PWC_8 Innovation in policing About this free course This version of the content may include video, images and interactive content that may not be optimised for your device. You can experience this free course as it was originally designed on OpenLearn, the home of free learning from The Open University – https://www.open.edu/openlearn/education-development/innovation-policing/content-section-0

Copyright © 2022 The Open University Intellectual property Unless otherwise stated, this resource is released under the terms of the Creative Commons Licence v4.0 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/deed.en_GB. Within that The Open University interprets this licence in the following way: www.open.edu/openlearn/about-openlearn/frequently-asked-questions-on-openlearn. Copyright and rights falling outside the terms of the Creative Commons Licence are retained or controlled by The Open University. Please read the full text before using any of the content. We believe the primary barrier to accessing high-quality educational experiences is cost, which is why we aim to publish as much free content as possible under an open licence. If it proves difficult to release content under our preferred Creative Commons licence (e.g. because we can’t afford or gain the clearances or find suitable alternatives), we will still release the materials for free under a personal end-user licence. This is because the learning experience will always be the same high quality offering and that should always be seen as positive – even if at times the licensing is different to Creative Commons. When using the content you must attribute us (The Open University) (the OU) and any identified author in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Licence. The Acknowledgements section is used to list, amongst other things, third party (Proprietary), licensed content which is not subject to Creative Commons licensing. Proprietary content must be used (retained) intact and in context to the content at all times. The Acknowledgements section is also used to bring to your attention any other Special Restrictions which may apply to the content. For example there may be times when the Creative Commons Non-Commercial Sharealike licence does not apply to any of the content even if owned by us (The Open University). In these instances, unless stated otherwise, the content may be used for personal and non-commercial use. We have also identified as Proprietary other material included in the content which is not subject to Creative Commons Licence. These are OU logos, trading names and may extend to certain photographic and video images and sound recordings and any other material as may be brought to your attention. Unauthorised use of any of the content may constitute a breach of the terms and conditions and/or intellectual property laws. We reserve the right to alter, amend or bring to an end any terms and conditions provided here without notice. All rights falling outside the terms of the Creative Commons licence are retained or controlled by The Open University. Head of Intellectual Property, The Open University Although innovation is often seen as typical of Silicon Valley start-ups led by twenty-somethings, organisations of any type, size or can be innovative. This applies just as much as to policing organisations as it does to anyone else. In this course we will consider the nature of innovation, most particularly as it applies to policing. This will include understanding not just how innovation applies in a policing context but also considering some key innovations in policing and how they have developed. The insights gained into innovation are relevant not just for those in policing but also for anyone in the community or in community organisations who wishes to positively influence new approaches and new ways of working by police. By better understanding both innovation and innovation in policing, these opportunities can be more effectively developed for broader social benefit. After studying this course, you should be able to: outline various ways in which innovation can be understood and how it differs from other, related concepts such as creativity discuss key forms of innovation in policing outline key methods and frameworks for innovation discuss ways in which organisations can become more innovative outline the role of leaders and leadership in supporting greater innovation. Innovation is, in many ways, a concept that we all perhaps recognise when we see or experience. Yet often we might struggle to clearly define it. Sometimes an innovation might be a product or service that is new or simply different, other times it might be an idea, process or approach that is a change to the way things have been done previously. Activity 1 What does innovation mean to you? What do you think are the key elements of innovation? Reflect for a moment and note down your thoughts in the box below. To better understand what innovation is in practice, it is worth considering two key definitions. Hartley and Knell (2021, p. 2) assert that ‘innovation is about new ideas or practices which are implemented’ [original emphasis]. The distinction highlighted by this definition is absolutely vital as it highlights the dual nature of innovation – on the one hand it is about something being new (in this case ideas or practices), and on the other it is about actual implementation. Developing these ideas further, the International Standards Organisation (ISO) – better known for its work developing quality and assurance standards such as ISO 9001 – defines innovation as ‘the successful exploitation of a new idea to realise value. It can relate to a product, a service, a process, a model, or any combination of these. Some ideas are small; some are big; but innovative ideas will be novel and will make a difference’ (Enterprise Ireland, 2021). As this latter definition highlights, rather than just being about the implementation of ideas or practices – which is undoubtedly vital – innovation is also about the realisation of value for the organisation and for stakeholders. The importance of this for public sector innovation in particular are emphasised by Hartley (2005, p. 27) when she highlights that ‘the drivers [for innovation] in the public sector are to achieve widespread improvements in governance and service performance, including efficiencies, in order to increase public value’. In this regard, the distinction between profit-oriented private sector innovation, and service- and outcome-oriented public sector innovation are worth highlighting. Activity 2 Perspectives on innovation in policing In this video Assistant Chief Constable Bobby Singleton, of the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI), shares his insights into some of the key questions of innovation in policing. Key questions include: From a policing perspective, what is innovation? Why is innovation important for policing? What would you see as the most important innovations to emerge in policing in recent years? What role do police leaders play in supporting innovation? What are the key barriers to innovation in policing? What role can communities play in policing innovation? How can innovation be enhanced in policing? Video 1 Bobby Singleton Bobby Singleton Yeah, so my name’s Assistant Chief Constable, Bobby Singleton. I am the current head of local policing for the Police Service of Northern Ireland.   I think from a policing perspective, the first thing that comes to mind in terms of innovation is just how fundamental it is as a concept, in terms of us delivering on our policing mission for the community, in terms of keeping people safe.   It’s really only through effective innovation, responding and adapting to changes in our operating environment, that we can continue to provide the service that the public require and are entitled to receive from their police service. To me, it’s an absolutely fundamental element of policing success. I think innovation is absolutely fundamental to policing because it represents really important opportunities for us.   I think that there’s an implicit recognition that we don’t operate within a vacuum, that the world in which we operate is constantly changing. And the only way that we can remain effective is to make sure that we change the way we innovate.   And for me, innovating, as well, is about making sure that we harness the powers of change that exist around us in our operating environment. Because quite often those forces of change, if you like, can present key threats and challenges to police.   