• No results found

Innovation in a security organisation: A case study of the eWitness project of the Dutch Police

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "Innovation in a security organisation: A case study of the eWitness project of the Dutch Police"

Copied!
71
0
0

Bezig met laden.... (Bekijk nu de volledige tekst)

Hele tekst

(1)

Innovation in a security organisation:

A case study of the eWitness project of the Dutch Police

Thesis MSc Crisis and Security Management, Leiden University Author: J. Heinsbroek, MSc.

Student number: s1033077 Supervisor: Prof. dr. E. Bakker Second reader: Dr. G.M. van Buuren June, 2017

(2)

1 Abstract

The present study focuses on innovation in a security organisation. The case study presented is the eWitness, a recent and still ongoing innovation within the Dutch Police. The eWitness is a tool that automates (part of) the investigative interview. A tablet provides the witness with a set of instructions that will help him report details from the memory of the event that was witnessed. The goal of this thesis is to get an understanding of innovation in the investigative department of a police organisation. Innovations can be studied using the Technological Innovation System (TIS) approach. To understand the eWitness’ innovation process, the analytical framework of Bergek, Jacobsson, Carlsson, Lindmark and Rickne (2008) is used. The framework describes 6 steps centred on seven key functional dynamics used to identify policy issues in the TIS. The analysis of the innovation process of the eWitness shows four policy issues: i) support pilot studies in new police units, ii) support potential users to increase and diffuse knowledge, iii) develop standards, and iv) expand and diversify funding programs. This thesis concludes with some remarks on how the

investigative department of the Dutch Police can improve its current innovation regulation.

Keywords: innovation policy, police, functional analysis, investigative interviewing,

eWitness, TIS

(3)

2 Foreword

This thesis is written as part of the Master program Crisis and Security Management at Leiden University. Doing research in this field of expertise was not always easy, as I have a background not in public administration but in cognitive psychology. At first I failed to come up with feasible research designs on two topics that I find interesting (terrorism and human trafficking). Luckily, with the help of my supervisor, I was able to combine cognitive psychology with public administration in an entirely new topic: innovation in a security organisation. The eWitness project of the Dutch Police is the case study that is presented, which I have been involved with for more than 2.5 years. This topic allowed me to combine two different disciplines and to deliver a report that is not only interesting for scholars studying innovation, but for the Dutch Police as well.

I would like to thank my supervisor Edwin Bakker for his guidance and his patience during the process. It was a long road and from time to time I needed to be put on the right track. Also, I would like to thank my colleagues at the Dutch Police for their enthusiasm and support in writing this thesis.

Leiden, June 2017 Joris

(4)

3 Table of contents Abstract 1 Foreword 2 Table of contents 3 Chapter 1: Introduction 7 Research objective 11 Thesis structure 11

Chapter 2: Theoretical Framework 12

Definition of innovation 12

Background 12

Analytical framework Bergek et al. (2008) 17

Step 1: Starting-point for the analysis: defining the TIS in focus 17 Step 2: Identifying the structural components of the TIS 17

Step 3: Mapping the functional pattern of the TIS 18

3.1 Knowledge development and diffusion 18

3.2 Influence on the direction of search 18

(5)

4

3.4 Market formation 18

3.5 Legitimation 19

3.6 Resource mobilisation 19

3.7 Development of positive externalities 19

Step 4: Assessing the functionality of the TIS and setting process goals 19 Step 5: Identify inducement and blocking mechanisms 20

Step 6: Specify key policy issues 20

Chapter 3: Methodology 21

Case selection 21

Operationalisation analytical framework Bergek et al. (2008) 22 Step 1: Starting-point for the analysis: defining the TIS in focus 22 Step 2: Identifying the structural components of the TIS 23

Step 3: mapping the functional pattern of the TIS 23

3.1 Knowledge development and diffusion 23

3.2 Influence on the direction of search 24

3.3 Entrepreneurial experimentation 24

3.4 Market formation 24

3.5 Legitimation 25

(6)

5

3.7 Development of positive externalities 26

Step 4: Assessing the functionality of the TIS and setting process goals 26 Step 5: Identify inducement and blocking mechanisms 28

Step 6: Specify key policy issues 28

Chapter 4: Case study: The eWitness Project 29

The eWitness 29

Experimentation 31

Innovation regulation within the Dutch Police 33

The innovation trajectory of the eWitness 34

Beyond the proposal’s scope 37

Chapter 5: Analysis 39

Step 1: Starting-point for the analysis: defining the TIS in focus 39 Step 2: Identifying the structural components of the TIS 40

Step 3: mapping the functional pattern of the TIS 41

3.1 Knowledge development and diffusion 41

3.2 Influence on the direction of search 41

3.3 Entrepreneurial experimentation 43

3.4 Market formation 44

(7)

6

3.6 Resource mobilisation 46

3.7 Development of positive externalities 47

Step 4: Assessing the functionality of the TIS and setting process goals 48 Step 5: Identify inducement and blocking mechanisms 51

Step 6: Specify key policy issues 54

Chapter 6: Conclusion 56

Limitations 57

Future directions 58

References 60

Appendix A.1 The eWitness Instructions 63

Appendix A.2 The eWitness Setup and Interface 65

Appendix B.1 E-mail by Coordinator Advisor Innovation July 2015 67 Appendix B.2 E-mail by Coordinator Advisor Innovation August 2015 69

(8)

7 1. Introduction

‘If you always do what you always did, you will always get what you always got.’

- Albert Einstein Organisations must keep up with new scientific knowledge and insights. As best practices often change because of newly derived technologies and methods, adaptation is of importance. In the field of security this is no different. The general topic of this thesis is

innovation in a security organisation. A number one example of a security organisation is the

police, whose goal is to provide public safety. In this thesis the police of the Netherlands (i.e., the Dutch Police) will be studied. The Dutch Police has labelled itself as an innovative and adaptive organisation (Directie Operatiën, 2014). Activities of the Dutch Police can be roughly divided into two departments: law enforcement and the investigative department. An example of a recent and still ongoing innovation conducted by the investigative department of the Dutch Police is that of the so-called eWitness project, which will be the case study that is presented in this thesis. The eWitness is a technological tool developed to aid a police

detective in investigative interviewing eyewitnesses (which will be explained in-depth in Chapter 4). Hence, the more specific topic of this thesis is innovation in the investigative

department of the Dutch Police.

The investigative department of the Dutch Police is occupied with gathering and investigating evidence of crimes. All information on a criminal case is registered in a written report, which is then delivered to the Ministry of Justice. The most used piece of evidence by the Dutch Police is the eyewitness testimony (De Poot, Bokhorst, Van Koppen, & Muller, 2004). Annually more than 225.000 witnesses are interviewed (Internal Operation Systems of the Dutch Police, 2012). This is reason to effectuate that Dutch police detectives conduct an eyewitness interview that is as good as possible. But what defines a ‘good’ eyewitness interview?

