This chapter presents the findings of a comprehensive survey conducted to gauge civil servants’ openness to change and innovation in their respective public sector organisations in Lithuania, Italy, and Malta. It reveals insights about perceptions of engagement with the future and encouragement to think about the future, including an examination of barriers, enablers, and incentives. The analysis also includes findings on the adoption of foresight methods. The findings reveal cross-country patterns in overall external and internal issues influencing the overall climate of anticipation and conditions for uptake of strategic foresight approaches.
Building Anticipatory Capacity with Strategic Foresight in Government
Lessons from Lithuania, Italy, and Malta
Abstract
The OECD Observatory of Public Sector Innovation (OPSI), with the support of the governments of Lithuania, Italy, and Malta, and the European Commission, conducted a survey to understand levels of openness to change and innovation in government, based on the individual perceptions of civil servants (see Box 3.1 for research method).
The analysis indicates a burgeoning potential to enhance anticipatory capacity among the populations surveyed. A positive perception of engagement with the future and a sense of agency is evident among civil servants, thanks to the perceived relevance of their work and a dedication to innovation. International influences and challenges play a significant role in anticipatory policymaking, yet internal structures and existing models present potential challenges in some contexts. While the adoption of foresight methods is still at an early stage, targeted training shows promise of enhancing awareness and adoption. Encouragement to embrace anticipatory practices appears to be linked more strongly with intrinsic rewards than traditional incentives. Overall, the data shows a disconnect between the sense of agency and authorising environments across organisations. In addition, in some cases, even if immersed in an encouraging context, the lack of skills might prevent ideas from being translated into action.
Some key findings from the data:
1. In terms of engagement with the future, most civil servants in all three countries present positive feelings, particularly among top managers. Their role appears to be pivotal in enhancing anticipatory policymaking.
2. In Malta and Lithuania, external barriers such as political agendas and ongoing crises appear to be holding back innovation, while Italy faces internal issues such as skills shortages. Despite these challenges, EU influence and global challenges in Malta and Italy, and internal drivers, such as organisational leaders and colleagues in Lithuania, have significantly encouraged innovation.
3. In the three countries, the data shows a lack of familiarity with foresight methods, and little uptake. Rational quantitative models are the most recognised but are underutilised, while specific qualitative foresight methods are largely overlooked in all three countries. This suggests a significant gap in leveraging forward-thinking methodologies in civil service structures. Targeted training initiatives might enhance understanding and the use of foresight techniques.
4. Individual satisfaction appears to be a key motivator in each country, indicating the intrinsic value of participating in forward-thinking initiatives. However, all three countries display differences in the perceived effectiveness of traditional incentives, such as career advancements or budget allocation. This suggests a need for tailored approaches to encourage a culture of innovation in government institutions.
5. There is a disconnect between the perceived relevance of civil servants’ work and encouraging innovation. Countries have varying encouragement levels, and addressing the gap might empower civil servants to think about the future and help them take action.
6. Overall, the lack of familiarity with foresight methods suggests that even in a favourable authorising environment, many individuals might lack the agency and the necessary skills and competencies to take action.
Survey instrument: The survey was developed based on the OECD Anticipatory Innovation Governance Model, relevant literature, and existing surveys. The questionnaire examined the public sector’s engagement, drivers, methods, and rewards for anticipatory capacity, from the perspective of public officials in all three countries.
Sampling design:
Malta: The survey population targeted all public officials from Malta. The sampling frame was a list of all civil servants from all ministries and entities across the country.
Lithuania: The survey population targeted all public officials from Lithuania. The sampling frame comprised civil servants from all ministries and entities across the country.
Italy: The survey was distributed among officials from central and local administrations who attended the Scuola Nazionale dell’Amministrazione1 (SNA) initial training courses for newly appointed senior executives. It was also distributed to civil servants from central and local administrations who attended SNA’s in-service training courses on Strategic Foresight between 2021-2023, as well as with the participants Regional Discussion Tables of the Ministry of the Environment and Security Energy (MASE) for the implementation of the Italian National Strategy for Sustainable Development.
Sampling considerations: The analysis and recommendations provided in this report apply only to the surveyed population and cannot be taken as general recommendations to the wider civil service.