But they’re equally opportunities if harnessed in the right way. And I think it’s vitally important that we approach change in this way, that we’re looking at it in terms of opportunities and not just threats and challenges. And, certainly, when you think about some of those powerful forces, in many respects the only way to rise to those threats and challenges is by making sure that we, ourselves, are capable of harnessing the opportunities that exist within them.   So take, for example, digital technology, in many respects a huge enabler in terms of crime, in particular. We’ve seen that, in many respects, organized criminals, in particular, can be early adopters of new technologies.   The only way that we can compete with that is by making sure that we ourselves stay as close to the crest of the wave of change as we possibly can. I think it was Arie de Geus that said once that the only sustainable competitive advantage is to learn quicker than your opposition. So certainly in that context, I think there’s a challenge to policing to make sure that we do that.   I think innovation is also fundamentally about making sure that we get the best from our single biggest resource, and that’s our people.   I would say still, today, in policing, the capability and capacity for innovation that exists within our organisations is still largely untapped. And as police leaders, we need to make a conscious effort to make sure that we democratize change and innovation in order to get the best from our biggest resource, our people.   I think for me, the family of change that I think has been the most impactful in policing is definitely in the kind of digital and technological arena. And when I think about this, I kind of conceive it as being about the augmentation of policing.   So innovations like ANPR, body worn video, the ability to process big data, and to be able to turn that to an investigative purpose, or to enhance police accountability and transparency, I think has been transformational in terms of the delivery of policing services. And I think will continue to be. And I think all provide really good, powerful examples of how, when policing, engages with the world around it. And six opportunities that exist in technology, how they can make a tangible difference to the quality of service that we provide to the public.   Well, I think police leaders have a huge role to play. And, I think in terms, firstly, of the leadership style and approach, I think that’s fundamental. I would say, first of all, that I think the role of police leaders is not necessarily to have all the answers, or to provide all the solutions, or to assume that necessarily innovation has to come from us.   Actually, I think the strength in the form of leadership that we’re looking for is a recognition that actually ideas exist at all levels within the organisation that are capable of making a significant difference to the service that we provide. So in that context, I see leadership in terms of innovation and policing being very much about democratizing the opportunities to be engaged in change and innovation within the organisation.   A lot of that is actually about flattening the hierarchy that exists within policing. And with the negative aspects of policing culture that result from that where people, perhaps, do look too much above them in terms of solution design and things like that.   So I think a key part of leadership is about creating the conditions, and the environment, and the platforms to allow people to participate.   And that kind of democratized change and innovation. I also think, crucially, as well, for an organisation that can, at times, be very demand-led, a key role of leadership as well as about creating the space and the time to allow people to benefit, recognizing that does require a significant investment on the part of individuals and the organisation, in order to realize the benefits from them. Well, I talked about the key role that leadership has to play. And I would say that the wrong kind of leadership, frankly, can be one of the chief barriers. So that kind of traditional leadership approach in terms of command and control, I think, can be an impediment, especially if there’s this idea that the leader is somehow divine and has all the answers. Because that’s just simply not the case.   And it, again, leaves us in a situation where we’re failing to properly exploit the talent, the capability that exists within the workforce that we have. So I can see leadership as being one of the chief barriers. I think, related to that, we have organisational structures and hierarchy which tends to reinforce some of that thinking, as well, and can stop at times the transfer of ideas, not only within the organisation.   But we also sometimes talk about a silo mentality, either within elements of policing or within policing as a body. Perhaps in the past haven’t been just as outward looking as we could or should have been. And, therefore, have prevented ourselves from being able to identify and exploit some of these opportunities. Inevitably, as well, budgets do play a part in this. And, certainly, in the context within which we operate in Northern Ireland, certainly our efforts to try and innovate and be creative have been hampered by only having annual budget settlements which have prevented us making the kind of long-term investment that’s sometimes required in order to bring about more significant change and innovation.   So I would say those have been the key barriers for us. I think it’s been about leadership, some of the negative elements of organisational culture, and then the budgetary constraints that we faced, as well. So my top tips would be, primarily, that everybody has a role to play. And the question I would be posing to people, well, if not you, then who? And if not now, then when? So don’t allow the negative aspects, sometimes of place in culture and hierarchy, to prevent you from bringing forward your good ideas. I mean, in many respects, our officers and staff represent our subject-matter experts. Nobody knows their business better than they do. And it stands to reason then that they will be the people that will have the most insightful observations about how things could be improved.   So my message to officers and staff would be to engage in this process. My message to leaders within the organisation is, let’s work to create the conditions that create platforms for people to be able to share those ideas and experience with us so as we can collectively work together in order to deliver a better service for the public.   So since the inception of the Police Service of Northern Ireland, the concept of policing with the community has been at the absolute core of what we do. And I think within that there’s an implicit recognition that, actually, when it comes to policing and community safety, this is not something that can ever be delivered by the police alone in isolation.   And instead, fundamentally, there’s a recognition in the concept of policing with the community that actually the best way and the only way, in fact to provide the standard and the level of police and service that people need and are entitled to expect from us is by working collaboratively with them. So in terms of innovation, where the role of the community comes into that, I think, for me, it’s about recognizing that innovation and the engagement with communities actually can happen at a multitude of different levels and definitely, in terms of our approach, in particular, to the exploitation of technology. I mean a big emphasis in that has been about trying to make us as a service more visible, more accessible, and more responsive to the community, in order to enable that coproduction that takes place in terms of delivering community safety.   So my hope for the next three to five years is that work will continue. And that we will continue to provide opportunities for people to engage with policing at a range of different levels, whether that’s from just taking simple, preventative steps themselves in order to protect themselves, their family, and their businesses, right up to and including joint coproduction of services, whether that be through the delivery of restorative justice within communities or wider community safety initiatives, including the likes of neighborhood watch, but elevating that, bringing it into the digital arena, and making it far smarter and more intelligent than it has been in the past.

