2022, vol. 45(1), pp. 77–90 DOI: https://doi.org/10.15388/Soctyr.45.1.5

The Expression of the Dimensions of Smartness in Cultural Management: The Foundations of the Research

Rytis Milkintas
Vilniaus universiteto doktorantas
Vilnius University, PhD student
El. p.: rytis.milkintas@sa.stud.vu.lt

Teodoras Tamošiūnas
Vilniaus universiteto Šiaulių akademijos profesorius, habil. dr.
Vilnius University Siauliai Academy, Prof., Dr. habil.
El. p.: teodoras.tamosiunas@sa.vu.lt

Summary. The aim of the research is to substantiate the methodological foundations of empirical research by revealing the concept of the expression of dimensions of smartness in cultural management. The article formulates theoretical construct based on expression of smartness dimensions in cultural management. This construct is formulating by combining cultural management and smart governance concepts and closely linking cultural management with the implementation of cultural policy and seeing the specifics of smart cultural management. The expression of smartness dimensions at culture management model consist of six main dimensions: strategics, creative development, harmonization of interests in the cultural sector, empowered cultural sector parties, harmony of intellectual and technological capital, the culture of shared value creation. Methodology strategy is based on two philosophical approaches by combining induction and deduction which result is abduction approach. Qualitative analysis was performed of theoretical sources of foreign countries and Lithuania. Another part of qualitative research is based on the interviewing chosen respondents to get information about the expression of smartness dimensions at culture management model functioning. There would be chosen about 30 experts (till data saturation) by using quadruple helix. Experts are chosen from government, science, business and nongovernmental organizations’ sphere. Gained results let to form research results conception which consists of three parts: theoretical model, current situation model, perspective situation model. The trajectory of the change from the current situation model to the perspective situation model helps to highlight the areas requiring improvement of the functioning of the cultural field, planned directions (trends) of change.
In future research, it is planned to form the indicators for all 6 theoretical dimensions of the expression of smartness dimensions at culture management model. Analysis based on this theoretical model also will be performed at the state level which provide a comprehensive view of the cultural field current situation and hypothetical perspective situation.
Keywords: smartness, smart governance, smart culture management.

Sumanumo dimensijų raiška kultūros vadyboje: tyrimo pagrindai

Santrauka. Tyrimo tikslas – pagrįsti empirinio tyrimo metodologinius pagrindus, atskleidžiant sumanumo dimensijų raiškos kultūros vadyboje sampratą. Straipsnyje formuluojamas teorinis konstruktas, pagrįstas sumanumo dimensijų raiška kultūros vadyboje. Šis konstruktas formuluojamas derinant kultūros vadybos ir sumanaus valdymo koncepcijas bei glaudžiai siejant kultūros vadybą su kultūros politikos įgyvendinimu, atsižvelgiant į sumanaus kultūros valdymo specifiką. Sumanumo dimensijų raiška kultūros vadybos modelyje susideda iš šešių pagrindinių dimensijų: strategija, kūrybinė plėtra, interesų derinimas kultūros sektoriuje, kultūros sektoriaus dalyvių įgalinimas, intelektinio ir technologinio kapitalo harmonija, bendros vertės kūrimo kultūra. Metodologijos strategija remiasi dviem filosofiniais požiūriais, derinant indukciją ir dedukciją, šą dermę įgalina abdukcijos metodas. Atlikta kokybinė užsienio šalių ir Lietuvos teorinių šaltinių analizė. Kita kokybinio tyrimo dalis pagrįsta respondentų apklausa, siekiant gauti empirinės informacijos apie sumanumo dimensijų raišką kultūros vadybos modelio funkcionavime. Ekspertai atrenkami (iki duomenų prisotinimo būsenos) keturgubos spiralės principu iš valdžios, mokslo, verslo ir nevyriausybinių organizacijų. Gauti rezultatai įgalina suformuoti tyrimo rezultatų koncepciją, kurią sudaro trys dalys: teorinis modelis, esamos situacijos modelis, perspektyvinis situacijos modelis. Pokyčio trajektorija iš esamos situacijos modelio į perspektyvinės situacijos modelį padeda išryškinti kultūros lauko funkcionavimo tobulinimo reikalaujančias sritis, galimas pokyčių tendencijas.
Būsimuose tyrimuose numatoma suformuoti rodiklius visoms šešioms teorinėms sumanumo dimensijoms kultūros vadybos modelyje. Šiuo teoriniu modeliu pagrįsta analizė atliekama valstybės lygmeniu, ji suteiks visapusišką kultūros lauko esamos situacijos vaizdą ir hipotetinę perspektyvinę situaciją.
Pagrindiniai žodžiai: sumanumas, sumanus valdymas, sumanus kultūros valdymas