Lots of studies have investigated various interviewing techniques in search of a method to obtain a complete and accurate report from the eyewitness (see Milne & Bull, 1999). Based on these studies, the Cognitive Interview was created (Fisher & Geiselman, 1992; Milne, 2004). This interviewing method combines various techniques that are scientifically proven to aid the eyewitness in recalling details from the episodic memory of the event that was witnessed. Information gained in the Free Recall is usually reliable and of

(9)

8 good quality (Milne & Bull, 1999; 2006). Also, by establishing rapport with the witness and asking open-ended questions (preferably in the describe-form, e.g. ‘can you describe what happened?’) the witness can freely report uncontaminated details from his memory. Furthermore, the interviewer should focus on not doing certain things. For example, interrupting the witness’ response hampers his effort in retrieving information from the memory, by breaking his concentration (Fisher & Geiselman, 1992). Asking closed and leading questions during the interview is also undesirable (Griffiths & Milne, 2006). Leading questions are questions that suggest an answer to the question asked (e.g., ‘you heard the offender talking, right?’), while closed questions require a yes or no as an answer (e.g., ‘did he carry a gun?’). Griffiths and Milne (2006) state that such unproductive questions lead to less detailed and more incorrect responses from the witness. The Cognitive Interview

encompasses these core elements combined with a number of techniques that have shown to facilitate eyewitness recall (see Fisher & Geiselman, 1992; Milne, 2004).

Unfortunately, conducting a Cognitive Interview is complicated and requires sufficient training. Many police forces, including the Dutch Police, do not have the capacity nor the resources to train all police detectives to be able to conduct a Cognitive Interview. Also, the Cognitive Interview is time consuming, making it undesirable to apply it in every situation. Hence police forces wield their own model for ‘everyday’ eyewitness interviewing. For the Dutch Police, this model is the interview model ‘generiek getuigenverhoor’ (Van Amelsvoort, Rispens & Grolman, 2015). From here on this model will be referred to as the ‘generic

eyewitness interview model’. Every Dutch Police detective is required to be able to apply the model in interviewing eyewitnesses (Expertgroep Algemeen Rechercheren, 2012). Therefore it is taught at the Dutch Police Academy. The model consists of three phases: i) opening, ii) questioning, and iii) closure. For this thesis only the second phase is of importance, as the other two phases include formalities for the police report. The questioning phase is all about obtaining details from the eyewitness’ memory. It consists of six steps: i) Free Recall and ‘tell everything’ instruction, ii) identifying circumstances under which the event was witnessed, iii) identifying topics for questioning, iv) questioning per topic, v) possible follow-up questions based on evidence or experience, and vi) verifying what pieces of information the witness has received from third parties (Van Amelsvoort, Rispens & Grolman, 2015: 202). Eyewitness interviews conducted by Dutch Police detectives have been evaluated. As mentioned before, the generic eyewitness interview model should be applied when

(10)

9 shortcomings in interviewing skills […] on the part of investigative officers in the

Netherlands” (Boon, 2012: 35). The study showed that police detectives frequently asked closed questions and frequently interrupted the witness. Balk (2015) found similar results in his study on the generic eyewitness interview model: Dutch Police detectives interrupt the witness twice every three minutes and of all questions asked during the interview, 60% was closed and 29% leading. The observations by Boon (2012) and Balk (2015) indicate that the current quality of eyewitness interviews conducted by the Dutch Police is insufficient, as the aforementioned interviewer behaviourisms (frequent interrupting and unproductive questions) have a negative impact on the eyewitness’ report. Being the most used piece of evidence in investigations by the Dutch Police, there is a need for improvement of the investigative interviews.

In the study of Balk (2015) the main research objective was to study to what extent the generic witness interview model is put into practice by Dutch Police detectives. Since there exists no monitoring body evaluating the quality of investigative interviews within the Dutch Police, the presumption that the model is being applied in interviews – despite taught at the Police Academy – might be false. This was exactly what Balk (2015) found. An analysis of 22 randomly selected eyewitness interviews showed that the generic witness interview model was not once applied. In 95% of the interviews, the instructions regarding the first step of the model, obtaining the Free Recall, were absent. Interviews with 12 of the involved police detectives showed they had little to no knowledge of the model. When asked how they conduct their investigative interviews, the detectives mentioned approaches that showed few similarities to the generic witness interview model. Thus, despite being required to be able to apply the model in interviewing eyewitnesses (Expertgroep Algemeen Rechercheren, 2012) and the model being taught at the Police Academy, Dutch Police detectives do not know and do not apply the model in practice.

The first solution that comes to mind, is to train the detectives to adequately conduct an investigative interview using the model and to apply the right behaviourisms while leaving out those having a negative impact. Within the investigative department of the Dutch Police, a program of additional training on investigative interviewing was set up in March 2014 (Dienst Regionale Recherche, 2014). The goal was to train detectives in communicative skills and techniques, and knowledge on human memory. The training project was scheduled to last until March 2015, but eventually the program was shut down in October 2014. The main reason for this was the lack of effort on the side of the attending detectives. They did not feel

(11)

10 the training sessions were necessary (‘we already know and do this’) and they lacked

motivation. Planning training sessions with the detectives was difficult as approximately 20% of the detectives did not show up. Even if the detectives were more open to the training program, this would not necessarily have increased their performance in interviewing witnesses. The reason for this is that what is learned in training quickly fades or is overruled by standards in the workplace (Ebbinghaus, 1885). In just six months, newly taught skills will fade away if they are not used properly on a regular basis (Lamb et al., 2002; Smets, 2012). This is found in Dutch Police practice. The studies conducted by Boon (2012) and Balk (2015) show evidence that the proper investigative interview skills are not applied on a regular basis by Dutch Police detectives.

But what if the quality of eyewitness interviews does not necessarily depend on the skill level of the police detective? What if (part) of the investigative interview could be automated? This can eliminate flaws in the way investigative interviews are currently being conducted by the investigative department of the Dutch Police. Building on this idea, the eWitness project was launched in 2014. Its aim was to automate the first phase of the

investigative interview: the Free Recall. This might seem like a radical idea, but as Einstein’s quote at the beginning of this chapter suggests; changing the process is inevitable in changing its outcome.

Automating a frequently applied process such as investigative interviewing can lead to significant changes in the organisation. This makes the case study of the eWitness interesting, especially if the end product is to be applied in practice. Not only organisational systems but also judicial systems can be obliged to reform, since they work with the report that comes from the investigative police department. Innovations such as the eWitness need to be carefully managed. In the past decades scholars have tried to come up with an analytical framework to successfully innovate. These frameworks build upon the System of Innovation approach (Edquist, 1997; 2001; Edquist & Hommen, 1999), which helps “to identify,

understand and compare the crucial activities in an innovation system and creates insight in the dynamics and possible patterns of technological change and related innovation processes” (Hekkert et al., 2007: 429). The framework that will be used in this thesis is the widely renowned practical scheme of innovation analysis created by Bergek, Jacobsson, Carlsson, Lindmark and Rickne (2008). This framework is used to identify the key policy issues and set goals in any given innovation. Contrary to other innovation system approaches it is practically useful for researchers and policy makers (Bergek et al., 2008).