Having watched the clip and listened to ACC Singleton’s perspectives, reflect and make some notes on how you might be able to draw upon his insights to enhance innovation in your organisation.

As is evident, innovation is a highly diverse concept and can be applied in many different ways. There are consequently many different forms or aspects of innovation. The following table summarises the most common forms of innovation as they relate to public services, including policing. Table 1 Innovation in a policing context(Adapted from De Vries et al., 2014, p. 153)

Type of innovation	Relates to...
Process innovations	Improvement of quality and efficiency of internal and external processesCreation of new organisational forms, the introduction of new management methods and techniques and new working methodsCreation or use of new technologies, introduced in an organisation to render services to users and citizens
Product or service innovations	Creation of new public services or products
Governance innovations	Development of new forms and processes to address specific societal problems
Conceptual innovations	Introduction of new concepts, frames of reference or new paradigms that help to reframe the nature of specific problems as well as their possible solutions

Figure 1 An example of innovation in policing

The imperative for innovation in a policing context has been broadly recognised and is highlighted in the National Police Chief Council’s Policing Vision 2025 policy document. One author makes the point, however, that understanding and defining innovation in policing can at times be less than straight-forward: Generally, prior studies of police innovation have used the requirement that an innovation must be new to the field of policing, or ‘state-of-the-art’. Unfortunately, these same studies have not always been clear how ‘state-of the-art’ for policing was ascertained. (King, 2000, p. 305)

While it might be tempting to assume that policing has always existed in a similar form to today, nothing could be further from the truth. In essence, modern policing as we now know it is a form of innovation in itself. After various attempts at creating a more managed policing service including in London and, notably, in Dublin where he had previously served as Chief Secretary for Ireland, the then Home Secretary, Robert Peel, was instrumental in devising a new and innovative form of policing: The Metropolitan Police Act (1829) established the London Metropolitan Police Department, an organisation that would become a model for future police departments in Great Britain, the British Commonwealth, and the United States. The “New Police,” as the force was called, was organized into a hierarchy of ranks in military fashion. Ranking officers were to be promoted from within, on the basis of merit. The basic police officer, the uniformed constable, was unarmed and had limited authority. Unlike other municipal police forces in Ireland and continental Europe, the London Metropolitan Police Department was designed to maintain close ties with and to draw support from the people it policed. The primary function of the force was crime prevention, and officers were instructed to treat all citizens with respect. Crime was to be controlled and public order maintained by preventive patrols; police were to be paid regular salaries; and no stipends were to be permitted for solving crimes or recovering stolen property. Constables also inherited many functions of the watchmen, such as lighting streetlamps, calling time, watching for fires, and providing other public services. (Encyclopedia Britannica, 2020) Underpinning this new approach to policing was an additional innovation: Peel’s principles of policing. These principles highlighted that police should: demonstrate impartiality focus on crime prevention carry out their duties within the limits of the law work in cooperation with the public so that the public voluntarily observes the law use force only to the extent necessary to restore order and only when other means have been exhausted. (Adapted from: Encyclopedia Britannica, 2020) If we consider Peel’s innovations from the perspective of those forms of public sector innovation outlined by De Vries et al (2014) and discussed earlier, they were arguably innovations in terms of processes, governance and services, not to mention the overall operating model of the policing bodies that had existed until that point.