__________

Received: 15/05/2022. Accepted: 14/06/2022
Copyright © Rytis Milkintas, Teodoras Tamošiūnas, 2022. Published by Vilnius University Press.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Introduction

The actuality. The national culture of the country is an integral foundation of a successful developing state. The field of culture is greatly influenced by the rapid processes of globalization, changes in management models, sociological changes in society. The influence of the international field of states on the instability of the culture of the national country is emphasized by Crosby, Hart et al. (2016), Pollitt (2016), Torfing, Sørensen, etc. (2016). According to Rakšnys, Valickas, etc. (2020), „the ongoing development of public administration systems includes past and present challenges“. Today‘s challenges mentioned by the authors have led to the rendering of traditional models and methods of public governance ineffective (Woronkowicz, 2018; Gil-Garcia, Zhang et al., 2016; Scholl, Scholl, 2014; Gaul, 2014). Therefore, with the globalization of the world and rapid technological transformations, favorable conditions were created for the formation of a new branch of the new model of public governance – a smart governance model.

The problem of research. According to Jucevičius, Pauliukevičiūtė (2017), „Cultural management is a relatively young field of scientific research that is associated with the sciences and practices of management, politics, public management, cultural studies, arts management, etc. Until now, lacking a broader approach to cultural management, its theoretical validity is poor, and its smartness in this context has not been studied at all. “ These authors emphasize the importance of research into the expression of dimensions of smartness in cultural management: “The principles of smartness that could be implemented in cultural management are a new, broad and scientifically ambitious topic.”

Smart governance is becoming an integral part of the management of today’s culture. According to Gaule (2014), „The qualities of smartness in the public administration system must be integrated into the structures and processes of the system and expressed through a common ethos and culture.“ The aforementioned change of public governance models towards smart management is gradually also taking place in the Field of Lithuanian Culture – more and more services of the cultural sector are moving to the digital space in order to increase their accessibility to the public, more effective mechanisms of activities of cultural institutions and its administration are applied, and the most suitable cultural policy model for Lithuania is sought. The gradual change of the model of public administration into the model of smart public management was studied and actualized by Jucevičius, Pauliukevičiūtė (2017), who began to develop a system of 6 dimensions of smartness in cultural management, but 4 sets of indicators were not compiled for the dimensions of smartness, but only the assigned criteria. Moreover, the model of the expression of six dimensions of smartness in cultural management has not been tested empirically in real conditions of its operation.

Current level of investigation of the main research question. The theme of the research is quite new, because in the context of Lithuanian science there is only the chapter of Jucevicius and Pauliukevičiūtė (2017) “Theoretical assumptions of the expression of dimensions of smartness in cultural management” in the book “Smart Social System” (2017) by Jucevicius, Šiugždinienė and others (2017). There is Stanislovaitienė’s (2016) thesis on the expression of smart public management dimensions in Lithuania and other scientific works on individual dimensions of smartness and their expression, but not in cultural management. Various aspects examine smartness and its expression in cultural management in the works of foreign authors (Musial, 2019; Mattocks, 2017), however, foreign authors have not developed a single system of expression of dimensions of smartness in cultural management. Therefore, it can be said that the research field of the topic under consideration has not been studied much, there is a lack of a holistic approach in treating the expression of dimensions of smartness in cultural management as a unified system. The topics are also influenced by the fact that the manifestations of smartness in cultural management have only been studied in more detail in the last decade.

A planned scientific solution to the problem. The aim of the study is to supplement the concept of six dimensions of smart cultural management and 24 criteria started by Pauliukevičiūtė and Jucevicius (2018) with four dimensions and to summarize the sets of indicators offered in the two-dimensional concept, thus completing a seamless system of six-dimensional indicator sets, to check the entire concept of dimensions, criteria and indicators in real conditions of cultural management at the state level. Also justify the trajectory of the change in the expression of dimensions of smartness in cultural management at the state level, moving from the present to the perspective situation.

