Table 2 How the intrapreneurships model... | Emerald Publishing

Table 2

How the intrapreneurships model changed over time and the editing rules used in translations of the model in North municipality

North	Focus of the intrapreneurships model	Editing
2007–2009	The intrapreneurships model fits well with the municipal tradition of encouraging decentralization. Historically, the municipality has multiple experiences of organizing with the key signature of decentralization, for example in the form of local municipal boards in the 1980 and 1990s (Politicians, public officials) The intrapreneurships model represents the same form of organizing that we had in the mid- 1990s when our school was given a more autonomous position in relation to other schools by the local municipal board (Employees at the school) The model is a solution to the problem of increased competition from private schools in the municipality (Politicians, public officials) The model is an alternative to the “classic” public operating mode and also fits well with the ongoing debate on how we can enable entrepreneurship and innovation in the public sector. The model is used by a municipality that recently won an award for its work on quality improvement (Politicians, public officials)	The model is edited into something familiar to the local context by associations with the past (context) The model is edited into a solution to a problem (logic) The model is edited to fit a public debate on entrepreneurship and privatization of the public sector and a “role-model”-municipality (logic)
2010–2013	The model means that units governed by intrapreneurships should be autonomous, but not so autonomous that we risk equality for the pupils in our schools (Public officials) The model must grant the units governed by intrapreneurships more autonomy to reach advantages associated with self-governing schools and/or private schools (Employees at the school)	The model is edited in accordance with a public debate on risks with privatization of schools (logic) The model is edited in accordance with a public debate on entrepreneurship and privatization of the public (logic)
2014–2016	The intrapreneurships 2.0 model (new label), grants autonomy to the units based on the results of performance measurements, decided by the municipal education authority. Use of performance measurements is in line with the municipality’s new quality system (Politicians, public officials) The intrapreneurships 2.0 model gives limited and conditional autonomy to schools, which means that they don’t challenge the value of equality for pupils in the municipality (Politicians, public officials) The model no longer exist in the municipality, it is not the same thing as it was before (Employees at the school) The intrapreneurships 2.0 model is part of the municipal history and associated with the story of a freedom-fighting principal, a strong leader with big visions, who fought for decades for the school to become more autonomous in relation to the education authority. It is also associated with a reputation for good student results and innovation (Politicians, public officials, employees at the school)	The model is edited in accordance with a new model of performance measurement introduced in the municipality (logic) The model is edited in accordance with a public debate on privatization of schools as a cause of inequality (logic) The model is edited in accordance with the past (context) The model is edited to represent a story, with a “plot” connecting accounts to one another, consisting of a hero and the schools´ reputation as a success (formulation)

North	Focus of the intrapreneurships model	Editing
2007–2009	The intrapreneurships model fits well with the municipal tradition of encouraging decentralization. Historically, the municipality has multiple experiences of organizing with the key signature of decentralization, for example in the form of local municipal boards in the 1980 and 1990s (Politicians, public officials)The intrapreneurships model represents the same form of organizing that we had in the mid- 1990s when our school was given a more autonomous position in relation to other schools by the local municipal board (Employees at the school)The model is a solution to the problem of increased competition from private schools in the municipality (Politicians, public officials)The model is an alternative to the “classic” public operating mode and also fits well with the ongoing debate on how we can enable entrepreneurship and innovation in the public sector. The model is used by a municipality that recently won an award for its work on quality improvement (Politicians, public officials)	The model is edited into something familiar to the local context by associations with the past (context)The model is edited into a solution to a problem (logic)The model is edited to fit a public debate on entrepreneurship and privatization of the public sector and a “role-model”-municipality (logic)
2010–2013	The model means that units governed by intrapreneurships should be autonomous, but not so autonomous that we risk equality for the pupils in our schools (Public officials)The model must grant the units governed by intrapreneurships more autonomy to reach advantages associated with self-governing schools and/or private schools (Employees at the school)	The model is edited in accordance with a public debate on risks with privatization of schools (logic)The model is edited in accordance with a public debate on entrepreneurship and privatization of the public (logic)
2014–2016	The intrapreneurships 2.0 model (new label), grants autonomy to the units based on the results of performance measurements, decided by the municipal education authority. Use of performance measurements is in line with the municipality’s new quality system (Politicians, public officials)The intrapreneurships 2.0 model gives limited and conditional autonomy to schools, which means that they don’t challenge the value of equality for pupils in the municipality (Politicians, public officials)The model no longer exist in the municipality, it is not the same thing as it was before (Employees at the school)The intrapreneurships 2.0 model is part of the municipal history and associated with the story of a freedom-fighting principal, a strong leader with big visions, who fought for decades for the school to become more autonomous in relation to the education authority. It is also associated with a reputation for good student results and innovation (Politicians, public officials, employees at the school)	The model is edited in accordance with a new model of performance measurement introduced in the municipality (logic)The model is edited in accordance with a public debate on privatization of schools as a cause of inequality (logic)The model is edited in accordance with the past (context)The model is edited to represent a story, with a “plot” connecting accounts to one another, consisting of a hero and the schools´ reputation as a success (formulation)