(12)

11 Research objective

The goal of this thesis is to get an understanding of innovation in the investigative department of a police organisation. This thesis has two research questions. The first question is:

i) What does the innovation process of the eWitness look like so far?

This question is rather straightforward, as it is necessary to clarify all features of the eWitness project to allow for an analysis of its innovation process. The second question is:

ii) How does the innovation process of the eWitness compare to the mechanisms and policy issues as derived from the analytical framework of Bergek et al. (2008)? Note that the second part of the question refers to the fact that the eWitness project is an

ongoing innovation at this time. Analytical models are mostly applied in hindsight, while that

is not their exclusive use. This way, this thesis will provide a scientific base of knowledge on innovation in the investigative department of a police organisation which can be built upon in future research on innovation in a security organisation in general.

Thesis structure

The structure of this thesis is as follows. Chapter 2 provides an overview of the academic debate on innovation theories and will elucidate the framework of Bergek and colleagues (2008) that will be used to analyse the case study. In Chapter 3 the methodology of the qualitative case study research design will be substantiated and the steps of the framework of Bergek and colleagues (2008) are operationalised. In Chapter 4 the case of the eWitness project will be explained in-depth; the eWitness features and its trajectory will be presented. Chapter 5 will present the analysis in which the framework of Bergek and colleagues (2008) will be applied to the case of the eWitness. The final chapter, Chapter 6, provides the

conclusion of this research, in which the research questions will be answered, limitations of the study will be mentioned and future directions regarding innovation in the investigative department of police organisations will be discussed.

(13)

12 2. Theoretical Framework

This chapter provides a theoretical framework within which the eWitness project will be studied. First, it will provide a definition of innovation. Next, a background on innovation theories will be provided. Finally, it will elaborate on the analytical framework of Bergek and colleagues (2008). This is the model that will be used to analyse the case study in this thesis. Definition of innovation

First, it is important to define what the ‘innovation process’ entails exactly; to clarify where it starts and where it ends. The Dutch Police works with the following definition of ‘innovation’ (translated from Dutch):

‘The adoption of a method (and/)or a tool, new for our Police Corps, with the end goal of creating a safer society.’ (Directie Operatiën, 2014: 7).

Clearly, this definition of innovation includes the implementation of the new method/tool. The Dutch Police explicitly deems an innovation successful, only if it is implemented and

maintained. It is mentioned as the fourth step in the model on innovation processes used by the Dutch Police (see Chapter 4 ‘The eWitness Project). The aforementioned definition will be used throughout this thesis, as the Dutch Police is the owner of the innovation that is being studied. Also, in the academic debate there is no single definition of what an innovation process entails (see Edquist, 1997). So instead of coming up with a new definition for the purpose of this thesis, the definition of the Dutch Police will be used.

Background

This section provides a comprehensive overview of the literature on innovation theories. In the past there have been attempts to study innovation processes empirically to describe and understand their structure, dynamics and performance, in order to come to an empirical basis for policy action. The widely used framework for innovation policy design is the Systems of Innovation (SI) approach (Edquist, 1997; 2001). While the term was first used in 1987, by economist and researcher in innovation Christopher Freeman, it was Charles Edquist, also researcher in innovation, who wrote the book on the SI framework titled

‘Systems of Innovation, Technologies, Institutions and Organisations’ (Edquist, 1997). In his book, Edquist defines a system of innovation as “all important economic, social, political, organisational, and other factors that influence the development, diffusion, and use of

(14)

13 innovations.” (Edquist, 1997: 14). Due to this rather vague definition and possible conceptual ambiguity, Edquist published an article in 2001 to discuss and comment on several

weaknesses of the SI approach. For instance, it was not clear what defines a ‘system’. Edquist (2001) explains that a system of innovation consists of multiple – more or less closely – connected elements (creating one ‘whole’ or ‘system’). Since this is, to some extent, still open to interpretation, other scholars have come up with more precise definitions. Bergek and colleagues (2008) for example, state that an SI consists of a group of components working together towards a common objective or function. In this case, components are actors, networks and institutions that work together to develop, diffuse and utilise new products or processes. Its components do not necessarily share the same goal, but they are somehow involved in the overall function of the system (Bergek et al., 2008).

A basic proposition about what is important to the performance of an innovation system, is the creation, diffusion and utilisation of knowledge, with interactive learning being a crucial factor underlying these processes (Edquist, 1997). Learning is influenced by

different sets of rules, norms, conventions and established practices. The SI performance is not only determined by the characteristics and abilities of the actors involved, but to a bigger extent by the relations between them and how they interact with one another. In the SI approach, patterns of interactions are looked for and explained, as they are at the base of the creation, application and distribution of knowledge (Edquist, 1997).

Put together the SI approach prescribes that “innovation is an interactive, non-linear process in which actors, e.g. firms, interact with a manifold of other organisations (e.g. research institutes, customers, authorities, financial organisations) and institutions (e.g. IPR, regulations, culture)” (Klein Woolthuis, Lankhuizen & Gilsing, 2005: 609). Institutions and organisations are often interchangable in everyday language. Note that in the field of innovation these words are not synonymous. Edquist defines it as follows: ‘Institutions are sets of common habits, routines, established practices, rules, or laws that regulate the relations and interactions between individuals and groups (Edquist, 1997: 46)’. To make the distinction even more clearly, Edquist defines organisations as ‘formal structures with an explicit purpose and they are consciously created’ (Edquist, 1997: 47). Organisations are often referred to as players or actors.

In the past decade scholars have been building on the SI approach, in different ways and for different purposes. Innovations can be categorised in process innovations and product

(15)

14 innovations. Process innovations can be either technological or organisational, while product innovations are goods or services. This is referred to as the ‘taxonomy of innovations’ (Edquist, 2001). Fischer (2001) made another distinction in types of innovation systems. He distinguishes between technological innovation systems, which are based on a specific technology, and localised innovation systems, that are based on some kind of geographical proximity. Researchers apply the type of SI that is considered most appropriate for the innovation that they study. While the term ‘technological innovation’ suggests it is about technological products, this is not necessarily the case. Both tangible (i.e., goods and technological process innovations) and intangible (i.e., services and organisational process innovations) innovations are encompassed by the term Technological Innovation System (TIS; Edquist, 2001). In this thesis the process of the eWitness innovation is studied, which is by nature technological. Therefore, a TIS approach is most appropriate for studying the eWitness innovation.

Innovation system approaches provide a perspective that is highly relevant in creating innovation policy (Edquist & Hommen, 1999). It is essential to unravel what actually happens in an innovation system. According to Edquist (1997; 2001) it is all about the development, diffusion and use of an innovation. By using a SI approach, the necessary environments and actions for the innovation to be successful can be explored (Edquist, 1997). Before creating policy actions that are aimed at positively influencing the innovation process, the policy maker needs a thorough understanding of how the system operates and how it performs (Edquist, 2011). The common way to study this for a TIS is by identifying certain activities that take place in the system, which will determine the success of the TIS (Meelen & Farla, 2013). Determinants of innovation are widely discussed by scholars in this field of research. Activities in a TIS are referred to as ‘functions’, which are known to influence the

development, diffusion and use of the innovation (Bergek et al., 2008; Hekkert et al., 2007, Johnson, 2001). However, there is “no established knowledge with regard to which the most important functions in a system of innovation are” (Edquist, 2001: 10).

