National and Regional Policies to Promote and Sustain Workplace Innovation

Chapter
Part of the Aligning Perspectives on Health, Safety and Well-Being book series (AHSW)

Abstract

Many European countries have a long history of programmes to promote and sustain workplace innovation. This chapter offers an updated Europe-wide summary of main national- and regional-level policy approaches to workplace innovation during the last two decades. The overview shows that workplace innovation programmes in Europe utilize exclusively soft regulation in its various forms. These activities are still unevenly distributed by geographical area, highlighting the gap between the more active north and the more passive south, and the absence of programmes in most of the new EU member states. However, new promising developments are currently underway in many countries and regions with no history of such programmes. Special attention is paid to methods for meeting the challenges of diffusion , an issue of crucial importance not only for the sake of improving the social effectiveness and legitimacy of programmes, but also for encouraging new countries and regions to take further steps.

References

  1. Alasoini, T. (2008). Building better programmes: Learning networks in the promotion of workplace innovation. International Journal of Action Research, 4(1–2), 62–89.Google Scholar
  2. Alasoini, T. (2011). Workplace development as part of broad-based innovation policy: Exploiting and exploring three types of knowledge. Nordic Journal of Working Life Studies, 1(1), 23–43. http://rossy.ruc.dk/ojs/index.php/njwls/article/view/2334/651. January 2, 2013.
  3. Alasoini, T. (2016). Workplace development programmes as institutional entrepreneurs: Why they produce change and why they do not (Doctoral Dissertations 12/2016, School of Science, Aalto University, Helsinki).Google Scholar
  4. Bessant, J., & Tsekouras, G. (2001). Developing learning networks. AI and Society, 15(1–2), 82–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brödner, P., & Latniak, E. (2003). Sources of innovation and competitiveness: National programmes supporting the development of work organisation. Concepts and Transformation, 8(2), 179–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Business Decisions Limited. (2000). Government support programmes for new forms of work organisation: A report for DG Employment and Social Affairs. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.Google Scholar
  7. De Spiegelaere, S., Van Gyes, G., & Van Hootegem, G. (2014). Labour flexibility and innovation, complementary or concurrent strategies? A review of the literature. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 35(4), 653–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Den Hertog, J. F., & Schröder, P. (1989). Social research for technological change: Lessons from national programmes in Europe and North America. Maastricht: University of Limburg.Google Scholar
  9. Eeckelaert, L., Dhondt, S., Oeij, P., Pot, D. F., Nicolescu, G. I., Trifu, A., et al. (2012). Review of workplace innovation and its relation with occupational safety and health: Literature review. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.Google Scholar
  10. Ekman, M., Gustavsen, B., Asheim, B. T., & Pålshaugen, Ø. (Eds.). (2011). Learning regional innovation: Scandinavian models. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  11. Eurofound. (2012). Fifth working conditions survey: Overview report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.Google Scholar
  12. Eurofound. (2015). Third European company survey—Overview report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.Google Scholar
  13. Flood, P. C., Guthrie, J. P., & Liu, W. (2008). New models of high performance work systems. Dublin: National Centre for Partnership and Performance.Google Scholar
  14. Fricke, W. (1994). Scientific knowledge, social change and action research. In T. Kauppinen & M. Lahtonen (Eds.), National action research programmes in the 1990s (pp. 47–69). Helsinki: Ministry of Labour.Google Scholar
  15. Funnell, S., & Rogers, P. (2011). Purposeful program theory: Effective use of theories of change and logic models. San Francisco: Wiley.Google Scholar
  16. Howaldt, J., Oeij, P. R. A., Dhondt, S., & Fruytier, B. (2016). Workplace innovation and social innovation: An introduction. World Review of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development, 12(1), 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Høyrup, S., Bonnafous-Boucher, M., Hasse, C., Lotz, M., & Møller, K. (Eds.). (2012). Employee-driven innovation: A new approach. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  18. Naschold, F. (1994). The politics and economics of workplace development: A review of national programmes. Helsinki: Ministry of Labour.Google Scholar
  19. Pot, F. (2011). Workplace innovation for better jobs and performance. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 60(4), 404–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pot, F., Dhondt, S., De Korte, E., Oeij, P., & Vaas, F. (2012). Workplace innovation in the Netherlands. In I. Houtman (Ed.), Work life in the Netherlands (pp. 173–190). Hoofddorp: TNO.Google Scholar
  21. Pot, F., Totterdill, P., & Dhondt, S. (2016). Workplace innovation: European policy and theoretical foundations. World Review of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development, 12(1), 13–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ramstad, E. (2008). Innovation generating model—Simultaneous development of work organization and knowledge infrastructure: Experimenting in the field of organizational development. Helsinki: Tekes.Google Scholar
  23. Ramstad, E. (2014). Can high-involvement innovation practices improve productivity and the quality of working-life simultaneously? Management and employee views on comparison. Nordic Journal of Working Life Studies, 4(4), 25–45. http://rossy.ruc.dk/ojs/index.php/njwls/article/view/4706/2393. Accessed January 7, 2015.
  24. Sandberg, Å. (Ed.). (2013). Nordic lights: Work, management and welfare in Scandinavia. Stockholm: SNS förlag.Google Scholar
  25. Vergeer, R., Dhondt, S., Kleinknecht, A., & Kraan, K. (2015). Will ‘structural reforms’ of labour markets reduce productivity growth? A firm-level investigation. European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies, 12(3), 300–317.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tuomo Alasoini
    • 1
  • Elise Ramstad
    • 1
  • Peter Totterdill
    • 2
  1. 1.Tekes—The Finnish Funding Agency for InnovationHelsinkiFinland
  2. 2.Kingston UniversityLondonUnited Kingdom

Personalised recommendations