The theoretical and empirical aspects of the scientific problem are aimed at realizing the research by answering the following problematic questions: 1. What scientific concepts can be used to justify and summarize the theoretical model of the expression of dimensions of smartness in cultural management? 2. What results of theoretical and empirical research can be used to justify the expression of the model of theoretical smartness dimensions in cultural management at the state level? 3. What results of theoretical and empirical research can be based on the trajectory of the change in the expression of the dimensions of smartness in cultural management at the state level, moving from the present to the prospective situation?

The object of research – methodological foundations for the study of the expression of dimensions of smartness in cultural management at the state level.

The goal of research – to substantiate the methodological foundations of empirical research by revealing the concept of the expression of dimensions of smartness in cultural management.

Research methods. For theoretical research, literary analysis, synthesis, comparison, generalization are used. For empirical research, a qualitative research strategy is chosen: analysis of the content of documents at EU, national and local level, targeted partially structured individual interviews of experts and categorization of its results, comparative analysis, grouping, systematization.

Theoretical framework

Smart governance

With the rapid processes of globalization and social changes in society, the forms of public governance are also changing. According to Goldsmith, Crawford (2014), the ability to collect, analyze and share information has great potential to change management. As the concepts of public governance changing and improving, the gradual transition from new public governance to smart management, interaction between different stakeholders and cooperation in decision-making become very relevant (Albino, Berardi ir kt., 2015; Alonso, Lippez-De Castro, 2015).

The smart social system was analyzed through the prism of the relationship with the environment by Jucevičius, Patašienė and others (2014), Šiugždinienė, Gaulė, etc. (2017). The indissolubility of the smart social system from the successful smart development of the city was highlighted by Shcherbina, Gorbenkova (2018). The integral part of the functioning of the smart social system – the use of ICT was emphasized by Patašienė, Patašius (2014), Cassandras (2016). An essential area of this system is a smart society analyzed by Salmelin (2015), Valkenburg, Ouden, etc. (2016).

Smart management is emphasized in the following essential aspects: 1) smart use of ICT for faster decision-making and networking (Amin, Sang, 2020; Pereira, Parycek et al., 2018; Gil-Garcia, Helbig et al., 2014); 2) the basis of a smart city (Pereira, Parycek, etc., 2018; Batty, 2017); 3) involvement of citizens in management processes (Alawadhi, Scholl, 2016; Gil-Garcia, Zhang et al., 2016); 4) transformation of management processes by increasing transparency, openness, prevention of corruption (Pereira, Cunha, etc., 2017); 5) flexible and rapid adaptation to changes (Jucevičienė, Jucevičius, 2014); 6) improvement of the quality and accessibility of public services (Awoleye, Ojuloge, etc., 2014; Lambert, 2013).

Cultural management

As national cultures change and become a global phenomenon, emerges the importance of cross-cultural management, analyzed by Thomas, Petereson (2018), Romani, Barmeyer, etc. (2018). The scientific literature of cultural management is dominated by 5 themes (Jucevičius, Pauliukevičiūtė, 2017): 1) mandel (2017), Paquette, Redaelli (2015), Crepaz, Huber, etc. (2015) as specific management in the field of culture, then the interdependence between economics and culture becomes apparent; 2) as a profession, academic activity was highlighted by Mandel, Cerquetti and others (2016), Cuyler (2014), in this case cultural management is perceived as interdisciplinary, integrally combining not only cultural, but also communication, social sciences and other fields of study; 3) as a management direction based on leadership was emphasized by Mendenhall, Bird (2015), Varela (2013), here management is perceived as a set of competences combining the management and implementation of cultural policy, the basis of which is the skillful ability to use economic and political interests from a strategic point of view; 4) as a phenomenon reflecting the formation and implementation of cultural policy, the process was highlighted by DeVereaux (2018), Bonet, Négrier, etc. (2018), which highlights the cultural policy formed by the state government, the involvement of the government in promoting organizations through various financial mechanisms through certain programmes; 5) as a management direction based on the management of institutions was analyzed by Pauliukevičiūtė, Jucevičius (2016), Yerznkyan, Gassner, etc. (2017), where the abilities to organize the implementation of projects of cultural institutions are highlighted.