While the innovation that is modern policing is now almost 200 years old, new innovations have continued to be the hallmark of policing organisations around the world. As Braga and Weisburd argue: In response to rising crime rates and growing public dissatisfaction, police departments needed to improve their performance and innovation provided the opportunity to make these improvements. These innovations included community policing, ‘broken windows’ policing, problem-oriented policing, ‘pulling levers’ policing, third-party policing, hot spots policing, Compstat, and evidence-based policing. (Braga and Weisburd, 2007, p. 2) While many of the innovations listed by Braga and Weisburd relate to processes and policing approaches, other innovations have been much more practical. As Brown (2014) points out, the telegraph was once a significant innovation in policing, allowing much more rapid communication between stations. Needless to say, the telegraph was eventually superseded by other innovations including the telephone and radio. While each of these technologies is still in use, in themselves they have significant innovation since they were first implemented to the point where they would be almost unrecognisable to the first users. Yet as the consultancy Deloitte highlight, innovation is more than the use of new technologies: Innovation is not just about the latest gadget – it’s about finding new ways to do things better. Innovations can take the form of new concepts, new methods, or new tools. But innovation tends to work best when all these forms come together to enable police and law enforcement agencies to have greater insight and impact than ever before. The innovations that are shaping the future of law enforcement begin with emerging technologies that support new concepts of operations, enabling the interventions, and relationships that keep society safe. Deloitte, 2021 Activity 2 Policing innovations What policing innovations can you think of? What forms of innovation have you seen or experienced in policing? Reflect for a moment on why you feel this was an innovation and what benefits this innovation might have brought for stakeholders and communities.

Figure 2 Body cameras used in policing A close up picture of a body camera being worn by a police officer.

Many of the things that are now taken for granted within policing were once important innovations. This includes things such as computers for managing and processing information and CCTV for monitoring public areas and ensuring safety. Bodycams are an example of a more recent technological innovation. Stepping away from technology, items such as high-visibility clothing and the use of bicycles to patrol areas are also innovations which have made their mark on policing. The following section will build upon this discussion and consider various approaches to innovation.

While there are many different approaches to innovation, three are of particular relevance to innovation in policing: 1 Incremental innovation 2 Radical innovation 3 Open innovation In this section you will consider each of these approaches in greater detail.

Incremental innovation refers to small, careful refinements or modifications made to existing services or processes. These small changes can help them evolve and make them ‘better’ through an evolutionary, rather than revolutionary approach to innovation. As it involves the slow and gradual refinement of what already exists and is known, incremental innovation can often be regarded as a safer option. In practice, this cautious approach can mean that while incremental innovations might lack the ‘glamour’ of radical innovations, they are much more common.

Figure 3Incremental (evolutionary) innovation vs radical (revolutionary) innovation This diagram is a pyramid, which narrows as the height increases. It is divided by a horizontal line between 85% below, and 15% above. The lower 85% is labelled evolutionary changes (lots of detailed changes, improvements, new generations, incremental innovations). The upper 15% is labelled revolutionary changes (a few landmark innovations, some radical innovations).

One relatively well-known example of long-term incremental innovation is the Boeing 737. Having first taken to the air in 1967, the 737 is still in service and has gone through four generations and at least 13 variants, each slightly different to those that have gone before.

Figure 4 A Boeing 737 in flight A close up picture of a Boeing 737 aeroplane in the sky.

The power of incremental innovation should by no means be underestimated: over time, significant changes can result!

In contrast to the slow and steady of incremental innovation, radical innovation is about making dramatic changes in a way that might perhaps be unusual or unexpected. Radical innovations such as the digital camera which mark a distinct change from what has gone before are often what people think of when they hear the term innovation.

Figure 5 The evolution of the camera A picture of three cameras lined up side by side. The camera to the left is an old model dating back a number of decades. The camera in the middle is a later design than the camera to the left. The camera furthest to the right is modern and with digital features.

The reality, however, is that in many cases radical innovations are simply the result of numerous incremental innovations. For example, the radical innovation that was the iPhone was, in that sense, simply the result of many smaller innovations over time.