Data collection: The survey was administered on an online survey platform between 7 August 2023 and 13 March 2024.
In Lithuania, a total of 4 366 responses were received, for an estimated completion rate of 10.1%.
In Italy, a total of 686 responses were received, for an estimated completion rate of 16.5%.
In Malta, a total of 1 151 responses were received, achieving an estimated completion rate of 3.8%.
Data analysis: The collected data was analysed using descriptive and inferential statistical techniques.
Ethical considerations: Respondents were given clear information on the survey’s purpose, voluntary nature, and the confidentiality of their responses, securing informed consent. Protocols were followed to safeguard respondent privacy and ensure the confidentiality of collected data.
1. National School of Administration.
Source: OECD.
To understand the levels of engagement with innovation and openness to change in government, it was necessary first to examine key perceptions of civil servants across LIMinal countries. Some understanding of the role they play in shaping the future, their sentiment about how much they are encouraged to embrace innovative thinking, and the time they spend on such activities are indicators of the surveyed population’s receptiveness and openness to change. This analysis uncovered insights into the dynamics of civil service engagement with innovation. Additionally, such examinations provide a foundation for identifying areas where interventions and support mechanisms can be used to cultivate a culture of innovation and forward-thinking governance.
Key considerations for comparing the data from the three countries (Lithuania, Italy, and Malta) included differences in sampling design, potentially influencing the comparability of results. In Malta and Lithuania, the survey targeted all public officials, utilising sampling frames of civil servants from various ministries and entities nationwide. In Italy, the approach differed significantly. The survey focused on officials from both central and local administrations who had attended specific training courses or participated in discussion tables on strategic foresight and sustainable development. This targeted selection method may introduce biases and limit the applicability of the recommendations to the more comprehensive sampling approaches in Malta and Lithuania.
Another critical factor affecting comparability is the absence of a specific question in the Malta survey on the time spent on innovative activity during work hours. Unlike the surveys in Lithuania and Italy, the Maltese survey did not inquire about this aspect, potentially leading to gaps in understanding the innovative practices and time allocation among its public officials.
Furthermore, to facilitate cross-country comparison, hierarchical roles in the Italian sample were adapted to align with equivalent positions in Malta and Lithuania. This adjustment aimed to standardise classifications such as “Assistant”, “Officer”, “Second-level manager”, and “First-level manager”, to correspond with similar roles in all three countries. It is also noteworthy that the Italian sample did not provide data for secretarial professionals, a category used in the Malta and Lithuania datasets. These differences in hierarchical categories may require additional methodological considerations when interpreting comparative results in the three countries.
3.2.1. Engagement with the future
In Lithuania, Italy, and Malta, the survey findings revealed a predominantly positive sentiment about the perceived significance of individuals’ contributions to shaping the future in the civil service (see Figure 3.1). A majority of respondents in all three countries acknowledge the importance of their work in shaping the future, reflecting a collective belief in the transformative impact of their roles. However, some respondents do not identify with this sentiment, and report either feeling neutral or disagree, suggesting that perceptions vary in different organisational contexts. Nevertheless, a consistently positive view of the role of civil service work in influencing the future prevails in the three countries.
The positive sentiments expressed by the civil servants surveyed on their role in shaping the future shed light on their sense of anticipatory agency. The acknowledgement of the transformative impact of their work reflects not only a belief in their individual contributions, but also a collective recognition of their capacity, motivation, and opportunity to anticipate and innovate in their organisational contexts. This underlines their sense of agency in engaging with future challenges and opportunities.
Note: N= 686 to 4 366.
Source: OECD.
When examining the data by hierarchical roles, distinct patterns emerged in the three countries (see Figure 3.2). Top and middle managers consistently exhibit the highest positive association with the belief in the transformative impact of their work, a reflection of their involvement in decision-making and strategic responsibilities. This trend was observed in Lithuania and Italy, emphasising the pivotal role of leadership in shaping the future in civil service institutions. However, among support staff, secretarial and service delivery professionals display lower levels of association in all three countries. This suggests a need for targeted strategies to enhance engagement and awareness among support staff, and for ensuring a cohesive understanding and commitment to shaping the future at all levels of the administration.
Note: N= 686 to 4 366. Italian sample did not provide data for secretarial professionals.
