Model for evaluating technological innovations in areas of criminal forensics
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24023/FutureJournal/2175-5825/2024.v16i1.846Keywords:
Evaluating, Technological innovation, Public sector, Economicity, Criminal forensicsAbstract
Objective: to describe the design of a model for evaluating technological innovations in three cases applied to improving criminal forensics, and present estimates of expected results using the applications
Method: descriptive research with a mixed approach, through documentary research, interviews, participant observation and application of an electronic questionnaire.
Results: Problems, solutions, products, beneficiaries, expected results and indicator form were identified. The types of expected results are improvements in organizational performance, organizational process and quality of public services. Estimates of time reduction, better use of the expert's cost and reduction of paper costs are presented, which provide greater efficiency, economy and sustainability resulting from innovation.
Originality/value: develops a logical model to evaluate innovations in the public sector, advancing the identification of types of results and ways to measure them, in addition to demonstrating results estimates.
Conclusions: the use of an innovation evaluation model allows for decision-making regarding the continuity and prioritization of innovation development, based on estimated results data, while also contributing to the improvement of the innovation itself with a focus on the expected outcome.
Downloads
References
Al-Noaimi, H. A., Durugbo, C., & Al-Jayyousi, O. R. (2021). Between dogma and doubt: a meta-synthesis of innovation in the public sector. Australian Journal of Public Administration. 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12501
Arundel, A., Bloch, C., & Ferguson, B. (2019). Advancing innovation in the public sector: Aligning innovation measurement with policy goals. Research Policy, 48(3), 789-798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.12.001
Bloch, C. (2011). Measuring public innovation in the nordic countries: Copenhagen manual. Copenhagen: MEPIN.
Brasil (2016). Lei nº 13.243 de 11 de Janeiro de 2016. Dispõe sobre estímulos ao desenvolvimento científico, à pesquisa, à capacitação científica e tecnológica e à inovação.
Carneiro, D. K. O., & Resende Junior, P. C. (2017). Inovação no processo de compra de medicamentos: Estudo de caso do Ministério da Saúde. Revista do Serviço Público, 68(4), 835-861. https://doi.org/10.21874/rsp.v68i4.1618
Cavalcante, P. (2018). Innovations in the federal government during the post-new public management era. Revista de Administração Contenporânea, 22(6), 885-902. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-7849rac2018170391
Cruz, S., & Paulino, S. (2013). Public service innovation and evaluation indicators. Journal Technology Management Innovation, 8(n. special), 285-297. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-27242013000300026
Dittmar, H., & Mrozinski, D. R. (2022). Utilização dos relatórios automatizados de alertas de desmatamento na melhoria do processo investigative criminal Ambiental. Revista Brasileira de Ciências Policiais, 13(9), 105-130. https://doi.org/10.31412/rbcp.v13i9.952
Hair Jr., J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2009). Multivariate data analysis. (7ª ed.) Pearson Prentice Hall.
Isidro, A. (2018). Gestão Pública Inovadora: um guia para a inovação no setor público. Curitiba: CRV, 2018.
Khalid, S., & Sarker, A. E. (2019). Public management innovations in the United Arab Emirates: rationales, trends and outcomes. Asian Education and Development Studies, 8(4), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1108/AEDS-07-2018-0121
Jeon, S. Y. (2020). The effect of information system utilization and education and training on organizational innovation in public social welfare officers: focused on the moderating effect of organizational trust. Asian Social Work and Policy Review, 14(1), 45-52. https://doi.org/10.1111/aswp.12191
Marchiori, D. M., Rodrigues, R. G., Mainardes, E. W., & Popadiuk, S. (2023). O papel das capacidades de TI, capacidades de reconfiguração de TI e inovatividade no desempenho organizacional: evidências do setor público brasileiro. Revista de Administração Pública, 57(2), 1-31. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0034-761220220221
Mättö, T. (2019). Innovation through implementation of a quality improvement method: a finnish public-sector case. The TQM Journal, 31(6), 987-1002. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-12-2018-0193
Mclaughlin, J. A., & Jordan, G. B. (2010). Using Logic Models. In: WHOLEY, J. S.; Hatry, H. P.; NEWCOMER, K. E. Handbook of practical program evaluation (pp. 55-80), 3ª ed. Wiley. Jossey-Bass – A Wiley imprint: United States of America.
