Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Aanbesteden in de publieke sector, barrières voor innovatie in de private sector? Public procurement in the public sector, barriers for private sector innovations?|
|Publisher:||Open Universiteit Nederland|
|Abstract:||Innovation is a key driver for social development and economic growth in the Netherlands. To remain the position in the top 20th economies worldwide the Dutch government initiated several incentives for innovation. Public procurement is considered a powerful tool to stimulate innovation in private companies. Various studies showed a great potential of the procurement-instrument through efficient use of this tendering tool. However, there is a lack of knowledge and understanding of the conditions that stimulate of hinder innovation. The problem statement of this study is: To what extent are factors, related to public procurement, a barrier to innovation in the private sector? This study is conducted in the construction industry which, in comparison with other sectors, is seen as less innovative and is depended of the workload from the public sector through public procurement. A survey was conducted among employees of construction and consulting companies with experience in participating in public tenders. A total number of 102 public tenders were included in this study. Literature describes various barriers to innovation and has led to seven hypotheses of factors that influence company’s innovation propensity. The factors that form a barrier to innovation in construction and (construction)consulting companies are: procurement competences, management of risk during the procurement process, interaction with the procurer, public demand for innovation, tender specifications, incentives and management of intellectual property rights. There was also the expectation that a company with higher scores on innovation culture will experience less resistance of barriers to their propensity to innovate. The research revealed a positive effect of flexibility and freedom in the tender specifications on innovation propensity. Also, confirmation was found for the positive influence of incentives on innovation propensity. These factors may be a barrier to innovation in tenders with lack of incentives and very narrow tender specifications. Remarkably, we found a negative relation between interaction with the procurer and the innovation propensity of construction companies. For the other factors no significant impact was found on the innovation propensity in the private sector. No support was found for the expected moderating effects of innovation culture of the company in relation to barriers to innovation. This study provides some recommendations for practice. Public procurers should allow flexibility of specifications in order to stimulate the development of innovative solutions by (private) suppliers. Suppliers also need to be stimulated by increasing size and duration of the contracts or use stimulating selection criteria in the tender (EMVI). The procurer must create conditions within the procurement process where there is space for suppliers creativeness and innovativeness. The interaction between the procurer and suppliers should focus on the conditions of the innovation process, not on the innovation itself. The study had a limited research group of 51 respondents, mainly from the southern Netherlands. Therefore, the research should be extended to other regions in the Netherlands. The conclusions are based on opinions and judgments of the respondents. The results of this study should be supported by qualitative research. Further research could also focus on the perspective of public organizations on the innovation in public procurement and on the obstacles within the influence of private organizations.|
|Appears in Collections:||MSc Management Science|
Files in This Item:
|Rijkers J scriptie dspace.pdf||1.07 MB||Adobe PDF||View/Open|
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.