There have been efforts to create a more practical model on TISs (see Table 1). Such approaches are aimed at providing a basis for policy action and are therefore internationally adopted by organisations such as the European Commission (Bergek et al., 2008). Anna Bergek is a professor in innovation systems and technology policy at the Chalmers University in Göteborg. In a recent attempt to operationalise a scheme of analysis, Bergek and colleagues (2008) reviewed findings of scholars on the important functions of a TIS. The authors

(16)

15 combined the results of nine studies on the functions that need to be filled for a TIS to evolve and perform well. Table 1 presents the functions that are identified by different scholars. Bergek and colleauges (2008) have integrated these functions into a set of seven functional dynamics. In studies that apply such a TIS function approach, there is a clear set of policy recommendations for almost all the separate functions in the TIS (Hekkert et al., 2007; Meelen & Farla, 2013).

The analytical framework of Bergek and colleagues provides a ‘systematic step-by-step approach to analysing innovation systems, describing and assessing performance and identifying key policy issues’ (Bergek et al, 2008: 408). It is presented in Figure 1. The authors present a framework that encompasses structural characteristics and dynamics of an innovation system and its performance. It is focused on the development, diffusion and use of particular knowledge, a particular product or both. The framework provides seven key

processes in the overall function of an innovation system, in which policy makers can intervene. The seven functions (see Table 1) are part of the third step from the overall systematic step-by-step approach. In the next section the step-by-step approach will be discussed in further detail.

(17)

16 Table 1. Functions that enable an SI to evolve and perform well, as adapted from Bergek et al (2008: Appendix A). Note that ‘This paper’ on the left side of the table refers to the paper of Bergek et al (2008).

(18)

17 Analytical framework Bergek et al. (2008)

Figure 1. The scheme of analysis (adapted from Oltander & Perez Vico, 2005) Step 1: Starting-point for the analysis: defining the TIS in focus

The analysis starts with making the precise unit of focus of the study explicit; particularly the structure and functions of the TIS. Bergek and colleagues (2008) list three types of choices that should be made in the analysis of a TIS: i) the choice between

knowledge field or product as a focusing device, ii) the choice between breadth and depth, and iii) the choice of spatial domain (Bergek et al., 2008).

Step 2: identifying the structural components of the TIS

In this step the structural components of the TIS have to be identified. First, the actors are to be identified. Secondly, networks have to be identified. Joint ventures or joint projects can contribute to knowledge formation and diffusion (Bergek et al., 2008). Thirdly,

institutions have to be identified. North (1994; as cited by Bergek et al,. 2008) names

examples such as culture, norms, laws, regulations and routines. These structural components can be difficult to define, because for an upcoming TIS, networks are usually undeveloped and institutions may not yet exist.

(19)

18 Step 3: mapping the functional pattern of the TIS

The functional pattern of the TIS is made to analyse the TIS’ behaviour in terms of a set of key functions. Bergek and colleagues (2008) describe these seven different functions as follows:

3.1 Knowledge development and diffusion

This lies at the heart of the TIS. The framework from Bergek and colleagues (2008) mentions different types of knowledge: scientific, technological, production, market, logistics and design knowledge. Sources of knowledge development are R&D department, learning from new applications, production, imitation, et cetera.

3.2 Influence on the direction of search

The commitment of organisations is essential for the development of a TIS. There must be sufficient incentive or pressure to be inclined to enter the TIS. The combined strength of these mechanisms have an influence on the direction of search within the TIS. Some factors are not controlled by the organisation within the TIS, but do have influence on the entity of the TIS. Bergek and colleagues (2008) name the following factors that influence direction of search: i) visions, expectations and beliefs in growth potential, ii) actors’ perceptions of the relevance of different types and sources of knowledge, iii) actors’ assessment of the present and future technological opportunities and appropriability

conditions, iv) regulations and policy, v) articulation of demand from leading customers, vi) technical bottlenecks or “reverse salient”, and vii) crises in current business.

3.3 Entrepreneurial experimentation

To reduce uncertainty in terms of technologies, applications and markets,

entrepreneurial experimentation needs to be conducted. This is fundamental in the evolvement of the TIS, to prevent stagnation in all steps of the innovation process.

3.4 Market formation

Bergek and colleagues (2008) describe the assessment of what phase the market is in, either nursing, bridging or mature, and the assessment of information on its users. Not only the development of the market is to be analysed, but also that what drives the formation. There can be factors that incline the users to use the innovation. Defining a clear demand

(20)

19 profile is of importance. Other factors that can influence market formation are institutional stimuli. Their presence can drive the formation, but their absence can lead to a need for institutional change.

3.5 Legitimation

Legitimacy is concerned with the social acceptance of and compliance with relevant institutions. The innovation should be considered appropriate and desirable by the TIS’ actors in order for resources to be mobilised. Legitimation is a dynamic process formed through conscious actions taken by organisations and individuals (Bergek et al., 2008). The goal is for the TIS to overcome the liability of newness.

3.6 Resource mobilisation

In an evolving TIS three forms of capital are to be mobilised: i) human capital through education in specific scientific and technological fields, entrepreneurship, management and finance, ii) financial capital, and iii) complementary assets (e.g., complementary products, services, network infrastructure etc.) (Bergek et al., 2008).

3.7 Development of positive externalities

A key process in the formation and growth of a TIS is the generation of positive external economies. New entrants to the TIS are central to the development of positive externalities; they can resolve uncertainties, strengthen political power and legitimacy, and lead to combinatorial opportunities. The development of positive externalities can strengthen the other six aforementioned functions.

Step 4: Assessing the functionality of the TIS and setting process goals

The functioning pattern of the TIS tells us how it is functioning, but not how well the system is functioning (Bergek et al., 2008). The authors have identified two bases for an assessment: i) the developmental phase of the TIS, and ii) comparing systems. Regarding the developmental phase of the TIS, functionality presumably differs between the formative phase and the growth phase. Comparing systems is about comparing the focal TIS with other TISs.

(21)

20 Step 5: Identify inducement and blocking mechanisms

The performance of a TIS’ functionality depends on its dynamics, which are shaped by blocking mechanisms (Bergek et al., 2008). These blocking mechanisms could take the

following shape: achieving institutional alignment can be difficult due to proponents of the new knowledge field being too weak to contribute to a legitimation process. This then leads to poor market formation which limits the strength of the influence on the direction of search and entrepreneurial experimentation functions. Furthermore, underdeveloped capabilities can hamper the involvement of potential customers, which can also undermine the dynamics of

market formation, influence on the direction of search and entrepreneurial experimentation

functions. Also actors need well established connections in networks, to aid the newly started TIS.