Source: OECD.
Encouragement in thinking about the future
The survey results in the three countries revealed a varied yet basically positive perception that respondents feel encouraged to consider future changes in the conduct of their duties. In Italy, those surveyed present a clearly forward-thinking culture. A substantial majority reported feeling often or always encouraged, indicating broad support for contemplating future scenarios. It is important to note that the Italian civil servants participating in the study represent a biased sample and may not reflect the sentiments of civil servants in general. In Malta, a substantial portion of respondents – almost half – felt encouraged to do so, suggesting an organisational emphasis on forward-thinking, although there are still respondents who feel only somewhat encouraged. In Lithuania, however, a significant fraction acknowledged that they sometimes or rarely feel encouraged to think about how things might change in the future – for a lower overall average – possibly signalling the need for a more supportive environment across government.
The survey results showed not only the varied but chiefly positive perception among civil servants on how much they are encouraged to consider future changes, but also offered valuable insight on the differing perceptions of authorising environments in the countries surveyed. While some countries displayed a strong sense of encouragement, indicating that the existing foundation in the public sector validates and supports anticipatory innovation, others reveal a need for improvement. The survey shed light on the complex interplay between individual motivation and the broader authorising environment that shapes anticipatory innovation in civil service institutions. It implies that in countries where positive feelings are prevalent, the system may recognise the demand, value, and utility of forward-looking tasks. Conversely, in countries where sentiment is less optimistic, a possible gap in validation and support for such initiatives may exist, suggesting a need to strengthen the authorising environment to encourage agency and legitimacy for forward-thinking initiatives.
Note: N= 686 to 4 366.
Source: OECD.
In analysing the data by hierarchical roles, similar patterns emerged in each country. Top managers showed the strongest endorsement of an encouraging environment, possibly indicating a top-down approach. This pattern supports the results on their belief in the influential role of their work in shaping the future. In all three countries, lower-level positions, such as secretarial and service delivery professionals, indicate a perception gap. That these groups reported feeling less encouraged suggests a need to strengthen their perception of support for future-oriented thinking. The variation may stem from the contextual understanding of their roles and responsibilities in the organisation.
Note: N= 686 to 4 366.
Source: OECD.
Based on the overall survey results, a number of actions could enhance futures thinking engagement in the civil service in Lithuania, Italy, and Malta. First, a concerted effort could be made to promote a shift in organisational culture, encouraging a future-oriented mindset at all levels of the hierarchy. This could involve not only top-down initiatives but also initiatives to empower and involve employees at mid- and lower levels of government. By designing structures to facilitate participation in policy development, each organisation could facilitate an authorising environment conducive to anticipatory governance. Targeted training programmes in specific foresight competencies could also be useful.
In Malta, Lithuania, and Italy, civil servants reported feeling largely positive about their role in shaping the future in the civil service. This underscores a collective belief in the transformative impact of their roles, indicating a sense of agency among respondents in influencing future outcomes. However, despite the higher perception of their role in shaping the future, the extent to which civil servants are encouraged to think about the future varies. While they recognised their potential to shape the future, they may not always feel adequately supported or encouraged to engage in forward-thinking activity.
The survey data separated by hierarchical roles revealed a distinct pattern. Top managers consistently exhibited a higher sense of agency and perception of encouragement in shaping the future in civil service institutions. This indicates that they may see themselves as having more autonomy and authority to engage in anticipatory policymaking than other roles. Their pivotal role in leadership posts may enhance their ability to drive anticipatory policymaking initiatives and encourage a culture of innovation in their respective organisations.
Perceptions of role in shaping the future and encouragement to think about the future
These findings also suggest that top managers play a critical role in enhancing anticipatory policymaking in civil service institutions. Their perceived agency and authorisation may empower them to initiate forward-thinking strategies that address emerging challenges and opportunities. Additionally, their leadership position enables them to signal the importance of anticipatory thinking and win support for innovative initiatives at various levels of an organisation.
However, a supportive environment for anticipatory action is essential at all hierarchical levels. Top managers may have a greater sense of agency and of an authorising environment, but making sure that all civil servants feel empowered to engage in forward-thinking activities is crucial for building a culture of innovation and adaptability. A culture that values and encourages forward thinking can help civil service institutions leverage the collective agency of their workforce and enhance the capacity to anticipate and respond to future trends and developments. Both individual agency and supportive authorising environments drive anticipatory policymaking and shape civil service.