Open innovation starts with the important realisation that ‘not all the smart people work for us’ (Chesbrough, 2003). Linked to this is the recognition that learning from the experience of others and not feeling the need to constantly reinvent the wheel is a vital step in the process of innovation. Box 1 Creative swiping One approach for developing and finding new ideas is creative swiping, first suggested by Tom Peters (1987). Creative swiping involves recognising the potential in other people’s ideas and learning how to adapt and enhance those ideas in ways that allow you to do things in more advantageous and sustainable ways. Critically, creative swiping is not a licence to plagiarise, defraud or produce counterfeit merchandise by pretending that something you stole from someone else is your work. Peters himself expresses the concept as follows: Put NIH (Not Invented Here) behind you – and learn to copy (with unique adaptation/enhancement) from the best! Do so by aggressively seeking out the knowledge of competitors (small and overseas, not just tired old foes) and interesting noncompetitors. Become a ‘learning organization.’ Shuck your arrogance – ‘if it isn’t our idea, it can’t be that good’ – and become a determined copycat/adapter/enhancer. (Peters, 1987, p. 228) Open innovation consequently involves looking outwards to see what others are doing and then building on those ideas. This can occur in many ways and can often happen naturally as an organisation works with partners or stakeholders to understand the best way to achieve a mutual goal. This can involve a process known as ‘co-creation’, a process where stakeholders or service users are more actively involved in the development of new, innovative solutions to better meet their needs. Activity 3 Incremental, radical or open innovation? What form of innovation underpinned each of the following innovations? The radio Body-worn cameras The Model T Ford The digital camera The Post-It Note Coke Zero While there are various perspectives on each of these items, the below is one way of categorising each of the innovations listed: The radio – an example of a radical innovation. Body-worn cameras – an example of a radical innovation The Model T Ford – an example of a radical innovation The digital camera – an example of a radical innovation The Post-It Note – an example of an incremental innovation Coke Zero – an example of an incremental innovation In the next section you will learn about one of the more common innovation processes, Design Thinking.

While it is important to understand various forms of innovation, it is also vital to have clarity on the processes involved in developing innovations. A commonly used approach to innovation is known as Design Thinking. Over recent years, Design Thinking has emerged as a high-profile approach to innovation in many organisations. Originally developed at Stanford University’s design school, the basic Design Thinking model has five stages each linked to form an integrated model supporting greater human-centred innovation:

Figure 6 The Design Thinking process A diagram showing the five stages of Design Thinking, arranged as a form of process flow. Reading from left to right they are: Emphathise, Define, Ideate, Prototype, Test. The image suggests a sequential flow between each of the stages.

Each of these stages is briefly outlined below. 1 Empathise Empathy is the foundation of a human-centered design process. To empathise, you : Observe. View users and their behavior in the context of their lives. Engage. Interact with and interview users through both scheduled and short ‘intercept’ encounters. Immerse. Experience what your user experiences. 2 Define The define mode is when you unpack and synthesize your empathy findings into compelling needs and insights, and scope a specific and meaningful challenge. It is a mode of ‘focus’ rather than ‘flaring’. Two goals of the define mode are to develop a deep understanding of your users and the design space and, based on that understanding, to come up with an actionable problem statement: your point of view. Your point of view should be a guiding statement that focuses on specific users, and insights and needs that you uncovered during the empathise mode. 3 Ideate Ideate is the mode of your design process in which you aim to generate radical design alternatives. Mentally it represents a process of ‘going wide’ in terms of concepts and outcomes – it is a mode of ‘flaring’ rather than ‘focus’. The goal of ideation is to explore a wide solution space – both a large quantity of ideas and a diversity among those ideas. From this vast depository of ideas you can build prototypes to test with users. 4 Prototype Prototyping is getting ideas and explorations out of your head and into the physical world. A prototype can be anything that takes a physical form – be it a wall of post-it notes, a role-playing activity, a space, an object, an interface, or even a storyboard. The resolution of your prototype should be commensurate with your progress in your project. In early explorations keep your prototypes rough and rapid to allow yourself to learn quickly and investigate a lot of different possibilities. Prototypes are most successful when people (the design team, the user, and others) can experience and interact with them. What you learn from those interactions can help drive deeper empathy, as well as shape successful solutions. 5 Test Testing is the chance to get feedback on your solutions, refine solutions to make them better, and continue to learn about your users. The test mode is an iterative mode in which you place your low resolution artefacts in the appropriate context of the user’s life. Prototype as if you know you’re right, but test as if you know you’re wrong. (Adapted from Hasso-Plattner Institute of Design at Stanford) A challenge for leaders in any organisation can be the development of a ‘culture of innovation’. More than just a nice to have, a culture sets the tone for how things are done in an organisation and what ideas are considered to be acceptable (or not). The culture of an organisation can also influence perceptions of which practices are considered sacrosanct and beyond challenging. Consequently, the ability to challenge ideas and existing practices in a meaningful and constructive way is vital for innovation to flourish.

Leading innovation thinker, Teresa Amabile, highlights that there are a number of key practices that can help or hinder creativity – and thus innovation – in organisations.