Expression of dimensions of smartness in cultural management

Jucevičius and Pauliukevičiūtė (2017) singled out six dimensions of smart cultural management: 1) strategics as the ability to focus on the long-term perspective by anticipating change and thus exploiting opportunities and reducing the impact of threats (Musial, 2019; Pauliukevičiūtė, Jucevičius, 2017); 2) creative development which is associated with continuous renewal, improvement, and the pursuit of innovation and creative adaptation to ongoing developmental change (Woronkowicz, 2018; Mattocks, 2017); 3) harmonization of interests in the cultural sector perceived as a complex multifaceted process in which different interest groups interact with different positions to be reconciled (Broccardo, Culasso et al., 2019; Woronkowicz, 2018); 4) empowered cultural sector parties defined as the systematic development of the cultural sector based on lifelong learning (Bromley, Meyer, 2017; Grodach, 2016); 5) harmony of intellectual and technological capital described as the use of a variety of goal-oriented, high-quality intellectual and technological capital to empower the intellectual and physical resources used to improve the quality of life (Manzaneque, Ramírez et al., 2017; Zhining, Shaohan et al., 2018); 6) the culture of shared value creation is described as the process of creating tangible and intangible (social value), which is derived from the concept of social responsibility (Sinthupundaja, Chiadamrong, 2020; Jucevičius, Jucevičienė, 2017). The dimensions of smartness are applied to describe the specific activities of interest groups, government and cultural organizations, the results of cultural management, revealing the smartness of the public management process as a value quality that helps to achieve non-standard and progressive results (Jucevičius, Pauliukevičiūtė, 2017).

Methodological bases of the research

Research approaches and methods

According to Rehman and Alhartri (2016), each scientific paradigm has several essential segments that can be divided into four groups: ontology, epistemology, methodology, and methods. Ontology is perceived as a philosophy aimed at determining the nature and structure of reality Guarino, Musen (2015), (the basis for the existence of reality is highlighted - the result of cognition of an individual or objective nature). According to Kiršė (2021), in attempting to formulate answers to the above questions, researchers can rely on knowledge from four sources: intuitive knowledge, authoritative knowledge, logical knowledge, and empirical knowledge. Epistemology is treated as an internal factor of the researcher, because the researcher‘s perception of the world determines how the information he conveys will be understood - as incorrect or correct (Alharahsheh and Pius, 2020). Methodology is closely related to the research strategy that the researcher follows in conducting the research. According to Rehman and Alharthi (2016), the methodology is a clear approach to data generation that helps the researcher select the types of data needed for the study, the data collection tools that will be most effective in achieving the research goal. It can be said that a researcher who wants to answer a methodological question must understand how to research the desired object. The methods used to collect, process, integrate and describe the data provide clarity to the methodology by specifying the data collection methods. The research implements the basic (generic) qualitative research strategy, which creates preconditions for revealing the researched phenomenon in accordance with pragmatism (ontological approach), social constructivism (epistemological approach) and applying qualitative research data collection and analysis methods (look at Fig. 1).

Figure 1. Research approaches and methods

Compiled by the authors according to (Kaushik, Walsh et al, 2019; Bryman, 2016)

The ontological approach of pragmatism focuses on concreteness, adequacy and facts, combining rationality with subjective attitudes. Pragmatism provides strong evidence for macro-level discourse (Kaushik, Walsh et al., 2019). For many qualitative characteristics, data are collected and interpreted in a particular political and social context, so the epistemological approach of social constructivism (Bryman, 2016) applies to the study. Hennink, Hutter et al. (2020), Creswell (2014) states that qualitative research is an approach that allows detailed study of expert experience and the content of documents.

Research participants

The research involves cooperation with the highest level experts of the Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Lithuania (members of the colleges of the Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Lithuania, councils under the Ministry), members of the main cultural sector funding institution - the Lithuanian Culture Council, members of 10 regional cultural councils. It is planned to cooperate with the heads of cultural institutions subordinated to the Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Lithuania, representatives of non-governmental organizations. Also Cooperation would be organized with municipal cultural departments and representatives of cultural businesses (private media, organizers of commercial events).

Figure 2. Primary experts model

Compiled by the authors

Approximately 30 experts would be selected for the targeted saturation of partially structured individual expert interviews till data saturation which expressing the reliability of the data (Braun, Clarke, 2019), according to the following criteria: 1) positions that correspond to the research topic and represent not only a personal but also an institutional approach; 2) professional experience in the field of culture of at least 5 years; 3) level of professional competencies - leadership skills, participation in research activities close to the research topic of the state or international cultural organizations, participation in high-level cultural policy, active researchers in research topics (Juknevičienė, 2015). Applying the quadruple helix model (McAdam, Debackere, 2018; Miller, McAdam, 2018), experts are selected for the study from 4 target groups: 1) science (8 researchers in the field of culture in higher education), 2) authorities (12 representatives from the Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Lithuania, the Lithuanian Culture Council, the Press, Radio and Television Fund, regional cultural councils, municipal cultural departments), 3) business (4 experts from private media and institutions organizing commercial events), 4) Representatives of NGOs and budgetary institutions (6 experts representing municipal non-governmental organizations in the field of culture, institutions subordinate to municipalities and the Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Lithuania).