Step 6: Specify key policy issues

The last step is to specify relevant key policy issues on the mechanisms that either block or induce the development of a desirable functional pattern (Bergek et al., 2008). Poor functionality should be remedied by the strengthening or addition of inducement mechanisms and weakening or the removal of blocking mechanisms. System failure is then expressed in functional terms rather than structural deficiencies. Policy makers can then alter the way in which the seven key processes are operating.

(22)

21 3. Methodology

The goal of this thesis is to get an understanding of innovation in the investigative department of a police organisation. There are two questions that will be answered in this thesis. The first one is:

i) What does the innovation process of the eWitness look like so far?

In Chapter 4 ‘The eWitness project’ this question will be answered by providing a detailed overview of why, how and when the eWitness was created, how innovations are regulated by the Dutch Police and how this has worked out for the innovation trajectory of the eWitness. The analysis of this case study consists of a comparison of the eWitness innovation to the analytical framework of Bergek and colleagues (2008). This will be addressed by answering the second question:

ii) How does the innovation process of the eWitness compare to the mechanisms and policy issues as derived from the analytical framework of Bergek et al. (2008)?

In order to come to a scientific base of knowledge on this topic, a qualitative case study research design is deemed most appropriate. Because this is an in-depth study of a single case, there is no generalisation applicable. Outcomes of the analysis are therefore limited to

innovation in the investigative department of the Dutch Police. However, this does not rule out the possibility to build upon this thesis in future research on innovation in a security organisation in general.

Case selection

The case study selected for this thesis is the eWitness project of the Dutch Police. The first reason for this choice, is the fact that police organisations are subject to supranational political, social and economic shifts (Jones, 1998). This means that the context within which police organisations function is constantly changing. Therefore, this thesis focuses on a currently ongoing innovation – since older innovations are likely to have taken place in a different context.

The second reason for choosing the eWitness project as a case study is the

accessibility of information. Being one of the researchers on this project, I have access to all sorts of documentation on the eWitness itself and on other documents of the Dutch Police

(23)

22 organisation. Also, I can easily get in touch with actors involved in the project (see Chapter 4 for an overview of actors that are involved in the eWitness innovation process).

The third reason is the opportunity to directly put lessons learned into practice, since the eWitness project is still ongoing. If the analysis in this thesis leads to useful insights with regards to the project, it might help to increase its chances of being a successful innovation. On the other hand, as the innovation process has already been running for a couple of years (see Figure 2 in Chapter 4), some of these insights might also be too late and the investment of financial and human resources could have been futile.

Operationalisation of the analytical framework

To be able to apply the analytical framework of Bergek and colleagues (2008) to the eWitness project, the six steps of the approach need to be operationalised. Rather than a description (see Chapter 2), this section will provide indicators for each of the steps. Some of the steps cannot be fully analysed for the eWitness project just yet, as the project is relatively new and still ongoing. This, however, does not mean that the TIS in this thesis cannot be analysed using the model. Bergek and colleagues (2008) even mention that a it may be possible and fruitful to analyse a TIS that only exists as an idea. From a policy perspective such an analysis can increase learning and knowledge development (Bergek et al., 2008). Note that an analysis using this framework will often not proceed in a linear fashion (Bergek et al., 2008). However, as the authors state, the analytical content is best presented

sequentially for reasons of simplicity.

Step 1: Starting-point for the analysis: defining the TIS in focus

To make the precise unit of focus in the TIS explicit, there are three choices to be made: i) the choice between a knowledge field or a product as a focusing device, ii) the choice between breadth and depth, and iii) the choice of spatial domain. To determine these choices for the eWitness project, the following questions need to be answered:

1.1 Is the focus of the analysis in the TIS a knowledge field or a product? 1.2 What is the level of aggregation in the TIS and what is the range of the

innovation’s application?

(24)

23 Step 2: identifying the structural components of the TIS

The structural components of a TIS are the actors, networks and institutions involved. The actors are all organisations that are somehow involved in the TIS. The first question here is:

2.1 What actors are involved in the eWitness project?

The second question concerns networks, either formally or informally created. Networks exists for different purposes and each network is collaborative in its own way. For example, it can be a shared partnership, or supply-demand relationship. The question here is:

2.2 What networks are involved in the eWitness project?

The third and last question regards identifying institutions (i.e., norms, laws, regulations and routines). Institutions need to be well aligned with a new technology, to allow for its

diffusion. Also, a lack of institutions can be a poor incentive to innovate. The question here is:

2.3 What institutions can be identified in the eWitness project?

As mentioned in Chapter 2, these last two may be hard to determine in an upcoming TIS, as networks are usually undeveloped and institutions may not yet exist.

Step 3: mapping the functional pattern of the TIS

The core of the analysis is to analyse the TIS is functional terms. Each of the functions will be operationalised separately.

3.1 Knowledge development and diffusion

Bergek and colleagues (2008) distinguish scientific, technological, production, market, logistics and design knowledge. These types of knowledge can be developed through different sources: R&D department, learning from new applications, production, imitation, et cetera. The question here is:

3.1.1 In which way is knowledge in the TIS being developed?

In a TIS the acquired knowledge base is then diffused. Hence the question:

(25)

24 3.2 Influence on the direction of search

In a TIS there are incentives and pressures that make actors become involved. These determine the direction of the TIS. Bergek and colleagues (2008) name the following factors: i) visions, expectations and beliefs in growth potential, ii) actors’ perceptions of the relevance of different types and sources of knowledge, iii) actors’ assessment of the present and future technological opportunities and appropriability conditions, iv) regulations and policy, v) articulation of demand from leading customers, vi) technical bottlenecks or “reverse salient”, and vii) crises in current business. The question here is:

3.2 To what extent are the different factors that influence the direction of the TIS involved in the eWitness project?

3.3 Entrepreneurial experimentation

Entrepreneurial experimentation reduces uncertainty in terms of technologies, applications and markets. Bergek and colleagues (2008) name the following types of experiments: i) number and diversity of new entrants, ii) number of different types of applications, iii) the breadth of the applied technologies and the nature of complementary technologies used. The question here is:

3.3 To what extent are various types of experimentation applied in the eWitness project?

Note that entrepreneurial experimentation is different than empirical experimentation. When analysing a TIS it is not about validating the use of the innovation, but about analysing the features that influence the innovation process. Empirical testing does have an effect on the eventual process, but the analysis in this step is focused on the entrepreneurial aspects. 3.4 Market formation

There are three phases of market formation for a TIS: nursing market, bridging market and the mature market. The size of the nursing market is often very limited. When

transitioning to the bridging market, there is a growth in the number of actors involved in the TIS. A mature market has large volumes on a mass scale, several decades after the onset of the initial market. The question is:

(26)

25 Then it needs to be clear what drives the market formation of the TIS. To do this, information about the end-users of the innovation needs to be assessed. The question is:

3.4.2 Who are the eWitness’ users?

To understand what drives the users, it must be clear whether the demand profile has been clearly defined and by whom. The question is:

3.4.3 Why would someone want to make use of the eWitness and who defined this demand?

Finally, market formation is also driven by institutional stimuli as standards need to be formatted as a prerequisite for the evolvement of markets. The question is:

3.4.4 Is the market formation for the eWitness driven by institutional stimuli or is there a need for institutional change?