Figure 7 Professor Teresa Amabile

Table 2 Amabile’s factors that help or hinder creativity(Adapted from Amabile, 2013, p. 136)

Factors that hinder creativity	Factors that support creativity
A practice and acceptance of harsh criticism of new ideas	A sense of positive challenge in the work
Political issues within the organisation	Diverse and collaborative teams that are focused on ideas and include a range of skills
An emphasis on maintaining the status quo	Freedom and autonomy to undertake work
A conservative, risk-averse attitude among top management	Encouragement and support for the development of new ideas from managers
Excessive time pressure to complete projects and work	A clear organisational vision for creativity which is supported by top leadership within the organisation
An excess focus on extrinsic motivators such as money and other rewards	Appropriate recognition for creativity and creative work
	Mechanisms and processes supporting the development of new ideas
	Behavioural norms that support the active sharing of ideas across the organisation

Activity 4 Factors hindering creativity Reflect on Amabile’s list of factors that help and hinder creativity. Which of these have you experienced in your own organisation? What has been the impact? At various times and in various contexts you will no doubt have experienced some of the factors that help or hinder innovation. This is only natural: each situation is different with its own challenges and opportunities. The key to innovation success lies in acknowledging the various factors impacting on the organisation and working, on the one hand, to strengthen those positive elements while, on the other hand, working to mitigate or manage those less positive elements. By considering those practices that help or hinder innovation in organisations we can start to do something about them. The next section continues the discussion of innovation in organisations by reflecting on organisational capabilities for innovation.

While a consideration of Amabile’s factors that help and hinder is an important starting point, it is also worth thinking about how people in organisations interact and work together – and what this might mean for innovation. Harvard Professor Linda Hill argues that ‘innovative organizations are communities that have mastered three capabilities critical to innovation: creative abrasion, creative agility, and creative resolution’ (Cook, 2014): Each of these aspects can be understood as follows: Creative abrasion refers to the ability to generate a marketplace of ideas through discourse and debate. Innovative organisations know how to amplify, rather than minimize differences. We’re not just talking about brainstorming, which asks people to suspend their judgment and share their ideas no matter how ‘off-the-wall’ or ‘halfbaked’. Creative abrasion is about having heated, yet healthy, arguments to generate a portfolio of alternatives. People in innovative organisations have learned how to inquire, actively listen, and advocate for their point of view. They understand that you rarely get innovation without diversity of thought and conflict. Creative agility is the ability to test and refine ideas through quick pursuit, reflection, and adjustment. This is about knowing how to do the kind of discovery-driven learning associated with design thinking – that interesting mix of the scientific method and the artistic process. Creative agility is about acting your way, as opposed to planning your way, to a solution. It is about running a series of experiments, not pilots. Pilots are often about being right – when they don’t work, something or someone is to blame. Experiments, by contrast, are about learning – and a negative outcome can provide important insights. Creative resolution is the ability to do integrative decision-making so that diverse ideas, even opposable ones, can be combined or reconfigured to create a new solution. In innovative organisations, people are not willing to go along to get along. They do not allow one individual or group to dominate – not the bosses, not the experts. They do not compromise or take the path of least resistance. Creative resolution requires a patient and inclusive decision-making approach that allows for ‘both-and’ versus ‘either-or’ solutions to be embraced. (Adapted from Cook, 2014; emphasis added)

On a certain level, nobody wants to fail. When failure happens in organisations there are a multitude of potential consequences, both for the organisation and the individuals involved. This is particularly so for public-sector organisaations such as police who arguably ‘face greater scrutiny of their risk taking and their failures than private firms’ (Hartley and Knell, 2021, p. 3). Bayley and Bittner (1984) further emphasise that those in policing typically have limited scope to make mistakes or ‘fail’: Police, unlike workers in most other jobs, are constantly being reminded of the fatefulness of their actions to themselves as well as to the public. They believe their jobs are on the line daily. So for police to avoid what would be viewed as a mistake by the department or the courts is an imperative. One aspect of what police learn on the job, then, is what not to do. As an officer remarked, ‘In policing, don’ts are often more important than do’s.’ Bayley and Bittner, 1984, p. 43 The reality is, however, that even in policing failure – if managed carefully and consciously – has the potential to support innovation through the learning opportunities it provides. For policing organisations, two specific approaches to failure are worth considering: intelligent failure and vicarious failure.

Intelligent failure refers to those ‘failures that are most effective at fostering learning’ (Sitkin, 1992). Rather than being random attempts or failures, Sitkin argues that intelligent failure has five key characteristics: It comes about as a consequence of actions that are well-planned. The outcomes are uncertain. The overall scale or potential impact is relatively modest. It is carried out and dealt with promptly and efficiently. The context is familiar enough that there is an opportunity for learning to take place. In applying the idea of intelligent failure to practical action, McGrath (2011) highlights seven key principles which are highly relevant for those seeking to innovate: Decide what success and failure would look like before you launch initiative. Convert assumptions into knowledge. Be quick about it – fail fast. Contain the downside risk – fail cheaply. Limit uncertainty. Build a culture that celebrates intelligent failure. Codify and share what you learn. By actively engaging with a practice such as Intelligent Failure, innovation on both a personal and organisational level can be strengthened considerably.

