The mission expresses the organisation's raison d'être. What do we stand for? This is a more static fact, often linked to the reason for incorporation. In relation to innovation, the long-term impact is therefore examined. Including innovation as a driving force to achieve the mission can be implicit ('we continuously improve our services') or explicit ('we see innovation as a means to accomplish the mission').

A vision related to innovation is an expression of the direction in which an organization wants to move through innovation and where it wants to be in 3 to 5 years and with a view on which activities will be undertaken.

Innovation objectives can be included in the i-strategy, annual plans and/or relevant policy documents. Sometimes these are dictated very directly by a political assignment.

There is an overall sense and mood that today's efforts will drive the organization forward in the longer term. The focus is on making the innovation organization more mature (so that structural innovations land faster and with more effect in the organization) and not on ad hoc solutions.

The result to be achieved is formally and structurally recorded because it is included in, for example, the budget, annual plans or multi-year project plans, and partly because of this, it can count on the commitment of the highest management.

The organization supposedly has a clear 'DNA'. Where applicable, this is always included in development processes. This attitude is actively propagated, included in the innovation policy and the organization is therefore valued.

Deviations from the established values ​​do not take place ad hoc, but only deliberately and consciously.

Taking such factors into account can on the one hand lead to extra effort or limitations in the implementation, but it is also often a unique factor that especially governments and not-for-profit institutions have to deal with.

This means that the organization works 'by default' and 'by design' according to the government-wide principles, such as the BIO for security, NORA and use of standards for architecture, open source solutions, open data, implementation of privacy impact assessment for start of service, etc.

An expression of this is that, for example, there is active cooperation from the 'business' (policy) at an early stage of development with 'development' (development) and 'operations' (management) of the service, product or solution to be developed. A so-called BusDevOps approach. Central to this is that 'what is desirable' from a policy perspective is considered just as important as 'what is possible (or is already possible)' from a practical point of view.

Top management visibly stimulates the behavior of managers and employees. They feel challenged by the top to come up with ideas and proposals for new developments.

It is not only important to know what your user group wants, but it can also relate to things like market developments, for example displacement effects: market parties taking over or picking up undesirable government tasks on their own initiative. Or think of a technology that offers your organization opportunities or threatens to make it redundant (is that perhaps a good development, where would it go wrong for the government in its core tasks, etc.)

This is made concrete, for example, by challenging employees, submitting ideas or asking for so-called challenges among start-ups or during innovation events.

Internal and external networks are very important in the exploration phase within innovation projects and events can also contribute to a good working atmosphere and knowledge transfer.

Management encourages everyone in the organization to start working (together) in a way that is appropriate to challenge. Current processes are not treated as sacred cows, but out-of-the-box thinking is desirable. Deployment of principles from the LEAN methodology also fits in here.

So not by default are they based on departments or existing team composition. The organization consciously supports the use of cross- and multi-functional teams specifically set up for different types of projects and ways of working.

Not every improvement delivers monetizable added value. It can therefore be both quantitative and qualitative. Sometimes an innovation also delivers benefits elsewhere in the organization or beyond. Broadly implemented and supported innovation management provides an organization in which innovation projects have a greater chance of success, acceptance and effectiveness.

Sometimes it is necessary to carry out a project with a high risk of failure. With innovation, showing vision and guts and thus taking well-considered risks is the order of the day in order to stimulate new developments.

Innovative organizations offer space for ideas, variation and experimentation because in such situations you learn better, give room for development and own initiative where possible. Stopping a project is not seen as failure, but as a moment of reflection and learning.

The 'client' can be a customer, the citizen, a social task, company, institution, etc. It is about an 'outside in' approach. Insights from outside the organization are used to optimally serve 'the customer'. The organization thinks proactively with clients and end users and tailors its services and activities to them (a demand-oriented orientation) whereby innovation is actively used. Terms such as 'market-oriented work', 'the customer journey' and 'customer intimacy' are then used in the organization when talking about innovation.

Effective communication means that the recipient is not overwhelmed by the innovation, but above all understands (without too many technical and/or substantive terms) what the delivery means for the organization and its stakeholders.

The organisation can actively participate in programs such as Startup In Residence, and other partnerships with companies and educational institutions.

The facilities are of such a nature that they are actually used and effective.

Almost all execution nowadays takes place within chains that need to (re)use each other's data. Thinking and setting up ecosystems and collaborative platforms is of great importance here. In addition, a government innovation can be very positive, but can also lead to concerns or side effects (whether desired or not). Think for example of privacy aspects. Or it may involve extra costs for citizens, companies or within the government. Taking this into account at the start is requested here.

Communicating what you stand for and what principles and conditions you use as an organization is an important aspect of embedding innovation in all work processes. This applies both to mutual cooperation within your own organization and with other departments or external parties.