Source: OECD.
Time spent on innovative activities
In Lithuania and Italy, the survey findings shed light on the varying emphasis placed on innovative approaches in their respective civil service sectors. Employees are finding new ways of working, exploring alternative options, collaborating and sharing knowledge with their colleagues. In Lithuania, respondents report spending on average 21% and 30% of their time on innovative activities, suggesting a spectrum of engagement with innovation among respondents in the Lithuanian government. Similarly, in Italy, the data highlights a slightly higher average but still corresponds to civil servants spending between 21% and 30% of their time on non-routine tasks. However, variations in emphasis remain across the surveyed population in the Italian government.
Note: N= 686 to 4 366.
Source: OECD.
Analysing the data by hierarchical roles offers further insights into the distribution of time spent on innovative tasks in civil service organisations in Lithuania and Italy. Top and middle managers there exhibited the highest dedication to innovation and non-predictable activities. This commitment is echoed to a lesser extent by public policy and service delivery professionals.
Note: N= 686 to 4 366.
Source: OECD.
In an analysis of the time spent on innovative activities, particularly considering hierarchical roles, Lithuania and Italy exhibited a notably higher dedication to innovation, allocating a significant portion of their working hours to non-routine and unpredictable tasks. This propensity for innovation at the upper ranks of management underscores a potential top-down approach to shaping organisational culture and priorities. The data indicates that high-level civil service positions play a pivotal role in creating an authorising environment for innovation. By showing a commitment to innovative tasks, top managers may set an example for their subordinates, underscoring the importance of forward-thinking approaches. Leaders’ emphasis on innovation could percolate through the organisational hierarchy, influencing the behaviour and attitude of middle managers and frontline staff.
3.2.2. Drivers of anticipatory capacity
The main drivers of anticipatory capacity can be classified into two main categories: external and internal (see Table 3.1).
Source: OECD.
External barriers, predominantly observed in Malta and Lithuania, include factors such as political agendas, public sector reform agendas, and ongoing crises. These obstacles reflect the external pressures and challenges that governments encounter in cultivating innovation. Political agendas may prioritise short-term objectives over long-term innovation initiatives, while public sector reform agendas may divert resources and attention away from innovative projects. Crises such as economic downturns, conflicts, or health crises like the COVID-19 pandemic may divert resources and attention from innovation efforts, favouring a reactive rather than proactive approach to governance.
On the other hand, internal barriers prevalent in Italy revolved around factors such as skills shortages and inter-departmental relationships. These highlight internal challenges in government institutions that slow innovation. Skills shortages may limit civil servants’ capacity to engage in innovative practices or adopt new technology. Inter-departmental relationships with siloed communication and collaboration may deter sharing innovative ideas and cross-sectoral initiatives.
In Malta and Italy, external factors such as EU influence, global challenges, and adherence to international standards and key performance indicators play a significant role in facilitating innovation. The EU’s influence offers access to funding, expertise, and best practices, driving innovation agendas in member states. Similarly, such global challenges as climate change or technological advances create opportunities for governments to innovate in response to emerging trends and pressures. Adopting international standards and key performance indicators can increase transparency, accountability, and benchmarking, building a culture of continuous improvement and innovation.
However, the perception of primary enablers in Lithuania diverges from the external factors identified in Malta and Italy. In Lithuania, organisational leaders, colleagues, and internal skill sets are perceived as the main drivers of long-term policy implementation and innovative approaches. This emphasis on internal drivers reflects the importance of organisational culture, leadership, and human capital in driving innovation in government institutions. Strong leadership could inspire a culture of innovation, while collaboration among colleagues and the availability of diverse skill sets favour the development of innovative policies and practices.
It is important to note that many of those surveyed expressed “neutral” responses. This trend is attributed to the broad and potentially ambiguous nature of these drivers, allowing for diverse interpretations. Notably, perceptions of leaders, colleagues, and crisis responses in Italy present intriguing contrasts, with neutrals being less prevalent but perceptions being contradictory. This suggests that context-specific factors influence perceptions (see Figure 3.7).