Examining when and how organisations understand failure and the conditions under which organisations learn (or do not) from their own failures or the failures of others has a long history in public policy and administration literature pertaining to topics such as natural disasters, aviation disasters, oil spills, nuclear energy policy and ‘homeland security’. (Molnar et al., 2018, p. 108) Vicarious Failure refers to the practice of consciously learning from the experience, including mistakes, of others (Kapur, 2015). The key principle underlying the concept is the recognition that by learning from what has worked either well or not so well elsewhere, we can get a head start on our own innovation initiatives and not needlessly reinvent the wheel. To highlight the value of vicarious failure, Molnar and colleagues (2018) explore the way in which policing at the 2014 G20 summit in Brisbane was directly influenced by the evident failures in the policing of the 2010 G20 summit in Toronto. In order to learn vicariously from previous failures, the Australian police very consciously engaged with and examined the failings from 2010 and the experience of other high-profile events to learn and develop new and innovative solutions. The consequence was that the G20 summit in Brisbane was approached and managed quite differently and the civil disturbances were kept to a minimum. Activity 5 Taking a failure-based approach Think about a project or piece of work that you have previously undertaken. How might a failure-based approach integrating aspects of either intelligent failure or vicarious failure have helped you approach it differently? In many cases our first approach can be to look for the right solution and to try to get things correct. By taking a failure-based approach we can more actively learn from our own mistakes (intelligent failure) or the mistakes of others (vicarious failure), leading to more positive longer-term outcomes. In the following section you will take a closer look at how leaders in policing can lead for innovation.

While individual practices are vital, for innovation to flourish in teams or organisations of any type, the appropriate leadership is necessary. In a review of the relationship between leadership and innovation, Kesting and colleagues (2015) found that different stages of the innovation process require different types of leadership. This conclusion is supported by Lee and colleagues (2020) who argue that: ...when seeking to help employees innovate, leaders should behave in a manner that is characterized by actively role-modelling desired behaviours, providing autonomy, goal directed support such as ensuring adequate resources and lending social influence to followers when required. (Lee et al, 2020, p.18) While the need for adaptability in leadership approaches is vital, one model that offers a specifically innovation-oriented perspective on leadership is that of the leader as ‘Innovation Architect’ developed by Miller and Wedells-Wedellsborg (2013).

Your primary job as a leader is not to innovate; it is to become an innovation architect, creating a work environment that helps your people engage in the key innovation behaviors as part of their daily work. (Miller and Wedell-Wedellsborg, 2013) In their 2013 book, Innovation as Usual, Miller and Wedell-Wedellsborg argue that for leaders, being an Innovation Architect is less about doing and more about supporting others as they engage in creative and innovative activities. An Innovation Architect, they assert, is ‘a person that makes other people innovate by changing the environment they work in’ (original emphasis; 2013a, p. vii). In order to do this, the innovation architect should facilitate the emergence of creativity and innovation so that it becomes what people usually do. Everyday organisational life should be creative and innovative: To support this, Miller and Wedell-Wedellsborg (2013) emphasise three key ideas which anyone seeking to lead innovation should bear in mind: being a leader of innovation is different to being an innovator innovation should be ongoing within the organisation’s daily work, rather than just at special times of the year or only by specific people the focus for leaders should not be on changing people, but rather on changing the environment in which people work. (Adapted from Miller and Wedell-Wedellsborg, 2013) But how should leaders do this? Miller and Wedell-Wedellsborg emphasise core leadership practices that could support innovation. These are the ‘5+1 keystone behaviours of innovation to promote in others’: Focus on ideas that matter to the business Connect to the outside to find original ideas Tweak and challenge the initial ideas Select the best ideas and discard the rest Stealthstorm past the politics of innovation +1 Persist in the pursuit of innovation as usual (Miller and Wedell-Wedellsborg, 2013) Synergy is crucial to securing success. The whole should exceed the sum of its parts and establish a virtuous cycle of self-sustaining innovation: 5+1 should equal much more than 6.

Figure 8 The Innovation Architect model The picture shows a circle with 5 linked bubbles located around the outside. Reading clockwise these say: Focus, Tweak, Stealthstorm, Select, Connect. In the middle there is a larger circle with the word Persist. On the right-hand side are listed the 5 + 1 innovation behaviours cited by Miller and Wedell-Wedellsborg (2013) as part of their Innovation Architect model. These are: 1. Focus on ideas that matter to the business 2. Connect to the outside to find original ideas 3. Tweak and challenge their original ideas 4. Select the best ideas and discard the rest 5. Stealthstorm past the politics of innovation +1. Persist in the pursuit of innovation as usual