3.5 Legitimation

The legitimation process is a conscious one: it is formed through conscious actions. To overcome the liability of newness, Bergek and colleagues (2008) name the dynamics of the legitimacy of the TIS:

i) the strength of the legitimacy of the TIS, in particular whether there is alignment between the TIS and current legislation and the value base in industry and society in particular, ii) how legitimacy influences demand, legislation and firm behaviour, and iii) what (or who) influences legitimacy and how (Bergek et al., 2008: 417).

The leads to the following questions:

3.5.1 Is there alignment between the TIS, current legislation and the value base in industry and society, to strengthen the legitimacy?

3.5.2 What (or who) influences legitimacy using what strategy?

3.5.3 How does the legitimacy of the eWitness project influence demand, legislation and firm behaviour?

Bergek and colleagues (2008) differentiate between three legitimation strategies. The first is the manipulation-strategy; manipulating the rules in the existing institutional framework. The

(27)

26 second is the conformance-strategy; adhering to the rules of the existing institutional

framework. The third is the creation-strategy; developing a new institutional framework. 3.6 Resource mobilisation

The extent to which the TIS is able to mobilise capital needs to be understood. There are three types: i) human capital through education in specific scientific and technological fields, entrepreneurship, management and finance, ii) financial capital, and iii)

complementary assets (e.g., complementary products, services, network infrastructure etc.). Hence the next questions:

3.6.1 To what extent is the eWitness project mobilising human capital? 3.6.2 To what extent is the eWitness project mobilising financial capital? 3.6.3 To what extent is the eWitness project mobilising complementary assets?

3.7 Development of positive externalities

New entrants to the TIS have a positive effect on the six other functional dynamics mentioned before. The question here is:

3.7 What actions have been undertaken to establish positive externalities?

Forms of actions to develop positive externalities are ‘resolution of uncertainties, political power, legitimacy, combinatorial opportunities, pooled labour markets, specialised

intermediates, as well as information and knowledge flows’ (Bergek et al., 2008: 418). Step 4: Assessing the functionality of the TIS and setting process goals

Here the issue of “goodness” in terms of the seven clearly specified key processes is addressed. Bergek and colleagues (2008) have identified two bases for this assessment. The first is the phase of development of the TIS. The TIS can be in a formative phase or a growth phase, with both phases having different requirements regarding the functional pattern. The question here is:

4.1 Is the eWitness in the formative phase or the growth phase?

The indicators that determine whether a TIS is in the formative or the growth phase can be seen in Table 2.

(28)

27 Table 2. Indicators of the TIS’ formative and growth phase (Bergek et al., 2008)

Formative phase Growth phase

- The constituent elements of the new TIS begin to be put into place

- Rapid rate of diffusion

- Involving entry of some firms and other organisations

- Rapid growth in economic activities

- The beginning of an institutional alignment

- System expansion

- Formation of networks - Large scale technology diffusion through the formation of bridging markets and subsequently mass markets (need for resource

mobilisation)

- A rudimentary structure is formed - Usually shorter than a decade - Large uncertainties prevailing as

regards technologies, markets and applications

- A volume of diffusion and economic activities that is but a fraction of the estimated potential

- High level of experimentation and variety creation

- Demand being unarticulated

- Absence of powerful self-reinforcing features (positive feedbacks) and weak positive externalities

(29)

28 The second base of assessment is systems comparisons. This provides ‘a powerful way of improving the understanding for decision makers’ (Bergek et al., 2008: 420). The focal TIS is to be compared to a similar TIS being developed elsewhere, or another TIS in a related area. The question here is:

4.2 What are other TISs and what can be learned from their performance?

The goal of this question is to specify process goals, which are derived from how the functional pattern should – according to findings in other similar TISs – develop. Step 5: Identify inducement and blocking mechanisms

The development of the previously mentioned seven functions of the TIS is influenced by inducement mechanisms and blocking mechanisms. It is useful to map out the relationship between the inducement mechanisms and blocking mechanisms and the functional patterns. The question is:

5 What are inducement and blocking mechanisms in the seven functional dynamics?

Step 6: Specify key policy issues

The process goals identified in step 4 can be translated into policy issues, which can help the functional pattern to reach higher functionality. The question is:

6.1 What key policy issues can be specified when looking at the process goals identified in step 4?

In step 5 the inducement and blocking mechanisms have been identified. Key policy issues are related to these mechanisms, as they determine the development of a desirable functional pattern. Hence the question:

6.2 What key policy issues can be specified when looking at the inducement and blocking mechanisms identified in step 5?

(30)

29 4. Case study: The eWitness Project

This section will provide all information on the eWitness project available at the time of writing this thesis. First the innovation of the eWitness itself will be explained. Why is what being automated? Afterwards, the experiments done with the eWitness are described. Then the way in which the Dutch Police regulates its innovations will be elaborated on, after which the innovation trajectory of the eWitness will be elucidated. Finally, this chapter will mention occasions where the project went beyond the scope of its proposal(s) and why.

The eWitness

The initial plan was to digitalise the Self-Administered Interview (SAI). The SAI is an investigative tool used to quickly obtain an eyewitness’ report (preferably at the scene of the crime), and to preserve the witness’s memory (Gabbert, Hope, & Fisher, 2009). To be precise, the witness fills out a form that provides him with a protocol of instructions, which are based on the Cognitive Interview (see Introduction section). The SAI minimises the time between witnessing an event and the witness’ comprehensive initial statement on the event, by letting the witness conduct a quality interview all by himself. Gabbert, Hope and Fisher (2009) showed that using the SAI protects against losing memories and the influence of misleading post-hoc information, and it enhances accuracy of the information. The SAI is adopted as a standard applied tool in police forces in various countries, such as the UK and Norway. However, it cannot be used as a substitute for an actual interview. Therefore the eWitness transfers the autonomous features of the SAI to the actual interview setting.

In 2014, the eWitness project was launched by the Dutch Police, with the goal to automate (part) of the investigative interview: the Free Recall phase. The initial eWitness project was funded by the NCTV (National Coordinator for Security and Counterterrorism; Ministry of Security and Justice). To be able to automate the Free Recall phase of the investigative interview, TNO created a prototype of the device. The eWitness prototype is a tablet providing the witness with a set of instructions, after which the witness can

independently report from his memory – without being asked questions or being interrupted. The specific set of instructions was created with the help of the Dutch Police Academy, Goldsmith University, University of Portsmouth and the University of Maastricht and can be found in Appendix A.1.

(31)

30 The eWitness prototype is a tablet with a 21.5 inch screen that provides auditory instructions (recorded by a professional voice over) along with visual animations and text displayed on its screen. A digital pen is used to operate the device by pressing buttons in between instructions. The tablet is attached to a full HD laptop, on which the interviewer initiates the eWitness software. The witness then hears instructions on the structure of the interview and what is expected of him. It is made clear that before a report is given, the eWitness will first help the witness in recalling the event. After the witness presses the ‘Next’ button the specific set of instructions will be given as shown in Appendix A.1. At this

moment the witness can also press the ‘Repeat’ button to hear the introductory instructions again.