Source: OECD.
3.2.3. Methods and practices of anticipatory capacity
The tools and methods exposed can be grouped into three levels of familiarity, shown in Table 3.2 below.
Source: OECD.
In the civil service of Lithuania, Italy, and Malta, a common trend emerged, given the low familiarity and adoption of methods and practices related to anticipatory capacity (see Figure 3.8). Rational quantitative models appear to be the best-known of the surveyed methods in all three countries, but they are mostly described as being “somewhat used” in the organisation. Despite some recognition for these approaches, such as scenario planning and quantitative modelling, their adoption rates do not reflect their potential utility for long-term policymaking in general. It is also surprising to note the lack of awareness and infrequent adoption of general qualitative methods like horizon scanning, which could be understood as general components of any strategic planning processes in government.
Lithuania does stand out for its noteworthy levels of awareness and adoption of “Visioning processes”, which could be attributed to recent initiatives such as the establishment of a Committee for the Future and the preparation of Lithuania’s Vision for the Future, “Lithuania 2050”.
In all three countries, specific foresight qualitative methods – Megatrends analysis, Causal Layered Analysis, Wind-tunnelling/Stress-testing, and Back-casting – appear to have low levels of awareness and adoption. This disparity in familiarity and use indicates a significant gap in leveraging forward-thinking methodologies in civil service structures, potentially impairing their ability to address emerging challenges and opportunities. Addressing this awareness gap will be crucial in updating strategic foresight practices.
Italy provides an interesting comparison, particularly considering the impact of training on awareness and adoption levels of foresight methods and practices (see Figure 3.9). Overall familiarity with foresight tools and methods remained low, but those who had received specific foresight training courses showed higher levels of awareness and adoption of the surveyed methods. This suggests that targeted training initiatives could potentially enhance understanding and use of foresight techniques. Investing in comprehensive training programmes tailored to the needs of civil servants could be an initial step in building a culture of proactive and strategic planning, ultimately bolstering the resilience and efficacy of public sector decision-making processes in all three countries.
Note: N= 686 to 4 366.
Source: OECD.
Note: N= 123 to 563.
Source: OECD.
3.2.4. Rewards and incentives of anticipatory capacity
The analysis of rewards and incentives in the civil service sectors of Lithuania, Italy, and Malta revealed intriguing trends in the motivators and drivers of civil servants among different roles and countries (see Figure 3.10). Across the board, “Individual Satisfaction” emerged as the most highly valued incentive, underscoring the importance of personal fulfilment and satisfaction in motivating civil servants in diverse contexts. This indicates a widespread acknowledgement of the intrinsic value derived from participating in forward-thinking initiatives, suggesting an underlying interest in driving change and shaping the future. Additionally, it is worth noting that those working in government institutions often found individual satisfaction in leading positive transformations and encouraging innovation.
Moreover, “Recognition from Leadership” consistently received high ratings across all countries and roles, casting light on the significant role that acknowledgement and appreciation from higher-ranking officials play in incentivising civil servants. This underscores the importance of effective leadership and communication in government institutions. Recognition from leadership could serve as a powerful motivator for driving innovation and forward-thinking behaviour among civil servants.
However, there are notable differences in the perceived effectiveness of traditional incentives such as “Promotions, Career Advancement,” and “Resources or Budget for My Team.” Respondents in Italy tend to rate these traditional incentives less highly than those in Lithuania and Malta, possibly because the Italian system has little margin for providing these kinds of incentives. These findings highlight the need for a strategic realignment of incentives, with a focus on shaping a culture that values forward-thinking behaviour and promotes collaborative innovation in governmental institutions in all surveyed countries.
Note: N= 686 to 4 366.
Source: OECD.
The pivotal role of higher-level civil service officials has been noted, including the forward-thinking approach in their work. Their belief in the relevance of their work in shaping the future and feeling encouraged to think about different scenarios is also relevant in creating an authorising environment for introducing anticipatory governance. It was thus relevant to analyse how top managers are rewarded in terms of anticipatory capacity. Figure 3.11 shows that in all three countries, “Individual Satisfaction” emerged as the incentive that was most highly valued by top managers. This aligns with the trend observed in Figure 3.10, indicating consistent focus on individual satisfaction as a key driver of motivation among civil service leaders. “Recognition from Leadership” received higher ratings from top managers in each country, highlighting the significance of acknowledgement and appreciation from peers and higher-ranking officials in incentivising leadership in the civil service. This underscores the importance of a supportive, inclusive work environment where leaders feel valued and recognised for their contribution.