Research strategy

An empirical study uses a three methods strategy. The methodological basis of the research consists of a selective abductive approach combining deduction and induction methods (look at Fig. 3).

Figure 3. Abduction approach

Compiled by the authors according to Kroll, Koskela’s (2016)

The content of the abduction access consists of the theoretical concept and the corresponding methodology supporting the research, and the results of the research are intended to substantiate the system of indicators of smartness expression in culture management (deduction).

The abduction approach enables the identification of the research method as systematic combaining, when the theory is developed simultaneously, empirical data collection and data analysis are performed by examining a separate case of expression of smartrness dimensions in Lithuanian cultural management (Lamé, Yannou, 2018). In addition, it is necessary to take into account various disturbances, to reconcile the contradictions and contradictions between theory and empirical data, to determine the trajectory of information and uncertainty, complexity and dynamism of the environment ”(Jucevičius, Bakanauskienė et al., 2017).

Interview method

According to Cresswell (2009), qualitative research allows for the collection of in-depth, contextual, open responses from research participants that express their attitudes, opinions, attitudes, experiences. The research with informants is conducted using an in-depth, partially structured interview method. Bryman (2012) argues that there is a clear tendency to name a semi-structured interview as in-depth. According to Yin (2009), an individual in-depth interview is unique in that the meeting with the expert can take place more than once, in order to obtain the fullest possible information on the topic of the questionnaire or to supplement the information already obtained in the previous interview.

A partially structured interview questionnaire is used. This interview method has a clear internal structure, where the respondent answers questions prepared in advance and presented in a certain order. In a structured interview, respondents are asked the same questions in the same sequence. The researcher strives to formulate questions so that the wording is unambiguous and equally understood by all selected experts, regardless of which quadruple helix belongs (e.g., science or business). Structured interviews allow not only to single out and group the opinions of respondents belonging to separate groups, but also to compare their views on certain issues related to the object of research. The interview questionnaire is prepairing in advance. The questionnaire consists of open-ended questions in which the expert is much less constrained than in closed-ended questions and is more free to express unique opinion on the questions being researched. Scheduled interview time: 45-60 min. The analysis of the results of the interviews is performed by systematizing the statements of the experts into categories and sub-categories.

Research instruments

A partially structured questionnaire is used to implement individual in-depth interviews with experts. The questions revealing the experts‘ approach to the expression of the dimensions of smartness in cultural management are formulated on the basis of general recommendations for the preparation of interview questionnaires. The questions revealing the object of the research are formulated in accordance with the structural elements of the theoretical model of Smartness dimensions in cultural management and their interaction. The wording of some of the questions is likely to be adjusted or supplemented to take into account the imperfections in the wording of the questions that emerged during the exploratory study (3-5 first experts). One questionnaire is planned for all 4 expert groups, and the specifics of the data obtained in the expert groups will be highlighted in the system of indicators based on theoretical and interview results.

The interview questionnaire distinguishes six groups of questions corresponding to the 6 dimensions of the expression of smartness in cultural management: strategics, creative development harmonization of interests in the cultural sector, empowered cultural sector parties, harmony of intellectual and technological, the culture of shared value creation. Each of the question groups in the questionnaire corresponding to the dimensions has groups of indicators that refine the 4 criteria assigned to each dimension in the theoretical model.

Only two dimensions of the theoretical model developed by Jucevičius and Pauliukevičiūtė (2018) (Strategic and Creative Development) have developed sets of indicators, but dimension of strategic consists of the set of 55 indicators. For empirical research to form sets of indicators for the remaining 4 dimensions. In total, the system of indicators for the interview questionnaire will consist of about 100 indicators.