This course has provided some insights into innovation both as it applies more generally, but also as it relates to policing. Only by examining understanding key aspects of innovation and the innovation process is it possible for policing organisations to become more innovative. This is vital for the longer term enhancement of policing and to better meet the needs of all community stakeholders. Equally, by understanding how policing innovation occurs, members of the community and community organisations are able to gain greater insight into how they can work with policing bodies to support greater innovation for mutual social benefit. Amabile, T.M. (2013) ‘Componential Theory of Creativity’, in E.H. Kessler (ed.) Encyclopedia of Management Theory. London: Sage Publications, pp. 134–139. Bayley, D.H., and Bittner, E. (1984) ‘Learning the Skills of Policing’, Law and Contemporary Problems, 47(4), pp. 35–59. Braga, A. and Weisburd, D. (2007) ‘Police Innovation and Crime Prevention: Lessons Learned from Police Research over the Past 20 Years’, Paper presented at the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) Policing Research Workshop: Planning for the Future, Washington, DC, November 28–29, 2006. Available at: https://justicestudies.com/pubs/policeinnovation.pdf. (Accessed: 4 August 2022). Brown, T.J. (2014) ‘Police Radio History and Innovation: What Have We Learned?’, Journal of Law Enforcement, 3(6), pp. 1–8. Chesbrough, H. (2003) ‘The era of open innovation’, Sloan Management Review, 44(3), pp. 35–41. Cook, G. (2014) How to manage a creative organization. Scientific American. Available at: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-to-manage-a-creative-organization/ (Accessed: 4 August 2022). Deloitte (2022) The future of policing: The policing innovations shaping the future of law enforcement. Available at: https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/pages/public-sector/articles/future-of-policing-and-law-enforcement-technology-innovations.html (Accessed: 4 August 2022). De Vries, H.A., Bekkers, V.J.J.M. and Tummers, L.G. (2015) ‘Innovation in the Public Sector: A Systematic Review and Future Research Agenda’, Public Administration, 94(1), pp. 146–166. Encyclopedia Britannica (no date) The development of professional policing in England.Available at: https://www.britannica.com/topic/police/The-development-of-professional-policing-in-England. (Accessed: 4 August, 2022). Enterprise Ireland (2021) Introduction to ISO 56000. Dublin. Hartley, J. (2005) ‘Innovation in Governance and Public Services: Past and Present’, Public Money & Management, 25(1), pp. 27–34 Hartley, J. and Knell, L. (2022) ‘Innovation, Exnovation and Intelligent Failure’, Public Money & Management, 42(1), pp. 40–48. Hasso Plattner Institute of Design at Stanford (no date) d.School Bootcamp Bootleg. Available at: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/57c6b79629687fde090a0fdd/t/58890239db29d6cc6c3338f7/1485374014340/METHODCARDS-v3-slim.pdf (Accessed: 4 August 2022). Kapur, M. (2015) ‘Learning from productive failure’, Learning: Research and Practice, 1(1), pp. 51–65. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/23735082.2015.1002195 (Accessed: 4 August 2022). Kesting, P., Ulhøi, J.P., Song, L.J., and Niu, H. (2015) ‘The Impact of Leadership Styles on Innovation – a Review’, Journal of Innovation Management, 3(4), pp. 22–41 King, W.R. (2000) ‘Measuring Police Innovation: Issues and Measurement’, Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 23(3), pp. 303–317 Lee, A., Legood, A., Hughes, D., Tian, A.W., Newman, A. and Knight, C., (2020) ‘Leadership, Creativity and Innovation: a Meta-analytic Review’, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 29(1), pp. 1–35. McGrath, R.G. (2011) ‘Failing by Design’, Harvard Business Review, 89(4), pp. 76–83. Miller, P. and Wedell-Wedellsborg, T. (2013) Innovation as Usual: How to Help Your People Bring Great Ideas to Life.Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. Molnar, A., Whelan, C., and Boyle, P.J. (2019) ‘Securing the Brisbane 2014 G20 in the Wake of the Toronto 2010 G20: ‘Failure-inspired’Learning in Public Order Policing’, The British Journal of Criminology, 59(1), pp. 107–125. Peters, T. (1987) Thriving on Chaos: Handbook for a Management Revolution. London: Guild Publishing. Sitkin, S.B. (1992) ‘Learning Through Failure: The Strategy of Small Losses’, Research in Organizational Behavior, vol 14, pp. 231–266. This free course was written by Laurie Knell. It was first published in August 2022. Except for third party materials and otherwise stated (see terms and conditions), this content is made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 Licence. The material acknowledged below and within the course is Proprietary and used under licence (not subject to Creative Commons Licence). Grateful acknowledgement is made to the following sources for permission to reproduce material in this free course: Images Course Image: DariaRen/Getty Images Figure 1: Stephen Barnes/Getty Images Figure 2: JOHN GOMEZ/Getty Images Figure 4: Archive PL/Alamy Stock Photo Figure 5: Prostock Studio/Shutterstock Figure 7: Professor Teresa Amabile: Corey Seeman in Flickr https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/ Every effort has been made to contact copyright owners. If any have been inadvertently overlooked, the publishers will be pleased to make the necessary arrangements at the first opportunity. Don’t miss out If reading this text has inspired you to learn more, you may be interested in joining the millions of people who discover our free learning resources and qualifications by visiting The Open University – www.open.edu/openlearn/free-courses.

Discussion 2022042900