Interestingly, there were variations in the ratings of traditional incentives such as “Promotions, Career Advancement” and “Resources or Budget for My Team” among top managers in different countries. Malta’s top managers tend to assign higher ratings to these traditional incentives than Italy and Lithuania, suggesting context-specific leadership priorities and management styles in government institutions or different options and incentives available for performance management. These variations underscore the need for tailored approaches to incentive structures and leadership development initiatives, to motivate top managers to drive innovation and forward-thinking behaviour in their respective civil service sectors.
Note: N= 31 to 169.
Source: OECD.
In the countries surveyed, civil servants generally perceived similar average levels of rewards in the civil service. However, Malta and Lithuania stand out, with slightly higher-than-average perceptions of rewards and above-average perceptions of encouragement to contemplate future changes. This suggests a correlation between positive feelings towards rewards and an inclination towards forward thinking among civil servants in these countries.
In Italy, civil servants reported a relatively high level of encouragement to consider future changes, alongside moderate perceptions of rewards, with individual satisfaction rewards scoring notably higher than the average on other incentives. This suggests that while overall reward perceptions are moderate, individual satisfaction is a significant motivator for engaging in forward-thinking activities.
Moreover, the data in Figure 3.12, which separates individual satisfaction from other rewards and examines their relationship with encouragement to consider future changes, suggests interesting qualitative insights. Notably, the perception of individual incentives exceeded the average of other extrinsic motivators, in each country. This suggests that civil servants place a higher value on individual satisfaction, such as recognition and autonomy, than extrinsic rewards, like salary or bonuses. However, the results may simply indicate that extrinsic rewards are not typically available or linked with futures thinking.
Lithuania, civil servants reported lower levels of encouragement to consider future changes than in Italy and Malta. Nevertheless, their perceptions of rewards remained above average, indicating a potential disconnect between perceived rewards and encouragement for future-focused thinking. This raises questions about the effectiveness of current reward systems in incentivising forward-thinking behaviour among civil servants and highlights the need for targeted interventions to bridge this gap.
Malta exhibited trends similar to Italy’s, with high levels of encouragement to consider future changes and above-average perception of rewards. Again, individual satisfaction stands out as particularly influential, potentially driving civil servants’ inclination towards forward-thinking. However, further exploration is needed to understand the specific factors contributing to this positive perception of rewards and their impact on a culture of forward thinking in civil service institutions.
Overall, the data suggests a nuanced relationship in civil service institutions between perceived rewards, encouragement for future-focused thinking and individual satisfaction. While higher perceptions of rewards, especially individual satisfaction, may correlate with increased encouragement for future-oriented activities, further exploration is needed to understand the dynamics at play and to optimise strategies for a culture of forward thinking in civil service organisations.
Source: OECD.
Based on the cross-country analysis in previous sections, this section introduces a focused analysis of two aspects crucial for understanding the dynamics of civil service engagement with innovation in the countries surveyed: the authorisation gap and the skills gap. These two dimensions from the anticipatory innovation governance (AIG) model shed light on the challenges faced by civil servants in taking a more future-oriented approach to their work.
The authorisation gap exposes the disparity between civil servants’ perceived roles in shaping the future and the level of encouragement they receive to fulfil these roles. Across the LIMinal countries, this gap underscores the need for alignment between aspirations and support mechanisms to drive innovation in governmental structures. Meanwhile, the skills gap emerged as a significant barrier to realising the potential of civil servants in shaping the future. Even if they are immersed in an authorising environment, civil servants may lack the skills and competencies to translate their forward-thinking thoughts into actionable strategies. Addressing this gap could be useful for enhancing civil servants’ agency and building a culture of innovation and proactive governance.
By examining these twin challenges of authorisation and skills gaps, this section aims to provide insights into the key obstacles holding back civil service engagement with innovation. These metrics will be relevant for governments in tailoring and targeting interventions and capacity-building initiatives, to help civil servants overcome these challenges and drive positive change in their respective spheres of influence.