The main result of the study

The results of the study are presented using the concept of the three models presented in Figure 4. The theoretical model is based on the model of Jucevičius, Pauliukevičiūtė (2017) expression of smartness dimensions in cultural management, which consists of 6 dimensions, 24 criteria and a system of indicators. The model of the current situation is based on the systematic information received from the experts during the interview and the analysis of the content of the legal acts regulating the operation of the cultural field: asymmetries of the theoretical model (trajectory of change) are identified. The concept of results presents an inductive trajectory from the current situation model to the theoretical model. This trajectory highlights the shortcomings of the theoretical model - changes and improvements are made to the theoretical model (criteria and indicators that are not working due to the existing legal framework or based on information obtained during expert interviews) are likely to change. The perspective situation model is formed from the EU and Lithuanian documents regulating the expected future changes in the cultural field and the strategic field of culture collected and systematized during the expert interviews. The trajectory of change from the current situation model to the perspective situation model helps to highlight the areas requiring the improvement of the functioning of the cultural field, the planned directions (trends) of change.

Fig. 4. Scheme of presentation of research results

Source: compiled by the authors

Conclusion

Smartness is seen as a kind of ability that is perceived as the use of local and external resources to best achieve set goals. The quality of smartness is characteristic of people and social systems of various kinds and coverage. In an age of high technology, the quality of smartness is often associated with information technology. Smartness in the universal sense is perceived as the ability to quickly and smoothly adapt to the ever-changing environment. Smart public governance is seen as a form of governance that links open and active governance structures that seek to involve all actors (citizens, business organizations, non-governmental organizations, public sector institutions), exploit the city‘s social, economic and ecological potential and thus avoid negative externalities factors.

The construct of cultural management is formulated by combining the concepts of culture and management, closely linking cultural management with the implementation of cultural policy and seeing the specifics of cultural management. Smart cultural governance is broadly understood as a set of actions that ensure the efficient operation of a cultural sector system in a dynamic environment, using intellectual capital and available resources to turn challenges into opportunities. Given the complexity of the cultural sector and the new requirements for cultural management, the application of the concept of smartnmess in managerial decisions opens up many new possibilities. Each of the concepts complements the concept of the field of cultural management with certain new aspects.

In the research methodology, a qualitative research strategy has been chosen, on the logical basis of which the coherence of induction and deduction methods is chosen - abduction. Applying the logic of the deduction method, a system of indicators is formed from the formed theoretical concept, on the basis of which a questionnaire is compiled and submitted to the experts. Experts are selected for the interview using the quadruple spiral method. This method selects experts from the following groups: science, business, government, non-governmental organizations. After the analysis of the information obtained during the interviews using the induction method, the concept is improved and asymmetries are identified.

