Diversity in GovTech
Who’s Represented in Innovative Technology Supplied to Public Administration?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59490/dgo.2025.970Keywords:
GovTech, government technology, diversity management, public sector innovationAbstract
This study investigates the potential role of diversity in shaping innovation outcomes within the GovTech sector, an emerging domain where startups collaborate with public administrations to drive digital transformation. While GovTech is positioned as a vehicle for more agile, inclusive, and citizen-oriented public services, its effectiveness hinges on the extent to which it mirrors the populations it serves. Grounded in theories of diversity management and diffusion of innovation, this research explores how the demographic composition of GovTech founders compares to public administration employees, the broader startup ecosystem, and the general citizenry in Germany. The study employs a mixed-methods approach, combining 108 expert interviews with GovTech founders and comparative analysis using secondary data from national datasets. It focuses on three diversity dimensions: gender, migration background, and socio-economic (labor vs. academic) background. The findings reveal substantial misalignments. GovTech startups are heavily male-dominated (85.7% male founders), starkly contrasting with the higher female representation in public administration (58.6%) and the near gender parity in the citizenry. Migration background is also underrepresented among GovTech founders (22.7%) relative to citizens (28.6%), though aligned with general startup trends. GovTech shows relatively strong socio-economic inclusivity, with 62.8% of founders from labor backgrounds, exceeding
both startup and citizen benchmarks. These demographic mismatches raise concerns about the representational legitimacy and inclusiveness of GovTech solutions, which may limit their relevance, adoption, and impact. Public administrations, while more gender-diverse, also exhibit gaps, particularly in migration and socio-economic representation, potentially compounding the dis-
connect between technology providers and end-users. The study proposes strategic responses, including inclusive procurement policies, support for diverse founders, and cross-sector alignment initiatives to strengthen equity in digital public services.
Downloads
References
Bartoli, A., & Rouet, G. (2023). Diversity and inclusion: Isomorphism,” washing process”, or actual strategic approach? Global, Social and Technological Development and Sustainability.
Bassett-Jones, N. (2005). The paradox of diversity management, creativity and innovation. Creativity and Innovation Management, 14, 169–175. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8691.00337.x.
Battaglio, R. P., Belardinelli, P., Bellé, N., & Cantarelli, P. (2019). Behavioral public administration ad fontes: A synthesis of research on bounded rationality, cognitive biases, and nudging in public organizations. Public Administration Review, 79, 304–320. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12994.
Bauer, L. T. (2025, March). Commercialization for public value - a path for civic technology innovation to diffuse into public administrations. In L. Ackermann, F. Schäfer, & M. Wimmer (Eds.), 1st symposium on data driven smart city science and transferability (dascit) (pp. 1–15). Lecture Notes in Informatics (LNI).
Belanger, F., et al. (2012). Theorizing in information systems research using focus groups. Australasian Journal of Information Systems, 17(2).
Bertelsmann Stiftung. (2024). Startups und soziale herkunft [Accessed: 2025-01-18]. [link]
Bharosa, N. (2022). The rise of govtech: Trojan horse or blessing in disguise? a research agenda. Government Information Quarterly, 39, 101692. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2022.101692.
Bharosa, N., & Janowski, T. (2024). The govtech challenge - govtech and public value creation. Proceedings of the 25th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, 1043–1045. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3657054.3659125.
Bundesinstitut für Bevölkerungsforschung (BiB). (2022, March). Vielfalt in der öffentlichen verwaltung nimmt langsam zu [Accessed: 2025-01-18]. [link]
Bundesverband Deutsche Startups e.V. (2023). Migrant founders monitor 2023 [Accessed: 2025-01-18]. [link]
Buolamwini, J. (2018). Why this matters [Accessed: 2025-04-08]. [link]
Chandler, R. C. (1984). The public administrator as representative citizen: A new role for the new century. Public Administration Review, 44, 196. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/975564.
Chen, V. H.-H. (2014). Facilitating social inclusion of migrant workers through digital game play. GlobDev 2014.
Choi, S., & Rainey, H. G. (2010). Managing diversity in u.s. federal agencies: Effects of diversity and diversity management on employee perceptions of organizational performance. Public Administration Review, 70, 109–121. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2009.02115.x.
Conboy, K., Fitzgerald, G., & Mathiassen, L. (2012). Qualitative methods research in information systems: Motivations, themes, and contributions. European Journal of Information Systems, 21(2), 113–118.
Denhardt, J. V., & Denhardt, R. B. (2015, March). The new public service (4th ed.). Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315709765.
Desai, A., & Manoharan, A. P. (2024). Digital transformation and public administration: The impacts of india’s digital public infrastructure. International Journal of Public Administration, 47, 575–578. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2024.2350762.
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101.
Edquist, C., & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, J. M. (2012). Public procurement for innovation as mission-oriented innovation policy. Research Policy, 41, 1757–1769. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.04.022.
European Migration Network. (2024, March). Person with a migratory background - glossary [Accessed: 2025-01-18]. [link].
Frumkin, P., & Galaskiewicz, J. (2004). Institutional isomorphism and public sector organizations. Journal of public administration research and theory, 14(3), 283–307.