3.3.1. Authorisation gap
Across Malta, Lithuania, and Italy, individuals generally perceived themselves as having a role in shaping the future. This perception reflects a sense of agency and responsibility among civil servants in influencing the direction of societal and governance trajectories. However, despite this positive perception, there appears to be a disconnect in the level of encouragement individuals feel towards actively engaging in shaping the future. While individuals recognise their potential role in shaping the future, they may not feel adequately supported or encouraged to do so in the existing governance framework. This gap between perception and encouragement suggests a discrepancy between aspirations and actual opportunities for meaningful participation and contribution to anticipatory innovation governance.
Malta stood out for the relatively high appreciation of individuals’ roles in shaping the future. This suggests a stronger sense of agency among its civil servants. Lithuania also presents a relatively high perception of individuals’ roles in shaping the future, although it is comparable to the overall average. Italy demonstrates a perception of individuals’ roles in shaping the future that is slightly below the overall average but is positive nonetheless.
While perceptions of individuals’ roles in shaping the future are generally positive across the surveyed countries, there appears to be variation in the perception of feeling encouraged towards innovative thinking (see Figure 3.13). Italy and Malta have higher-than-average perceptions of forward-thinking encouragement than Lithuania. Its civil servants express similar sentiments about the importance of their work in shaping the future but identify less with the feeling of being encouraged.
Addressing this gap in the authorising environment may be relevant for encouraging a culture of anticipatory innovation governance where individuals are not only empowered to envision the future but are also supported in actively contributing to its realisation. By bridging this divide and providing avenues for meaningful engagement and participation, governments may be able to pave the way for transformative change. Targeted interventions and capacity-building initiatives tailored to the specific needs identified in the analysis could help governments empower civil servants to overcome these challenges. This might enable civil servants to drive positive change in their areas of influence and to advance anticipatory innovation governance.
3.3.2. Skills gap
In Malta, Lithuania, and Italy, foresight methods and practices are generally not widely known or adopted. Governments’ encouragement of forward-thinking initiatives varies, but even with a favourable authorising environment, many civil servants may lack the agency and the competencies to translate their visions into action.
Italy and Malta stand out, with reported levels of encouragement of innovative thinking significantly higher than the average. The Italian civil service offers a supportive environment where individuals feel empowered to explore and embrace new ideas and approaches. Lithuania’s level of encouragement of innovative thinking, on the other hand, is slightly below the average. This suggests potential challenges in encouraging a culture of proactive engagement with future-focused initiatives. Perhaps even when immersed in an authorising environment, many individuals may lack the agency and necessary skills and competencies to translate their visions into action. Meanwhile, civil servants in Lithuania exhibit a relatively greater familiarity with foresight methods than the average. This indicates a foundation for the integration of anticipatory governance practices, although efforts may be needed to bridge the gap between awareness and encouragement towards innovation.
Along the same lines, the surveys familiarity with foresight methods and civil servants’ perception of their role in shaping the future provide more details on the dynamics within the civil service. Italy and Lithuania demonstrate relatively similar levels of familiarity with foresight methods, both slightly below the average. Despite this, Italy exhibits a perception of a slightly greater role in shaping the future than Lithuania. This suggests that while civil servants in Italy may have slightly less familiarity with foresight methods, they still perceive themselves as playing a significant role in shaping the future.
Conversely, Malta stands out with both a perception of a higher role in shaping the future and less familiarity with foresight methods than the average. This indicates that civil servants in Malta may have a strong sense of their role in shaping the future, even though they may not have extensive exposure to specific foresight methodologies.
OECD (2024), “Lithuania Survey: Public administration openness to change and innovation” in OECD Project LIMinal, Anticipatory Governance: Opportunities for public sector strategic foresight in Italy, Lithuania, and Malta.
OECD (2024), “Italy Survey: Public administration openness to change and innovation” in OECD Project LIMinal, Anticipatory Governance: Opportunities for public sector strategic foresight in Italy, Lithuania and Malta.
OECD (2024), “Malta Survey: Public administration openness to change and innovation” in OECD Project LIMinal, Anticipatory Governance: Opportunities for public sector strategic foresight in Italy, Lithuania, and Malta.