Towards a practice-based approach to public innovation – Apollonian and Dionysian practice-approaches




Public innovation, collaborative innovation, practice-based theory, bricolage, public-private collaboration


This paper discusses how a practice-based approach to public innovation can provide an alternative, critical means of looking at public innovation. It unravels two ways practices can exist in relation to public innovation: Apollonian and Dionysian practice approaches. The Apollonian practice-approach is purposeful, speaking of the actors’ plans and interests and the rules of the game. In contrast, the Dionysian is a more spontaneous, bricolage-like approach to innovation that gathers people in an open space of innovation. Given these contrasting approaches further illustrated through two case vignettes, the paper argues that public innovation transpires not only through purposeful practices and plans but also more contextual public services changes. Research needs to capture both of these approaches and explore their impact on innovation. The paper concludes by outlining a research strategy for investigating practice-approaches in public service innovation and how a practice-based approach can add to our understanding of public service innovation.

This article belongs to the Special Issue Public sector Innovation - Conceptual and Methodological Implications

Guest Editors: Ann Karin Tennås Holmen (University of Stavanger) and Maria Røhnebæk (Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences)


Ansell, C., & Trondal, J. (2018). Governing turbulence: An organizational-institutional agenda. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 1(1), 43-57.

Benedict, R. (1961). Patterns of culture. Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (1991). Organizational learning and communities-of-practice: Toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovation. Organization Science, 2(1), 40-57.

Bryson, J., Sancino, A., Benington, J., & Sørensen, E. (2017). Towards a multi-actor theory of public value co-creation. Public Management Review, 19(5), 640-654.

Carstensen, M. B. (2011). Paradigm man vs. the bricoleur: Bricolage as an alternative vision of agency in ideational change. European Political Science Review, 3(1), 147-167.

Cass, N., & Shove, E. (2017). Changing energy demand. Concepts, metaphors and implications for policy. Lancaster University.

Echeverri, P., & Skålén, P. (2011). Co-creation and co-destruction: A practice-theory based study of interactive value formation. Marketing Theory, 11(3), 351-373.

Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 219-245.

Fuglsang, L. (Ed.) (2008). Innovation and the creative process: Towards innovation with care. Edward Elgar.

Fuglsang, L. (2017). The critical incident technique and everyday innovation. In F. Sørensen & F. Lapenta (Eds.), Service Innovation Research Methods (pp. 40-59). Edward Elgar.

Fuglsang, L. (2018). Towards a theory of a practice-based approach to service innovation within spheres of interaction. In A. Scupola & L. Fuglsang (Eds.), Services, Experiences and Innovation: Integrating and Extending Research (pp. 147-164). Edward Elgar.

Fuglsang, L., & Sørensen, F. (2011). The balance between bricolage and innovation: Management dilemmas in sustainable public innovation. Service Industries Journal, 31(4), 581-595.

Fuglsang, L., & Rønning, R. (2015). On innovation patterns and value-tensions in public services. Service Industries Journal, 35(9), 467-482.

Gherardi, S. (2006). Organizational knowledge: The texture of workplace learning. Blackwell.

Gherardi, S. (2009). Practice? It's a matter of taste. Management Learning, 40(5), 535-550.

Grönroos, C. (2019). Reforming public services: Does service logic have anything to offer? Public Management Review, 21(5), 775-788.

Haraway, D. J. (2016). Staying with the trouble: Making kin in the Chthulucene. Duke University Press.

Hartley, J. (2005). Innovation in governance and public services: Past and present. Public Money & Management, 25(1), 27-34.

Hartley, J. (2006). Innovation and its contribution to improvement. Department for Communities and Local Government (UK).

Maffesoli, M. (1998). Société ou communauté. Tribalisme et sentiment d'appartenance. Corps et Culture, 3.

McGillivray, D. (2005). Fitter, happier, more productive: Governing working bodies through wellness. Culture and Organization, 11(2), 125-138.

Nicolini, D. (2009). Zooming in and out: Studying practices by switching theoretical lenses and trailing connection. Organization Studies, 30(2), 1391-1418.

Nicolini, D., & Monteiro, P. (2017). The practice approach: For a praxeology of organisational and management studies. In A. Langley & H. Tsoukas (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook on Organizational Studies (pp. 110-126). SAGE.

Nietzsche, F. W. (2000). The birth of tragedy. Oxford University Press.

OECD (2005). The measurement of scientific and technological activities. Oslo manual. Guidelines for collecting and interpreting innovation data (Third edition). OECD.

Osborne, S. P. (2018). From public service-dominant logic to public service logic: Are public service organizations capable of co-production and value co-creation? Public Management Review, 20(2), 225-231.

Osborne, S. P., Radnor, Z., & Strokosch, K. (2016). Co-production and the co-creation of value in public services: A suitable case for treatment? Public Management Review, 18(5), 639-653.

Pantzar, M., & Shove, E. (2010). Understanding innovation in practice: A discussion of the production and re-production of Nordic walking. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 22(4), 447-461.

Reckwitz, A. (2002). Toward a theory of social practices: A development in culturalist theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory, 5(2), 243-263.

Schatzki, T. R. (2002). The site of the social: A philosophical account of the constitution of social life and change. Pennsylvania State University Press.

Schatzki, T. R. (2016). Keeping track of large phenomena. Geographische Zeitschrift, 104(1), 4-24.

Schatzki, T. R. (2019). Social change in a material world. Routledge.

Skålén, P., Gummerus, J., von Koskull, C., & Magnusson, P. R. (2015). Exploring value propositions and service innovation: A service-dominant logic study. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(2), 137-158.

Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2012). Introduction: Collaborative innovation in the public sector. The Innovation Journal, 17(1), 1-14.

Strati, A. (1992). Aesthetic understanding of organizational life. Academy of Management Review, 17(3), 568-581.

Sundbo, J. (1997). Management of innovation in services. Service Industries Journal, 17(3), 432-455.

Torfing, J. (2016). Collaborative innovation in the public sector. Georgetown University Press.

Torfing, J. (2019). Collaborative innovation in the public sector: The argument. Public Management Review, 21(1), 1-11.

Torfing, J., & Triantafillou, P. (2013). What's in a name? Grasping new public governance as a political-administrative system. International Review of Public Administration, 18(2), 9-25.

Voorberg, W. H., Bekkers, V. J. J. M., & Tummers, L. G. (2015). A systematic review of co-creation and co-production: Embarking on the social innovation journey. Public Management Review, 17(9), 1333-1357.

Warde, A. (2005). Consumption and theories of practice. Journal of Consumer Culture, 5(2), 131-153.

Warde, A. (2015). On the sociology of eating. Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement - Review of agricultural and environmental studies, 96(1), 7-15.

Wegrich, K. (2019). The blind spots of collaborative innovation. Public Management Review, 21(1), 12-20.

Westwood, R. (2004). Comic relief: Subversion and catharsis in organizational comedic theatre. Organization Studies, 25(5), 775-795.

Spiral staircase with black steps and white walls, viewed from above. Picture by Robin Schreiner from




How to Cite

Fuglsang, L. (2021). Towards a practice-based approach to public innovation – Apollonian and Dionysian practice-approaches. Nordic Journal of Social Research, 12(Special issue), 1–23.

Cited by