Fund, G. (2024, July). We invest in startups that modernize the operations of government.
Grandia, J., & Meehan, J. (2017). Public procurement as a policy tool: Using procurement to reach desired outcomes in society. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 30, 302–309. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-03-2017-0066.
Gross-Gołacka, E., Kusterka-Jefmańska, M., Jefmański, B., Kupczyk, T., & Warwas, I. (2022). Diversity management in organizations – the measuring of the benefits: Visegrad group (v4) countries perspective. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2022.684.
Hickey, P. J., Erfani, A., & Cui, Q. (2022). Use of linkedin data and machine learning to analyze gender differences in construction career paths. Journal of Management in Engineering, 38(6), 04022060.
Isenberg, D. J. (2010). How to start an entrepreneurial revolution. Harvard Business Review, 1–11.
Kolain, M., & Hillemann, D. (2022). Government technology (govtech). SSRN Electronic Journal. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4051971.
Li, J., & Chung, K. (2020). Decomposing isomorphism: What drives similarity in the adoption of new public management? Administration & Society, 52, 375–404. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399718811307.
Lodge, M., & Wegrich, K. (2005). Control over government: Institutional isomorphism and governance dynamics in german public administration. Policy Studies Journal, 33(2), 213–233.
McGrandle, J. (2017). Understanding diversity management in the public sector: A case for contingency theory. International Journal of Public Administration, 40(6), 526–537.
McNutt, J. G., Justice, J. B., Melitski, J. M., Ahn, M. J., Siddiqui, S. R., Carter, D. T., & Kline, A. D. (2016). The diffusion of civic technology and open government in the united states. Information Polity, 21, 153–170. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3233/IP-160385.
Niehaves, B. (2011). Iceberg ahead: On electronic government research and societal aging. Government Information Quarterly, 28, 310–319. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2011.01.003.
Niehaves, B., & Klassen, G. (2024, July). Govtech in europe: Influencing factors, common requirements and recommendations.
Nose, M. (2023, November). Inclusive govtech: Enhancing efficiency and equity through public service digitalization, International Monetary Fund.
O’Connor, S., & Liu, H. (2024). Gender bias perpetuation and mitigation in ai technologies: Challenges and opportunities. AI & Society, 39, 2045–2057. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-023-01675-4.
of the European Union, C. (2024, March). Regulation (eu) 2024/903 of the european parliament and of the council of 13 march 2024 laying down measures for a high level of public sector interoperability across the union (interoperable europe act). [link]
Oppong, N. Y. (2013). Talent management: A bundle of hurdles. Public Policy and Administrative Research, 3(8), 63–73.
Sabharwal, M., Hijal-Moghrabi, I., & Royster, M. (2014). Preparing future public servants: Role of diversity in public administration. Public Administration Quarterly, 38(2), 206–245. Retrieved January 20, 2025, from [link]
Sabharwal, M., Levine, H., & D’Agostino, M. (2018). A conceptual content analysis of 75 years of diversity research in public administration. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 38, 248–267. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X16671368.
Saunders, M. (2022, April). Pursuing greater diversity in public procurement [Accessed: 2025-04-08]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17615/1nrp-vh53.
Schultze, U., & Avital, M. (2011). Designing interviews to generate rich data for information systems research. Information and Organization, 21, 1–16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2010.11.001.
Selke, D., Kilian, M., & Jonge, R. D. (2024). Govtech in europe - the govtech opportunity.
Statista. (2021). Soziale herkunft der studierenden in deutschland seit 1982 [Accessed: 2025-01-18]. [link]
Statista. (2023). Bevölkerung mit und ohne migrationshintergrund nach erwerbsbeteiligung 2023 [Accessed: 2025-01-18]. [link].
Statista. (2024). Startups in deutschland - statista thema [Accessed: 2025-01-18]. [link]
Tseng, F.-M., Jade, N. B. N., Weng, H.-H. R., & Lu, F.-Y. (2024). Effects of team diversity, emergent leadership, and shared leadership on team performance in a multi-stage innovation and creativity crowdsourcing competition. The International Journal of Management Education, 22, 100948. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2024.100948.
vom Brocke, J., Simons, A., Niehaves, B., & Cleven, A. (2009). Reconstructing the giant: On the importance of rigour in documenting the literature search process. 17th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS).
vom Brocke, J., Simons, A., Riemer, K., Niehaves, B., Plattfaut, R., & Cleven, A. (2015). Standing on the shoulders of giants: Challenges and recommendations of literature search in information systems research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.03709.
Wise, L. R., & Tschirhart, M. (2000). Examining empirical evidence on diversity effects: How useful is diversity research for public-sector managers? Public Administration Review, 60(5), 386–394.
Wyszynski, M. (2020). Der einfluss von framing, medienpriming, vorurteilen und debiasing auf die bewertung eines betrugs an der solidargemeinschaft [Doctoral dissertation, Construcutor University]
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Conference Proceedings Volume
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Luca T. Bauer, Marc Wyszynski, Björn Niehaves
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