References

Albino,V., Berardi, U., Dangelico, R. M. (2015). Smart Cities: Definitions, Dimensions, Performance, and Initiatives. Journal of Urban Technology, 22 (1), 3-21.
Alharahsheh, H. H., Pius, A. (2020). A Review of key paradigms: positivism VS interpretivism. Global Academic Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 2 (3), 39-43.
Alonso, R. G., Lippez-De Castro, S. (2015). Technology Helps, People Make: A Smart City Governance Framework Grounded in Deliberative Democracy. Public Administration and Information Technology, 11, 333-347.
Amin, F., Sang, C. G. (2020). Hotspots Analysis Using Cyber-Physical-Social System for a Smart City. IEEE Access, 8, 1-13.
Awoleye, O. M., Ojuloge, B., Ilori, M. O. (2014). Web application vulnerability assessment and policy direction towards a secure smart government. Government Information Quarterly, 31 (1), 118–125.
Batty, M. (2017). The age of the smart city. UK: University College London.
Bonet, L., Négrier, E. (2018). The participative turn in cultural policy: Paradigms, models, contexts. Poetics, 66, 64-73.
Braun, V., Clarke, V. (2019). To saturate or not to saturate? Questioning data saturation as a useful concept for thematic analysis and sample-size rationales. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11, 1-16.
Broccardo, L. Culasso, F., Mauro, S. G. (2019). Smart city governance: exploring the institutional work of multiple actors towards collaboration. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 32 (4), 367-387.
Bromley, P., Meyer, J. W. (2017). “They Are All Organizations”: The Cultural Roots of Blurring Between the Nonprofit, Business, and Government Sectors. Administration & Society, 49 (7), 939-966.
Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods. 4-th edition. Oxford press.
Bryman, A. (2016). Social Research Methods. 5th edition. UK: Oxford University Press.
Cassandras, G. C. (2016). Smart Cities as Cyber-Physical Social System. Engineering, 2, 156–158.
Crepaz, L., Huber, C., Scheytt, T. (2015). Governing arts through valuation: The role of the state as network actor in the European Capital of Culture 2010. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 37, 35-50.
Cresswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, Quantative, Mixed Methods Approaches. 3 rd edition. Thousand oaks: Sage Publications.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Aproaches. 4th edition. USA: SAGE Publications.
Crosby, B. C., Hart, P., Torfing, J. (2016). Public value creation through collaborative innovation. Public Management Review, 1-15.
Cuyler, A. C. (2014). Critical Issues for Research in Arts Management. ENCATC Journal of Cultural and Policy, 4 (1), 9-13.
DeVereaux, C. (2018). Arts and Cultural Management: Sense and Sensibilities in the State of the Field. USA: Routledge.
Gaulė, E. (2014). Sumanus viešasis valdymas: samprata ir dimensijos. Viešoji politika ir administravimas, 13 (3), 372–385.
Gil-Garcia, J. R., Zhang, J., Puron-Cid, G. (2016). Conceptualizing smartness in government: An integrative and multidimensional view. Government Information Quarterly, 33 (3), 524-534.
Goldsmith, S., Crawford, S. (2014). The Responsive City: Engaging Communities through Data-Smart Governance. 1st edition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Grodach, C. (2016). Mapping the arts: industry concentrations, distribution, and change in the US, 1980–2010. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 22 (3), 353-375.
Guarino, N., Musen, M. (2015). Applied ontology: The next decade begins. Applied ontology, 10 (1), 1- 4.
Hennink, M., Hutter, I., Bailey, A. (2020). Qualitative research methods. UK: SAGE publications.
Jucevičienė, P., Jucevičius, R. (2014). What Does It Mean to Be Smart? Proceedings of the 8th Scientific Conference “Business and Management 2014”, May 15–16, 2014. Vilnius: Technika, 911-918.
Jucevičius, G., Bakanauskienė, I., Brasaitė, D. ir kt. (2017). Organizacijų valdymas neapibrėžtumų sąlygomis: teorija ir praktika. Monografija. Kaunas: Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas.
Jucevičius, R., Patašienė, I., Patašius, M. (2014). Digital dimension of smart city: critical analysis. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 156, 146 – 150.
Jucevičius, R., Pauliukevičiūtė, A. (2017). Sumanumo dimensijų raiškos kultūros vadyboje teorinės prielaidos. Kn.: Jucevičius, R., Šiugždinienė, J. ir kt. Sumanioji socialinė sistema. Kaunas: Technologija, 193-226.
Jucevičius, R., Šiugždinienė, J. ir kt. (2017). Sumanioji socialinė sistema. Kaunas: Technologija.
Kaushik, V., Walsh, C. A., Lai, D. W. L. (2019). Pragmatism as a Research Paradigm and Its Implications for Social Work Research. Social Sciences, 8 (9), 1-17.
Kiršė, S. (2021). Asmeninių savybių, dėkingumo ir pasitenkinimo įtaka vartotojų ketinimui skleisti teigiamus atsiliepimus socialinėse medijose. Daktaro disertacija. Vilnius: Vilniaus universitetas.
Lambert, F. (2013). Seeking electronic information from government resources: A comparative analysis of two communities’ web searching of municipal government websites. Government Information Quarterly, 30 (1), 99-109.
Lamé, G., Yannou, B., Cluzel, F. (2018). Analyzing RID methodology through the lens of innovative abduction. International Design Conference - Design 2018, 1879-1890.
Mandel, B. (2017). Arts/Cultural Management in International Contexts. Germany: Universitätsverlag Hildesheim.