The eWitness has a number of subsequent modules, of which one is selected by the interviewer at the start of the interview. These modules aim to help the witness recall memories of the event by utilising so-called mental context reinstatement techniques (from here on: CR) (see Fisher & Geiselmann, 1992; Milne 2004). Two different types of CR were implemented in the eWitness prototype: spoken CR and sketch CR. When selecting the

spoken CR module, the voice-over gives instructions to help the witness with vividly recalling the event. During this module the screen is left blank to prevent the witness from being

distracted. After these instructions the witness is instructed to report everything he can remember on the event. A checklist with a number of ‘rules’ for the witness’ report is then displayed on the screen, see Appendix A.2.

An alternative to spoken CR, is the sketch CR (Dando, Wilcock, & Milne, 2009). In the sketch CR module, the witness is instructed to draw the situation before he gives his report to the interviewer. This is done using the digital pen, which also allows the witness to write down notes. In the drawing phase everything the witness draws and says is registered. When the witness is finished drawing, he presses the ‘Drawing finished’ button. Like in the spoken CR module, the witness is then instructed to report everything he can remember. The

checklist from Appendix A.2 will be shown, as well as the sketch (slightly minimised to make room for the checklist). At this point the witness can still alter the drawing if he wants to. Both versions of the drawing are automatically saved to the computer.

So, the eWitness provides the witness with all the necessary instructions for the Free Recall. Once the witness starts reporting there is no time limit. The interviewer and witness are positioned in a 10-to-2 position from one another (i.e., the interviewer is seated in the

(32)

31 peripheral vision of the witness, see Appendix A.2). This allows the witness to stare out in front of him and to calmly recollect his memory, without being distracted by the interviewer. To test the eWitness’s functionality, an experiment was then setup.

Experimentation

In the first experiment the two types of context reinstatement were tested in an experimental setting to be compared with each other, and more importantly: to be compared with the Free Recall obtained by Dutch Police detectives (Boon, Rosloot & Heinsbroek, 2015). The Dutch Police detectives were instructed to conduct an interview as they would normally do. In the experiment a total number of 55 participants were tested (age M=20). Participants viewed a video of a mock-crime and were interviewed 6 to 8 days later – either by using the eWitness (spoken CR module N=20, sketch CR module N=20) or by a police detective (N=15). The fifteen police detectives worked in the district of The Hague (age M=43) with an average of 13 years of experience as a police interviewer. The interviews were scored on three different aspects: i) the number of the details (persons, actions, objects,

surrounding), ii) the accuracy of the mentioned details (details were scored correct, incorrect or confabulated), and iii) the pace in which information was provided. Only the Free Recalls were scored, as the eWitness could not provide for subsequent interviewing steps.

The results were as follows: participants working with the eWitness reported three times more information in the Free Recall than participants interviewed by police detectives (Boon, Rosloot & Heinsbroek, 2015). The average number of details reported in the mental CR condition and the sketch CR was similar (53 vs. 54), and significantly higher (p=.000) than the number of details reported in the police interviews’ Free Recall (17). The accuracy of the details was similar in each of the three groups: .82 vs. .86 vs. .84 in respectively the spoken CR, sketch CR and police interviewer conditions. The pace in which witnesses that were interviewed by police detectives reported information was initially higher, as the witness started almost immediately with his report. In the eWitness conditions the witness was

provided with approximately 5 minutes of instructions, after which the witness started his report. Yet, participants in the eWitness conditions reached the mark of 50 details in a shorter timeframe than participants that were interviewed by a police detective. So, investing time in providing witnesses with a set of necessary instructions will enhance the pace in which the witness will provide information. After the interview participants were requested to fill out a short evaluation form on their experience in using the eWitness. They reported feeling

(33)

32 comfortable working with the device and many mentioned that the instructions were very clear in what was expected of them. In both the spoken CR and sketch CR participants stated that the eWitness helped them in recalling memories. This notion seems to be confirmed by the results.

These first results are promising; automating the investigative interview seems to be a feasible option to improve the quality of the investigative interviews conducted by the Dutch Police. The experiment provides an evidence-based foundation to explore automating further steps of the investigative interview. Multiple questions surfaced while looking at short-term future follow-up studies and directions. For example how the set of instructions can be optimised. Participants in this study left out details such as ‘it happened in broad daylight’, probably because this type of information was considered to be too obvious to mention. Here additional instructions can be fruitful. Another question was whether participants working with the eWitness provided more information because they were helped in recalling their memory or simply because they were given more time to focus on their task before they started reporting. Other questions are about the hardware. The eWitness prototype consisted of separate components with multiple cables. The tablet technology is rapidly developing; tablets will have improved processors, more data capacity in a smaller design, improved screen technology, more accurate touch screen technology, and improved integrated features such as a microphone and speakers (which are separate components in the prototype). The question is what type will be best suited for the eWitness.

The aforementioned directions were part of the proposal for the eWitness’s follow-up project. In the runtime of this second project multiple things will be delivered. There is a tangible hand-out with standardised instructions for the interviewee, based on insights of the first experimental study. For the interviewer there is one as well, showing the standardised instructions with the addition of behavioural guidelines. Regarding the eWitness itself, the proposal aims at finalising its design. This entails improving the Free Recall instructions and to optimise the apparatus. Another experimental study is included with five different

conditions. The first condition is the silent condition: in this conditions the context

reinstatement conditions from the first experiment are replaced by a silence of several minutes which is ended by the eWitness voiceover requesting the witness to give his report. This is to test the idea that witnesses recall more details in CR modules, simply because they are given more time to concentrate on the event before they give their statement. The second condition is the detail-level condition. In this condition another set of instructions is given to enhance

(34)

33 the level of depth of the details that witnesses report. The witness is given the example of a plastic cup, and the number of details one can tell by just looking at the cup (e.g. its height, shape, colour and so on, compared to ‘it is a plastic cup’). The third, fourth and fifth condition are so-called baseline conditions; each leaving out a set of instructions to deduct the effect that all the separate sets of instructions have on the eyewitness’ report. This provides for an empirical foundation of the eWitness’ functionality.

Innovation regulation within the Dutch Police

Before looking into the innovation trajectory of the eWitness, it will first be clarified how the Dutch Police has regulated its innovation structure and management. This regulation can be found in the document ‘Innoveren met passie voor de professie’ (translated;

‘Innovating with a passion for the profession’) created by the Knowledge and Innovation department and the Innovation Network, both part of the Directory on Police Operations (Directie Operatiën, 2014). In this section only the aspects that are relevant for the eWitness case will be elucidated, since aspects that did not show up in the eWitness projects are beyond the scope of this thesis.