There is generally an open culture where there is room for entrepreneurship, research and serendipity within the organization. The workplace supports this by responding to the needs of managers and employees.

This can be in the office, options for working on location and/or at home (including digital support). This includes modern, digital presentation techniques and brainstorm tools.

The organization has a vision of the role and added value of an innovation-tailored workplace plus facilities and also designs the organization and (digital) spaces accordingly.

This also involves (digital) facilities and goes far beyond compliance with occupational health policies. Does the workplace actively support innovation?

The organization facilitates teams and employees with the necessary tools, methods and techniques to support innovation activities.

This contribution can be diverse. For example: participating in new projects, active knowledge sharing, learning new skills. But also supporting an open, creative atmosphere internally.

In conjunction with a good vision on which talents may still need to be hired externally.

Competence in all areas of methods, tools and techniques in the field of innovation are recognized as important. HR policies for managers and employees focus on multiple levels of proficiency in developing new products, services and processes.

Recordings can be formal in the personnel file or informal in periodic bilateral consultations. An open atmosphere where managers and employees work in line with their personal ambitions and talents is an important factor for innovation success.

Intrinsic motivation and personal growth to contribute is fueled when the manager supports it and challenges employees.

Here we ask about the extent to which the handling of administrative processes and provision of resources around innovation projects is smooth.

Good support that is periodically adjusted in line with progress is essential to achieving innovation success.

At first, a positive outcome may be difficult to measure, but still: a positive outcome provides a measurable point for success. Such as: has the (quantitative or qualitative) objective been achieved? The question here is whether there is a focus on creating value for the organization or customer.

The employees must of course comply with the procurement procedures within the government or the organisation. The question particularly relates to the extent to which this can be done satisfactorily, focusing not so much on the procedure but on the result: does it lead to the right selection of the supplier or partner with whom to develop the solution?

Examples include an in-house innovation lab, program or team. What is meant here is a structural organizational interpretation of the innovation management function (i.e. not just temporary / project teams for innovation projects).

Phasing of an innovation project usually takes place along 3 clusters: explore (leading to a promising concept), experiment (leading to a proven concept) and excel (achieving success after implementation).

There are various (comprehensive) tools in circulation to help determine the probability and impact of risks. These should be used. For example, the use of the PMK Project Management Assessment can be helpful here. But also a simple textual enumeration of possible risks in table form with a discussion of impact and probability can already be an effective way of such an analysis.

A life cycle approach means planning not only for start-up and introduction moments, but also for modification and parting with products and services. This allows for smooth anticipation (with time and money) of further future development or scaling down.

This is referred to in innovation management terminology as the necessary 'ambidexterity' or 'two-handedness'. It is needed for the friction that can arise within an organization when existing activities demand all the resources and attention and no room is left for development, while this is seen as necessary.

Within our organization, not only are stand-alone innovation projects implemented, but there is the application of a coherent approach (portfolio management) in line with our mission, vision and strategy.

For example, by deploying a Minimum Viable Product (MVP), user experiences can be quickly converted for improvement on the way to a proven concept before actual implementation.

This makes this attitude of the organization the antithesis of the Not Invented Here Syndrome. Of course, this is also a matter of 'where desirable': within the security domain, closed, even secret, innovation is more likely to occur. In this context, closed information disclosure would actually be necessary (and therefore normal).

A periodic measurement - especially in long-term projects - provides insight into factors that require extra attention. In projects, the required competencies and commitment will change as the delivery progresses. This also belongs to the domain of the periodic measurement: team composition, management and governance must remain in line with the phase in which the project is located.

An innovation is only successful if it has a positive impact on regular or new activities, or has been implemented completely independently.

The employees feel supported by the managers in carrying out new developments involving many uncertainties that make this support necessary.

This could be a cycle of meetings and reports, for example. Or an elaborate portfolio management report.

Technological or social developments can move so fast worldwide that it is impossible to keep up with them structurally on all fronts. However, the organization can take appropriate measures to remain well-informed and to conduct regular research into which developments are expected to have an impact on the organization.

Data and information is seen in the organization to fuel many innovative and related, support processes.

Is the monitoring sufficiently in line, also in relation to the principles used in policy documents, annual plans and strategy?

This also includes in a broad sense knowledge sharing (expertise, lessons learned).

This manifests itself in a formal sense (working agreements, action and decision lists), but also in an informal sense (for example, managers do or do not act on suggestions from innovation teams).

This can range from corrective actions by management to stopping projects where desirable based on predetermined failure factors. A so-called 'early exit' then belongs to the regular field of innovation.

Also called 'key factors for success': when is an innovation successful? Is that simply after implementation or are specific results also expected and announced in advance?

Input from stakeholders and in particular end users is seen as an essential part of innovation processes.

The organization then has at its disposal effective methods for information gathering, analysis, and reporting. There is information-driven working in decision making.