Mandel, B., Cerquetti, M., Palmi, P. (2016). From “serving” public arts institutions to creating intercultural contexts: cultural management in Germany and new challenges for training. ENCATC journal of cultural management & policy, 6 (1), 5-12.
Manzaneque, M., Ramírez, Y., Diéguez-Soto, J. (2017). Intellectual capital efficiency, technological innovation and family management. Innovation, 19 (2), 167-188.
Mattocks, K. (2017). “Just Describing is Not Enough”: Policy Learning, Transfer, and the Limits of Best Practices. The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society, 48 (2), 85-97.
McAdam, M., Debackere, K. (2018). Beyond ‘triple helix’ toward ‘quadruple helix’ models in regional innovation systems: Implications for theory and practice. R&D Management, 48 (1), 3–6.
Mendenhall, M. E., Bird, A. (2015). From cross-cultural management to global leadership: Evolution and adaptation. Journal of World Business, 51 (1), 115-126.
Miller, K., McAdam, R., McAdam, M. (2018). A systematic literature review of university technology transfer from a quadruple helix perspective: toward a research agenda. R&D Management, 48 (1), 7–24.
Musial, M. (2019). The Cultural Sector in the Context of the City Development Strategy: a Case Study. The WSB University in Poznan Research Journal, 85 (2), 91 -100.
Paquette, J., Redaelli, E. (2015). Art management and cultural policy research. Hampshire: Pelgrave Macmillan.
Patašienė, I., Patašius, M. (2014). Skaitmeninė dimensija sumaniajame mieste: Baltijos šalių miestų atvejis. Viešoji politika ir administravimas, 13 (3), 454-468.
Pauliukevičiūtė, A., Jucevičius, R. (2016). Strategiškumo kaip sumanumo dimensijos kultūros vadyboje vertinimas. Viešoji politika ir administravimas, 15 (3), 375-389.
Pauliukevičiūtė, A., Jucevičius, R. (2018). Six smartness dimensions in cultural management: social/cultural environment perspective. Business, Management and Education, 16 (1), 108–120.
Pereira, G. V., Cunha, M. A., Lampoltshammer, T. J., Parycek, P., Testa, M. G. (2017). Increasing collaboration and participation in smart city governance: a cross-case analysis of smart city initiatives. Information Technology for Development, 23 (3), 526-553.
Pereira, G. V., Parycek, P., Falco, E., Kleinhans, R. (2018). Smart governance in the context of smart cities: A literature review. Information Policy, 23 (2), 1–20.
Pollitt, Ch. (2016). Be prepared? An outside-in perspective on the future public sector in Europe. Public Policy and Administration, 31 (1), 3–28.
Rakšnys, A. V., Valickas, A., Vanagas, R. (2020). Challenges of creation and implementation of collaborative innovations in public sector organisations. Public policy and administration, 19, 9 -21.
Rehman, A., Alharthi, K. (2016). An Introduction to Research Paradigms. International Journal of Educational Investigations, 8 (3), 51-59.
Romani, L., Barmeyer, C., Primecz, H., Pilhofer, K. (2018). Cross-Cultural Management Studies: State of the Field in the Four Research Paradigms. International Studies of Management & Organization, 48, 247–263.
Salmelin, B. (2015). Open Innovation 2.0 Creates New Innovation Space. In: Open Innovation 2.0 – Yearbook 2015. European Commission, 21-24.
Scholl, H. J., Scholl, M. C. (2014). Smart Governance: A Roadmap for Research and Practice. Conference 2014 Proceedings. USA: iSchools, 163–176.
Shcherbina, E., Gorbenkova, E. (2018). Smart City Technologies for Sustainable Rural Development. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering. UK: IOP Publishing, 1-8.
Sinthupundaja, J., Chiadamrong, N. (2020). Examining Capabilities of Social Entrepreneurship for Shared Value Creation. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 11 (1), 1-22.
Šiugždinienė, J., Gaulė, E., Rauleckas, R. (2017). In search of smart public governance: the case of Lithuania. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 85 (3), 587-606.
Stanislovaitienė, J. (2016). Sumaniojo viešojo valdymo dimensijų raiška: Lietuvos atvejis. Daktaro disertacija. Kaunas: Kauno technologijos universitetas.
Thomas, D. C., Petereson, M. F. (2018). Cross-cultural management. Essential concepts. USA: SAGE Publications.
Torfing, J., Sørensen, E., Roiseland, A. (2016). Transforming the Public Sector into an Arena for Co-Creation: Barriers, Drivers, Benefits, and Ways Forward. Administration & Society, 1– 31.
Valkenburg, R., Ouden, E., Schreurs, M. A. (2016). Designing a smart society. In: Open innovation 2.0 2016 yearbook. European Comission, 87-92.
Varela, X. (2013). Core Consensus, Strategic Variations: Mapping Arts Management Graduate Education in the United States. Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society, 43 (2), 74-87.
Woronkowicz, J. (2018). Community Engagement and Cultural Building Projects. The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society, 48 (1), 32-43.
Yerznkyan, B., Gassner, L., Kara, A. (2017). Culture, Institutions, and Economic Performance. Montenegrin Journal of Economics, 13 (2), 71-80.
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case Study Research Design and Methods. Sage publications: USA.
Zhining, W., Shaohan, C., Huigang, L., Nianxin, W., Erwei, X. (2018). Intellectual capital and firm performance: the mediating role of innovation speed and quality. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 29 (18), 1-29.