Within the Dutch Police, the innovation process consists of five steps: i) ideation, ii) experimenting, iii) decision making, iv) implementation and preservation, v) evaluation and adjustments (Directie Operatiën, 2014). In the ideation phase it needs to be clear that there is an urgent problem and that the innovation is the solution to this problem. In the second phase, that of experimenting, it is tested whether the innovation is feasible. The experiment is

followed by an evaluation and a business case is made. The third step is that of decision making. If the decision is positive the implementation plan will be carried out. This leads us to the next phase: implementation. This encompasses all the efforts made to enable the use of the innovation in the working environment. The last step is that of evaluation and

adjustments. After the period of a year, the implementation of the innovation will be evaluated, with the possible outcome of making small adjustments to it. There is also the chance of re-entering the innovation process at the ideation phase. This makes innovation a cyclic process (Directie Operatiën, 2014).

In this process multiple actors are involved. Throughout the entire process go/no-go decisions frequently occur and wide-scale implementation of the innovation should be taken into account at all times. In this process the ones that are innovating (innovators) are not necessarily the ones to implement the innovation in the organisation (implementers). This is

(35)

34 where the Innovation Support Team (IST) comes into play; to unburden the innovators with the preparations of implementation. They determine what can be done at a specific moment in time, in order to facilitate implementation at a later moment in time. By doing this, the chance of successfully implementing the innovation is increased. The IST has an advisory role.

The budget for innovations is managed by Director of Operations of the ‘Staf

Korpsleiding’, which is the board of the entire Dutch Police organisation. This director is in charge of the department of Knowledge and Innovation, which is responsible for the

coordination and facilitation of the innovation process. Innovations require investment of both human and financial resources. There is a budget available which is reserved for innovations that can be invested if the expected benefits outweigh the costs. Also, the innovation needs to meet the goals of the ‘Strategische Innovatieagenda Politie’ (SIAP, translated; Strategic Innovation-Agenda Police). This agenda encompasses the innovation goals of the Dutch Police, which are closely related to the policy priorities of the organisation. So, in order to get approval, the innovation needs to fit within one of the SIAP goals. The eWitness innovation adheres to the goal of ‘Competent enforcement’ (in Dutch ‘Vakkundig optreden’;

Politieacademie, 2015), which mentions witness interviewing as one of their topics. During the runtime of an innovation project, there is the ‘coordinating consultant’ of the department of Knowledge and Innovation that manages the innovation on behalf of the Director of Operations. Also, there is the innovation broker, who is responsible for facilitating all innovations within a separate unit of the Dutch Police (in the Netherlands, there is one national police corps, which can be divided into 11 separate police units).

The innovation trajectory of the eWitness

Now that it is clear how the eWitness functions, what its exact use is, and how innovations within the Dutch Police are regulated, the innovation’s trajectory will be

analysed. Figure 2 displays the eWitness’ innovation process in chronological order including timestamps. The documentation on this period is limited, as information was exchanged in meetings or in telephone conversations which were not recorded. Agreements made during these meetings and phone calls did however frequently occur in e-mail correspondence of the partners involved, which will be discussed in this section and can be found in Appendix B.1 and B.2.

(36)

35 Figure 2. The trajectory of the eWitness project.

2013 June Idea is created; digitalising the SAI

July NCTV rejects; new proposal aims to digitalise (part) of the investigative interview

October START PROJECT 1

November Literature research, developing eWitness etc.

2014 October First experimental research – testing spoken CR, drawing CR and police detectives

2015 March- June Data analysis, reporting, future directions June END PROJECT 1

July 1st Proposal Project 2 (followed by various renewed proposals until February 2016)

2016 March START PROJECT 2

October Second experimental research – testing silent condition, baseline condition A, baseline condition B, baseline condition C and the detail-condition.

2017 February Pilot study started

March – July Data analysis, reporting, future directions; including involvement of other partners

(37)

36 In 2013, there was a project at the Dutch Police on improving witness testimonies, that mainly dealt with training Dutch Police detectives (see Introduction) and with translating and implementing the SAI. Two researchers on this project came up with the concept of the eWitness. As stated earlier, this concept originated from the idea to digitalise the

Self-Administrated Interview. This idea was put into a proposal in early 2013 and was submitted to the NCTV. This proposal was rejected because digitalising the SAI was not innovative

enough. In June 2013, a first version of the proposal of digitalising (part of) the investigative interview (i.e., the concept of the eWitness) was submitted. After some minor changes the proposal got approval in September. The first eWitness project was eventually launched in October 2013. In August 2014 I myself joined the project, as an intern since I was enrolled as a student in the Master Applied Cognitive Psychology at Leiden University. After the runtime of the first project I was contracted as a researcher (having graduated in Cognitive

Psychology).

After the first project was completed, several proposals for a follow-up eWitness project were submitted, but were rejected due to various reasons. In July 2015 a first proposal for a follow-up study was submitted within the Dutch Police, as the NCTV only funds new innovative projects and not follow-ups. This proposal was rejected by the coordinating consultant due to multiple reasons (see Appendix B.1). For instance, the proposal did not include legal aspects. This needed to be covered to examine whether an interview in which the eWitness is used can be used in court. Another more crucial part of critique in the feedback on the first proposal was the statement that it would be regrettable to continue experimenting and developing for another couple of years before implementing the

innovation. In the feedback there was an urge to implement products or knowledge, parallel to experimenting with and further developing the eWitness. The need for implementation, the innovation’s end station, was being emphasised. Lastly, while the proposal mentioned connecting the eWitness to existing police systems as a future step, the feedback strongly suggested to include this as part of the research and development described in the proposal.

In another e-mail (Appendix B.2), which was written after the proposal’s content was discussed within the IST, the need for implementation was stressed again. The proposal suggested another 18 months of experimenting with and developing the eWitness. The IST deemed this too long and stated that steps towards implementation should be taken as soon as possible (i.e., from the start of second eWitness project). The IST explicitly mentions that ‘endless researching is a missed opportunity for this great innovation.’ Despite these critiques,

Referenties

GERELATEERDE DOCUMENTEN

As the cell is able to assimilate exogenous sterols and unsaturated fatty acids in addition to synthesizing ergosterol during winemaking, this study ex- plores whether combinations

We hebben deze binnen ons bedrijf zo ver ontwikkeld en we hebben zoveel kennis van de biologische teelt dat de kwaliteit van onze biologische producten goed kan concurreren met

H6 The value of adult learning as a development approach in managing change and a learning organisation depends on the ability ojtop management to support adult learning.... Diagram

This study contributes to (1) clarification on how SMEs can get insight into customer- and market demand without considerable R&D; (2) insight in the effects

Knowledge giving and taking. A frequently mentioned advantage of participation in the cluster is the ability of firms to receive valuable information. However, within the cluster

Keywords: Government, policy instruments, sustainability, transition, renewable energy, innovation projects, project success.6. Governmental influence on innovation

This paper has addressed this gap by investigating the direct effects, signalling of quality, learning and networking, of participating in an innovation award

This thesis conducted its research at an innovative technology company who recently implemented an organizational innovation, which is described below. In order to gain a