Montezano, L. (2022). Estudo multicasos de avaliação de resultados das inovações tecnológicas no setor público: mecanismos utilizados, desafios e ganhos. 19th CONTECSI - International Conference on Information Systems and Technology Management Virtual, 1-20.
Montezano, L., Albuquerque, T. M. M., Medeiros, J. A. D., & Barbosa, S. O. (2023). Ambiente e resultados de uma inovação tecnológica forense premiada na Polícia Federal. Revista Brasileira de Ciências Policiais, 14(11), 41-70. https://doi.org/10.31412/rbcp.v14i11.1029
Oliveira, L. D. A., & Sousa, J. C. (2021). Características dos laboratórios de inovação no setor público a nível nacional: uma revisão da literatura. Revista do Serviço Público, 73(2), 339-358. https://doi.org/10.21874/rsp.v73.i2.5113
Ongaro, E., Gong, T., & Jing, Y. (2021). Public administration, context and innovation: a framework of analysis. Public Administration and Development, 41, 4-11. https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.1902
Pannis, A. C., Isidro, A. S. F., Carneiro, D. K. O., Montezano, L., Resende Junior, P. C., & Sano, H. (2022). Inovação em compras públicas: atividades e resultados no caso do robô ALICE da Controladoria-Geral da União. Cadernos Gestão Pública e Cidadania, 27(86), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.12660/cgpc.v27n86.83111
Park, N., Cho, M., & Lee, J. W. (2021). Building a culture of innovation: how do agency leadership and management systems promote innovative activies within the government? Australian Journal of Public Administration, 80(3), 453-473. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12474
Silva, M. R. S., Oliveira, J., Franca, V. V., Luft, M. C. M. S., & Olave, M. E. L. (2022). Inovação no Setor Público: Mapeando o Campo e as Temáticas da Produção Científica Brasileira na Área de Administração. Desenvolvimento em Questão, 20(58), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.21527/2237-6453.2022.58.11679
Silva, S. V. M., & Sousa, J. C. (2022). Gestão da inovação na administração pública sob o prisma das produções científicas. Revista Brasileira de Gestão e Inovação, 10(1), 170-174. https://doi.org/10.18226/23190639.v10n1.08
Souza, M. M., & Guimarães, T. A. (2018). Recursos, inovação e desempenho em tribunais do trabalho no Brasil. Revista de Administração Pública, 52(3), 486-506. https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-761220170045
Sucupira, G., Saab, F., Demo, G., & Bermejo, P. H. (2019). Innovation in public administration: itineraries of Brazilian scientific production and new research possibilities. Innovation & Management Review, 16(1), 72-90. DOI 10.1108/INMR-03-2018-0004
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Lana Montezano, Felipe Ferreira Paulucio, Luiz Guilherme Barros Cocentino, José Alysson Dehon Moraes Medeiros
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms: the author(s) authorize(s) the publication of the text in the journal;
2. The author(s) ensure(s) that the contribution is original and unpublished and that it is not in the process of evaluation by another journal;
3. The journal is not responsible for the views, ideas and concepts presented in articles, and these are the sole responsibility of the author(s);
4. The publishers reserve the right to make textual adjustments and adapt texts to meet with publication standards.
5. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right to first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Atribuição NãoComercial 4.0 internacional, which allows the work to be shared with recognized authorship and initial publication in this journal.
6. Authors are allowed to assume additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (e.g. publish in institutional repository or as a book chapter), with recognition of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
7. Authors are allowed and are encouraged to publish and distribute their work online (e.g. in institutional repositories or on a personal web page) at any point before or during the editorial process, as this can generate positive effects, as well as increase the impact and citations of the published work (see the effect of Free Access) at http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html
• 8. Authors are able to use ORCID is a system of identification for authors. An ORCID identifier is unique to an individual and acts as a persistent digital identifier to ensure that authors (particularly those with relatively common names) can be distinguished and their work properly attributed.
