Last retrieved May 19, 2022, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/obstacle.

  16. Measure Definition & Meaning. Last retrieved May 19, 2022, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/measure.

  17. Chan, F. K. Y., & Thong, J. Y. L. (2009). Acceptance of agile methodologies: A critical review and conceptual framework. Decision Support Systems, 46(4), 803–814.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Cohen, D., Lindvall, M., & Costa, P. (2004). An introduction to agile methods. Advances in Computers, 62, 1–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Theobald, S., Schmitt, A., & Diebold, P. (2019). Comparing scaling agile frameworks based on underlying practices. In R. Hoda (Ed.), Agile processes in software engineering and extreme programming—Workshops, LNBIP (Vol. 364, pp. 88–96). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Séguin, N., Tremblay, G., & Bagane, H. (2012). Agile principles as software engineering principles: An analysis. In C. Wohlin (Ed.), Agile processes in software engineering and extreme programming 13th international conference, XP 2012, LNBIP (Vol. 111, pp. 1–15). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Definition of value noun from the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. Last retrieved May 19, 2022, from https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/value_1?q=value.

  22. Definition of mindset noun from the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. Last retrieved May 19, 2022, from https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/mindset?q=mindset.

  23. Definition of transformation noun from the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. Last retrieved May 19, 2022, from https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/transformation?q=transformation.

  24. O’Toole, L. J., & Meier, K. J. (2014). Public management, context, and performance: In quest of a more general theory. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(1), 237–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (1997). Organizational spontaneity in context. Human Performance, 10(2), 153–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Bamberger, P. (2008). From the editors: Beyond contextualization: Using context theories to narrow the micro-macro gap in management research. Academy of Management Journal, 51(5), 839–846.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Mergel, I. (2019). Digital service teams in government. Government Information Quarterly, 36(4), 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Kiselev, C., Winter, R., & Rohner, P. (2020). Project success requires context-aware governance. MIS Quarterly Executive, 19(3), 199–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Westermann, F. (2019). A Balancing Act: Defining a control-oriented approach to public sector agility. Master thesis. Delft University of Technology. Retrieved from http://resolver.tudelft.nl/uuid:d8b03c83-d4e8-4288-9287-fa3c4eb7dc91.

  30. Carroll, N., Bjørnson, F. O., Dingsøyr, T., Rolland, K. H., & Conboy, K. (2020). Operationalizing agile methods: Examining coherence in large-scale agile transformations. In M. Paasivaara & P. Kruchten (Eds.), Agile processes in software engineering and extreme programming—Workshops, LNBIP (Vol. 396, pp. 75–83). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  31. Pettigrew, A. M., Woodman, R. W., & Cameron, K. S. (2001). Studying organizational change and development: Challenges for future research. The Academy of Management Journal, 44(4), 697–713.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Soparnot, R. (2011). The concept of organizational change capacity. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 24(5), 640–661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Jansson, N. (2013). Organizational change as practice: A critical analysis. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 26(6), 1003–1019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Fernandez, S., & Rainey, H. G. (2006). Managing successful organizational change in the public sector. Public Administration Review, 66(2), 168–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Tangi, L., Janssen, M., Benedetti, M., & Noci, G. (2021). Digital government transformation: A structural equation modelling analysis of driving and impeding factors. International Journal of Information Management, 60, 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Pedersen, K. (2018). E-government transformations: challenges and strategies. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 12(1), 84–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Andrews, R., Beynon, M. J., & McDermott, A. M. (2016). Organizational capability in the public sector: A configurational approach. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 26(2), 239–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. van der Voet, J. (2019). Organizational decline and innovation in public organizations: A contextual framework of cutback management. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 2(2), 139–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Bolhuis, W. T. C. (2021). How can (large scale) agile be effectively adopted and scaled up in Dutch public sector organisations. Master thesis. University of Twente. Retrieved from http://purl.utwente.nl/essays/88539.

  40. SAFe 5 for Lean Enterprises. Last retrieved May 19, 2022, from https://www.scaledagileframework.com/safe-for-lean-enterprises/.

  41. Davison, R. M., & Martinsons, M. G. (2007). Action research and consulting. In N. Kock (Ed.), Information systems action research (pp. 377–394). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  42. Davison, R. M., Martinsons, M. G., & Kock, N. (2004). Principles of canonical action research. Information Systems Journal, 14(1), 65–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Baskerville, R., & Wood-Harper, A. T. (1998). Diversity in information systems action research methods. European Journal of Information Systems, 7(2), 90–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Eisenhardt, K. M. (2020). What is the Eisenhardt method, really? Strategic Organization, 19(1), 147–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Schröder, D., Kiselev, C., Rohner, S., Kautz, T., & Rohner, P. (2022). Entwicklung, Einsatz und Wirkung des Digital Transformation Orchestrator. Controlling, 34(1), 59–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Drury, M., Conboy, K., & Power, K. (2012). Obstacles to decision making in Agile software development teams. Journal of Systems and Software, 85(6), 1239–1254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Value Streams. Last retrieved May 19, 2022, from https://www.scaledagileframework.com/value-streams/.

  48. Winter, R. (2010). Organisational design and engineering—Proposal of a conceptual framework and comparison of business engineering with other approaches. International Journal of Organizational Design and Engineering, 1(1&2), 126–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Onwujekwe, G., & Weistroffer, H. (2019). Agile development in bureaucratic environments: A literature review. In M. Themistocleous & P. R. da Cunha (Eds.), 15th European, Mediterranean, and Middle Eastern Conference, EMCIS 2018, LNBIP (Vol. 341, pp. 316–330). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Ghimire, D., Charters, S., & Gibbs, S. (2020). Scaling agile software development approach in government organization in New Zealand. In ICSIM ’20: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on software engineering and information management (pp. 100–104). Association for Computing Machinery.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Hong, K. P., & Kim, P. S. (2020). Building an agile government: Its possibilities, challenges, and new tasks. Halduskultuur: The Estonian Journal of Administrative Culture and Digital Governance, 21(1), 4–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Bjørnson, F. O., Vestues, K., & Rolland, K. H. (2017). Coordination in the large: A research design. In XP ’17: Proceedings of the XP2017 scientific workshops (pp. 1–5). Association for Computing Machinery.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Lappi, T., & Aaltonen, K. (2017). Project governance in public sector agile software projects. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 10(2), 263–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Mantovani Fontana, R., & Marczak, S. (2020). Characteristics and challenges of agile software development adoption in Brazilian Government. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 15(2).

    Google Scholar 

  55. Patanakul, P., & Rufo-McCarron, R. (2018). Transitioning to agile software development: Lessons learned from a government-contracted program. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 29(2), 181–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Ylinen, M. (2021). Incorporating agile practices in public sector IT management: A nudge toward adaptive governance. Information Polity, 26(3), 251–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Information Management, University of St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland

    Tobias Kautz & Robert Winter

Authors
  1. Tobias Kautz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Robert Winter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tobias Kautz .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Social and Political Sciences, University of Milan, Milano, Italy

    Alessandra Lazazzara

  2. Department of Law, Economics and Sociology, Magna Græcia University of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy

    Rocco Reina

  3. Department of Management and Business Administration, University "G. d'Annunzio", Pescara, Italy

    Stefano Za

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Kautz, T., Winter, R. (2024). Striving to Become Agile in the Public Sector: A Context Theory Perspective. In: Lazazzara, A., Reina, R., Za, S. (eds) Towards Digital and Sustainable Organisations. ItAIS 2022. Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation, vol 65. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-52880-4_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation