Pub Date : 2021-11-29DOI: 10.1177/00208523211058865
Tao Li, Zhenyu M. Wang
The prevalence of top-heavy bureaucracies in non-democracies cannot be explained by the theories of Parkinson, Tullock, Niskanen, or Simon or by classical managerial theories. When bureaucracy positions carry rents, the competition for promotion becomes a rent-seeking process. Borrowing the career-tournament theory framework from managerial scholarship, we argue that top-heavy bureaucracy resembles a tournament with too many finalists. When rent is centralized at the top (i.e. power centralization), as is the case in many non-democracies, the optimal bureaucracy should be top-heavy, accommodating and encouraging relatively more finalists at the top to compete for the final big prize. We provide suggestive evidence by analyzing ministry organizations in China (1993–2014) and Russia (2002–2015). After some fluctuations, the shape of Russian ministries eventually converged with that of China. In the steady state, their ministry shapes are far more top-heavy than what is prescribed by managerial theories. At the micro-level, ministry power centralization, measured by the perceived influence of the ministers, is correlated with ministry top-heaviness in Russia. Points for practitioners Our theory suggests that a top-heavy authoritarian bureaucratic structure naturally follows from a back-loaded sequential career tournament and an effort-maximizing bureaucratic leader. Our findings also suggest that Chinese and Russian ministries both converge to a highly top-heavy structure in the long run. We demonstrate that the top-heavy structure first arose during the planned-economy experiment in the Soviet Union. Our research sheds new light on public-sector reforms that aim to reduce bureaucracy top-heaviness in autocracies.
{"title":"The top-heavy shape of authoritarian bureaucracy: evidence from Russia and China","authors":"Tao Li, Zhenyu M. Wang","doi":"10.1177/00208523211058865","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523211058865","url":null,"abstract":"The prevalence of top-heavy bureaucracies in non-democracies cannot be explained by the theories of Parkinson, Tullock, Niskanen, or Simon or by classical managerial theories. When bureaucracy positions carry rents, the competition for promotion becomes a rent-seeking process. Borrowing the career-tournament theory framework from managerial scholarship, we argue that top-heavy bureaucracy resembles a tournament with too many finalists. When rent is centralized at the top (i.e. power centralization), as is the case in many non-democracies, the optimal bureaucracy should be top-heavy, accommodating and encouraging relatively more finalists at the top to compete for the final big prize. We provide suggestive evidence by analyzing ministry organizations in China (1993–2014) and Russia (2002–2015). After some fluctuations, the shape of Russian ministries eventually converged with that of China. In the steady state, their ministry shapes are far more top-heavy than what is prescribed by managerial theories. At the micro-level, ministry power centralization, measured by the perceived influence of the ministers, is correlated with ministry top-heaviness in Russia. Points for practitioners Our theory suggests that a top-heavy authoritarian bureaucratic structure naturally follows from a back-loaded sequential career tournament and an effort-maximizing bureaucratic leader. Our findings also suggest that Chinese and Russian ministries both converge to a highly top-heavy structure in the long run. We demonstrate that the top-heavy structure first arose during the planned-economy experiment in the Soviet Union. Our research sheds new light on public-sector reforms that aim to reduce bureaucracy top-heaviness in autocracies.","PeriodicalId":47811,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Administrative Sciences","volume":"89 1","pages":"703 - 721"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2021-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43193110","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-26DOI: 10.1177/00208523211058651
S. Sahraoui
Managing the “Opportunity of the Covid-19 crisis” at the International Institute of Administrative Sciences Public administration will never be the same during and after Covid-19—if there is ever an after Covid-19. Sabine Kuhlman, International Institute of Administrative Sciences (IIAS) Vice President for Western Europe, developed along with a number of colleagues (Kuhlmann et al., 2021), a cross-country comparative analysis in the September 2021 special issue of the International Review of Administrative Sciences (IRAS) on “Testing the crisis: Opportunity management and governance of the Covid-19 pandemic”. The comparison shows that opportunities arise during crises and the extent of these opportunities increases with the magnitude of the crisis. Needless to say that the Covid-19 crisis is a global cataclysm of a magnitude hardly seen before. Its longevity makes is all the more trying for a variety of actors including governments and public administration. The opportunities are, however, immense as well. According to Kuhlman and her co-authors, “opportunity management” by various political and administrative actors will depend on both institutional factors and individual ones. Institutional factors consist of the institutional starting conditions, administrative cultures and historical path dependencies. Individual factors consist of the strategies of actors who will see in the crisis a welcome opportunity to demonstrate leadership and effective governance. In these annual chronicles, and other than referring the reader to the excellent special issue of IRAS and in particular Kuhlman et al.’s contribution, I would like to review the work of the IIAS during this year and plans for the years ahead in terms of the conceptual framework laid out by the guest editors to the special issue. How did the IIAS, through the agency of its secretariat, manage opportunities arising from the Covid-19 crisis. It goes without saying that the special issue is about managing the health crisis itself at the
{"title":"Chronicle of the International Institute of Administrative Sciences","authors":"S. Sahraoui","doi":"10.1177/00208523211058651","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523211058651","url":null,"abstract":"Managing the “Opportunity of the Covid-19 crisis” at the International Institute of Administrative Sciences Public administration will never be the same during and after Covid-19—if there is ever an after Covid-19. Sabine Kuhlman, International Institute of Administrative Sciences (IIAS) Vice President for Western Europe, developed along with a number of colleagues (Kuhlmann et al., 2021), a cross-country comparative analysis in the September 2021 special issue of the International Review of Administrative Sciences (IRAS) on “Testing the crisis: Opportunity management and governance of the Covid-19 pandemic”. The comparison shows that opportunities arise during crises and the extent of these opportunities increases with the magnitude of the crisis. Needless to say that the Covid-19 crisis is a global cataclysm of a magnitude hardly seen before. Its longevity makes is all the more trying for a variety of actors including governments and public administration. The opportunities are, however, immense as well. According to Kuhlman and her co-authors, “opportunity management” by various political and administrative actors will depend on both institutional factors and individual ones. Institutional factors consist of the institutional starting conditions, administrative cultures and historical path dependencies. Individual factors consist of the strategies of actors who will see in the crisis a welcome opportunity to demonstrate leadership and effective governance. In these annual chronicles, and other than referring the reader to the excellent special issue of IRAS and in particular Kuhlman et al.’s contribution, I would like to review the work of the IIAS during this year and plans for the years ahead in terms of the conceptual framework laid out by the guest editors to the special issue. How did the IIAS, through the agency of its secretariat, manage opportunities arising from the Covid-19 crisis. It goes without saying that the special issue is about managing the health crisis itself at the","PeriodicalId":47811,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Administrative Sciences","volume":"87 1","pages":"980 - 984"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2021-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41704179","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-26DOI: 10.1177/00208523211058859
Samuel Defacqz, C. Dupuy
Recent scholarship has focused on how coordination mechanisms are implemented by public sector organizations, thereby paying attention to coordination as a process. This article studies the coordination process that resulted in the implementation of the interministerial financial information system of the French central state—named Chorus. Chorus is a case of an unlikely coordination process rolled out in the non-conducive context of the French Napoleonic Administration. Chorus aimed at connecting all ministries’ administrative services to a shared information system, while ministries were previously using their own systems and applications. Based on the literature on mechanisms of coordination, and focusing on the role of existing institutions and the actors involved in the coordination process, the analysis has two main results. First, AIFE—“Agence pour l’informatique financière de l’État”, the agency in charge of the implementation of Chorus—steered the process by developing a stepwise network-based interministerial strategy. Second, the coordination steered by AIFE resulted in a transformative change of the French state's financial and accounting structures through a layering process of change. Thereby, the article contributes to the empirical analysis of public administrations’ recent changes toward increased coordination at the central level by studying recent reforms in France and their outcomes. Points for practitioners This article shows that coordination processes within public sector organizations are context sensitive and depend on the behavior of the “agents of change” in charge of these processes. In contexts that are non-conducive to transformative change (e.g. siloed structures, presence of veto players), the set-up of agile, resourceful and autonomous change agents is key. When veto players may oppose structural change, the article suggests setting up network-based coordination processes aiming at incremental evolutions inducing transformative change.
{"title":"A transformative change through a coordination process and a steering agency. The case of the financial information system of the French central state","authors":"Samuel Defacqz, C. Dupuy","doi":"10.1177/00208523211058859","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523211058859","url":null,"abstract":"Recent scholarship has focused on how coordination mechanisms are implemented by public sector organizations, thereby paying attention to coordination as a process. This article studies the coordination process that resulted in the implementation of the interministerial financial information system of the French central state—named Chorus. Chorus is a case of an unlikely coordination process rolled out in the non-conducive context of the French Napoleonic Administration. Chorus aimed at connecting all ministries’ administrative services to a shared information system, while ministries were previously using their own systems and applications. Based on the literature on mechanisms of coordination, and focusing on the role of existing institutions and the actors involved in the coordination process, the analysis has two main results. First, AIFE—“Agence pour l’informatique financière de l’État”, the agency in charge of the implementation of Chorus—steered the process by developing a stepwise network-based interministerial strategy. Second, the coordination steered by AIFE resulted in a transformative change of the French state's financial and accounting structures through a layering process of change. Thereby, the article contributes to the empirical analysis of public administrations’ recent changes toward increased coordination at the central level by studying recent reforms in France and their outcomes. Points for practitioners This article shows that coordination processes within public sector organizations are context sensitive and depend on the behavior of the “agents of change” in charge of these processes. In contexts that are non-conducive to transformative change (e.g. siloed structures, presence of veto players), the set-up of agile, resourceful and autonomous change agents is key. When veto players may oppose structural change, the article suggests setting up network-based coordination processes aiming at incremental evolutions inducing transformative change.","PeriodicalId":47811,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Administrative Sciences","volume":"89 1","pages":"775 - 790"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2021-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48476585","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-16DOI: 10.1177/00208523211045251
Fabian Homberg, Jens Mohrenweiser
This article disentangles the country-specific institutional system at the macro level from individual-level attraction and socialization in measuring public service-oriented work motives across European countries through public–private sector comparisons. We argue that country-specific institutions shape the level of public service-oriented work motives of each country and thereby generate level differences across countries. In contrast, public–private sector differences, (i.e. gaps), in public service-oriented work motives within a country reflect aspects of individual-level attraction and socialization. We use the 2005 and 2010 waves of the European Working Conditions Survey and demonstrate that the levels and gaps are empirically distinct phenomena, contrary to current treatment in the literature. We conclude that the distinction between levels and gaps can advance understanding of the antecedents of public service-oriented work motives and support the institutional theory of public service-oriented work motives. Points for practitioners This article argues and provides evidence for the fact that levels of work motives oriented towards public service that are visible in a cross-country comparison should not be confused with the gap of such work motives inside one country. This distinction is important because in countries where gaps between the sectors are almost non-existent and levels are generally high, interventions geared towards public service-oriented work motives are less likely to be effective.
{"title":"Public service-oriented work motives across Europe: A cross-country, multi-level investigation","authors":"Fabian Homberg, Jens Mohrenweiser","doi":"10.1177/00208523211045251","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523211045251","url":null,"abstract":"This article disentangles the country-specific institutional system at the macro level from individual-level attraction and socialization in measuring public service-oriented work motives across European countries through public–private sector comparisons. We argue that country-specific institutions shape the level of public service-oriented work motives of each country and thereby generate level differences across countries. In contrast, public–private sector differences, (i.e. gaps), in public service-oriented work motives within a country reflect aspects of individual-level attraction and socialization. We use the 2005 and 2010 waves of the European Working Conditions Survey and demonstrate that the levels and gaps are empirically distinct phenomena, contrary to current treatment in the literature. We conclude that the distinction between levels and gaps can advance understanding of the antecedents of public service-oriented work motives and support the institutional theory of public service-oriented work motives. Points for practitioners This article argues and provides evidence for the fact that levels of work motives oriented towards public service that are visible in a cross-country comparison should not be confused with the gap of such work motives inside one country. This distinction is important because in countries where gaps between the sectors are almost non-existent and levels are generally high, interventions geared towards public service-oriented work motives are less likely to be effective.","PeriodicalId":47811,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Administrative Sciences","volume":"89 1","pages":"667 - 684"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2021-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44727077","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-11DOI: 10.1177/00208523211054876
Sungjoo Choi, Soonae Park
Scholars have argued that utilization of quantitative performance indicators by public organizations could generate unintended consequences that might outweigh the benefits of performance measurement. We examined the relationships between goal ambiguity and external control, and distortive practices in performance measurement in public organizations. The data from 47 agencies of the central and local governments in Korea were analyzed using fixed-effect ordered logistic regression methods. The results showed that goal ambiguity was positively and significantly associated with distortive practices in performance measurement. Goal ambiguity may incentivize public employees to misuse performance information to obtain rewards for higher performance ratings. Contrary to our expectation, reinforced external control was negatively and significantly related to distortive behaviors in performance measurement. Higher work autonomy was not significantly associated with manipulation of performance information. Employees with higher intrinsic motivation were less likely to distort performance measures, whereas the ones with higher extrinsic motivation were more likely to misuse performance information to achieve higher performance ratings. Points for practitioners To avoid the potential distortions in performance measurement, public managers should adopt a refined measurement model of performance customized to the unique characteristics of public services. Multiple sets of measures need to be developed and managed properly to respond to complex political environments which involve different key values and the stakeholders in the policy processes, and the nature of public service products and outcomes. Reinforced behavioral control in the process of measuring performance will also be necessary.
{"title":"Exploring performance paradox in public organizations: Analyzing the predictors of distortive behaviors in performance measurement","authors":"Sungjoo Choi, Soonae Park","doi":"10.1177/00208523211054876","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523211054876","url":null,"abstract":"Scholars have argued that utilization of quantitative performance indicators by public organizations could generate unintended consequences that might outweigh the benefits of performance measurement. We examined the relationships between goal ambiguity and external control, and distortive practices in performance measurement in public organizations. The data from 47 agencies of the central and local governments in Korea were analyzed using fixed-effect ordered logistic regression methods. The results showed that goal ambiguity was positively and significantly associated with distortive practices in performance measurement. Goal ambiguity may incentivize public employees to misuse performance information to obtain rewards for higher performance ratings. Contrary to our expectation, reinforced external control was negatively and significantly related to distortive behaviors in performance measurement. Higher work autonomy was not significantly associated with manipulation of performance information. Employees with higher intrinsic motivation were less likely to distort performance measures, whereas the ones with higher extrinsic motivation were more likely to misuse performance information to achieve higher performance ratings. Points for practitioners To avoid the potential distortions in performance measurement, public managers should adopt a refined measurement model of performance customized to the unique characteristics of public services. Multiple sets of measures need to be developed and managed properly to respond to complex political environments which involve different key values and the stakeholders in the policy processes, and the nature of public service products and outcomes. Reinforced behavioral control in the process of measuring performance will also be necessary.","PeriodicalId":47811,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Administrative Sciences","volume":"89 1","pages":"501 - 518"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2021-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46360224","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-26DOI: 10.1177/00208523211047355
Lars Dorren, Mirijam Böhme
Motivated reasoning theory is a psychological theory that reads that policymakers interpret evidence in ways that fit their preferences rather than assessing it neutrally. The theory is increasingly used to explain policy processes as part of a behavioural approach to public administration, but it has limitations. As psychological research relies on experiments, the question remains what role motivated reasoning plays in real-world policy processes. Based on ethnographic observations collected during the planning phase of a large infrastructure project, this study confirms that motivated reasoning explains how people interpret information. However, it also shows that peoples’ context has a great impact on their reasoning. Ultimately, we suggest that a focus on time and real-world context is essential in understanding processes of reasoning, for which methodological diversification is needed. Points for practitioners People are inclined to interpret information in light of existing attitudes, rather than approach it neutrally. They read it in such a way that it confirms their attitudes, or are critical of it when it does not. Conflicts caused by differentiating views can be better understood by looking at the attitudes that inform these views. Discussions that might seem aimless at first might have secondary functions such as building trust amongst participants.
{"title":"The practice of motivated reasoning: observing knowledge use in real-world policy processes","authors":"Lars Dorren, Mirijam Böhme","doi":"10.1177/00208523211047355","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523211047355","url":null,"abstract":"Motivated reasoning theory is a psychological theory that reads that policymakers interpret evidence in ways that fit their preferences rather than assessing it neutrally. The theory is increasingly used to explain policy processes as part of a behavioural approach to public administration, but it has limitations. As psychological research relies on experiments, the question remains what role motivated reasoning plays in real-world policy processes. Based on ethnographic observations collected during the planning phase of a large infrastructure project, this study confirms that motivated reasoning explains how people interpret information. However, it also shows that peoples’ context has a great impact on their reasoning. Ultimately, we suggest that a focus on time and real-world context is essential in understanding processes of reasoning, for which methodological diversification is needed. Points for practitioners People are inclined to interpret information in light of existing attitudes, rather than approach it neutrally. They read it in such a way that it confirms their attitudes, or are critical of it when it does not. Conflicts caused by differentiating views can be better understood by looking at the attitudes that inform these views. Discussions that might seem aimless at first might have secondary functions such as building trust amongst participants.","PeriodicalId":47811,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Administrative Sciences","volume":"89 1","pages":"398 - 414"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2021-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41609338","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-21DOI: 10.1177/00208523211051839
Daniela Pianezzi, Yuji Mori, S. Uddin
Previous studies have overlooked how partnerships between public and private actors (PPPs) play out as an effect of cultural and historical conditions in the context of a smart city. Our analysis investigates the peculiar context of Japan, where smart city initiatives stem from a historically and culturally embedded “partnership” between government and businesses. Unlike other smart city settings, the adoption of a neoliberal logic of an all-embracing market world by prioritizing business interests over other civic issues is not inevitable. This paper contributes to the literature on PPPs and smart cities by presenting the case of a partnership between public and private actors that overcomes the antagonistic and transactional relationship problematized in previous studies. We demonstrate that the workings of PPPs are historically and culturally embedded. Thus, we caution policy-makers against adopting a universal framework for partnerships in smart city initiatives. In the case of Japan, we advocate for long term orientations of projects instead of the short-term goals espoused by smart city initiatives.
{"title":"Public–private partnership in a smart city: A curious case in Japan","authors":"Daniela Pianezzi, Yuji Mori, S. Uddin","doi":"10.1177/00208523211051839","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523211051839","url":null,"abstract":"Previous studies have overlooked how partnerships between public and private actors (PPPs) play out as an effect of cultural and historical conditions in the context of a smart city. Our analysis investigates the peculiar context of Japan, where smart city initiatives stem from a historically and culturally embedded “partnership” between government and businesses. Unlike other smart city settings, the adoption of a neoliberal logic of an all-embracing market world by prioritizing business interests over other civic issues is not inevitable. This paper contributes to the literature on PPPs and smart cities by presenting the case of a partnership between public and private actors that overcomes the antagonistic and transactional relationship problematized in previous studies. We demonstrate that the workings of PPPs are historically and culturally embedded. Thus, we caution policy-makers against adopting a universal framework for partnerships in smart city initiatives. In the case of Japan, we advocate for long term orientations of projects instead of the short-term goals espoused by smart city initiatives.","PeriodicalId":47811,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Administrative Sciences","volume":"89 1","pages":"632 - 647"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2021-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44206576","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-19DOI: 10.1177/00208523211048167
J. Hughes, K. Orr, M. Yusoff
This qualitative study provides empirical knowledge and develops theory about the role of strategic management in Malaysian local government. As the country addresses the grand challenge of economic growth amid enduring national aspirations of moving from developing to fully developed status, the analysis identifies six approaches to strategic management across nine Malaysian local authorities. Rather than presenting a linear story of progression, the six models of strategizing in Malaysia illuminate the governance traditions that co-exist in this setting. The study examines the assumptions about public management that underpin the different approaches and relates these to the country's inheritance of classical public administration and centralized government, the introduction of New Public Management, and the subsequent emergence of features of New Public Governance. It contributes to theory by providing an analysis of the role of strategy in each of the three governance traditions and connects debates about local governance with scholarship on strategic management. It also contributes to the emerging literature on strategizing for grand challenges and the limited repository of such studies located in a public sector context. The article ends by identifying the implications for policy and practice and suggesting areas for further research. Points for practitioners This study highlights the need for collaboration to address strategic meta problems, manage economic pressures and deliver public services. The six approaches to strategy development presented provide a set of models and frames through which practitioners may assess their local environment. Our typology offers a basis for cross-sectoral learning and reflection, including ways of diagnosing contextual variables and developing strategic knowledge. The Malaysian case shows how the context of strategy formation has been affected by the shift from local government to governance, as well as by interacting colonial legacies.
{"title":"Strategizing for grand challenges: economic development and governance traditions in Malaysian local government","authors":"J. Hughes, K. Orr, M. Yusoff","doi":"10.1177/00208523211048167","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523211048167","url":null,"abstract":"This qualitative study provides empirical knowledge and develops theory about the role of strategic management in Malaysian local government. As the country addresses the grand challenge of economic growth amid enduring national aspirations of moving from developing to fully developed status, the analysis identifies six approaches to strategic management across nine Malaysian local authorities. Rather than presenting a linear story of progression, the six models of strategizing in Malaysia illuminate the governance traditions that co-exist in this setting. The study examines the assumptions about public management that underpin the different approaches and relates these to the country's inheritance of classical public administration and centralized government, the introduction of New Public Management, and the subsequent emergence of features of New Public Governance. It contributes to theory by providing an analysis of the role of strategy in each of the three governance traditions and connects debates about local governance with scholarship on strategic management. It also contributes to the emerging literature on strategizing for grand challenges and the limited repository of such studies located in a public sector context. The article ends by identifying the implications for policy and practice and suggesting areas for further research. Points for practitioners This study highlights the need for collaboration to address strategic meta problems, manage economic pressures and deliver public services. The six approaches to strategy development presented provide a set of models and frames through which practitioners may assess their local environment. Our typology offers a basis for cross-sectoral learning and reflection, including ways of diagnosing contextual variables and developing strategic knowledge. The Malaysian case shows how the context of strategy formation has been affected by the shift from local government to governance, as well as by interacting colonial legacies.","PeriodicalId":47811,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Administrative Sciences","volume":"89 1","pages":"363 - 380"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2021-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42934407","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-19DOI: 10.1177/00208523211039740
Monika Simmler, Giulia Canova, K. Schedler
Advanced technology is not only transforming the public sector in general but is also increasingly transmuting the criminal justice system. Smart applications are designed to predict crimes, automate legal proceedings, and predict recidivism. We argue that such use of intelligent technology to optimize police work, criminal justice, and law enforcement is ultimately serving to establish a “smart criminal justice.” However, not every use of technology is intelligent or “smart,” per se. Based on a literature analysis, we explore the meaning of “smartness” from a descriptive and normative perspective, in order to develop a catalog of decisive criteria. We identify the use of technology as a basic prerequisite, and efficiency, effectiveness, and participation as normative criteria for any smart initiative in the public sector. Considering the specifics of the criminal justice system, these criteria can be expanded by claims related to legality, equality, and transparency. In sum, this article presents and discusses guidelines for assessing the usefulness and legitimacy of technical innovations in the criminal justice system. The catalog developed here will facilitate practitioners and policy-makers in determining when the use of technology in criminal justice is actually smart, and more importantly, when it is not. Points for practitioners Advanced technology is increasingly being used in the public sector in general and the criminal justice system in particular, bringing opportunities as well as substantial risk. The use of technology has to adhere to normative principles to be considered as “smart criminal justice.” This article presents a list of normative criteria that can be used in practice to assess whether technology in criminal justice is used smartly. Practitioners are encouraged to use this catalog as a guide for procurement, implementation, and evaluation processes.
{"title":"Smart criminal justice: Phenomena and normative requirements","authors":"Monika Simmler, Giulia Canova, K. Schedler","doi":"10.1177/00208523211039740","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523211039740","url":null,"abstract":"Advanced technology is not only transforming the public sector in general but is also increasingly transmuting the criminal justice system. Smart applications are designed to predict crimes, automate legal proceedings, and predict recidivism. We argue that such use of intelligent technology to optimize police work, criminal justice, and law enforcement is ultimately serving to establish a “smart criminal justice.” However, not every use of technology is intelligent or “smart,” per se. Based on a literature analysis, we explore the meaning of “smartness” from a descriptive and normative perspective, in order to develop a catalog of decisive criteria. We identify the use of technology as a basic prerequisite, and efficiency, effectiveness, and participation as normative criteria for any smart initiative in the public sector. Considering the specifics of the criminal justice system, these criteria can be expanded by claims related to legality, equality, and transparency. In sum, this article presents and discusses guidelines for assessing the usefulness and legitimacy of technical innovations in the criminal justice system. The catalog developed here will facilitate practitioners and policy-makers in determining when the use of technology in criminal justice is actually smart, and more importantly, when it is not. Points for practitioners Advanced technology is increasingly being used in the public sector in general and the criminal justice system in particular, bringing opportunities as well as substantial risk. The use of technology has to adhere to normative principles to be considered as “smart criminal justice.” This article presents a list of normative criteria that can be used in practice to assess whether technology in criminal justice is used smartly. Practitioners are encouraged to use this catalog as a guide for procurement, implementation, and evaluation processes.","PeriodicalId":47811,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Administrative Sciences","volume":"89 1","pages":"415 - 432"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2021-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42278925","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-19DOI: 10.1177/00208523211047093
Camilla Wanckel
This study examines the institutionalization of information technologies for policy formulation by investigating the case of eNAP. The digital tool was introduced in the spring of 2018 with the aim of supporting and improving sustainability impact assessments (SIAs) within the German Federal Government. Applying a neo-institutional perspective, this study shows how a tool like eNAP is embedded into prevailing regulative, normative, and cultural–cognitive structures. Findings from 10 semi-structured interviews indicate that the application of eNAP varies according to intra-ministerial coordination practices and portfolio-specific information-processing schemata. Overall, the tool serves to translate the abstract regulation to conduct an SIA, as well as to translate the vague norm of “sustainability” into a concrete assessment requirement, thereby helping increase policy officials’ awareness of sustainability goals. However, consistent with previous studies, great importance is not attached to SIAs in policy formulation, and prevailing norms and routines make the implementation of eNAP to increase the use of evidence or in-depth considerations of policy alternatives and their consequences unlikely. Points for practitioners Information and communication technologies (ICTs) provide new opportunities to support ex-ante policy evaluations. Practitioners enforcing ICTs for impact assessments should take a comprehensive perspective on the institutional context because both formal organizational structures and implicit expectations, habits and routines affect how policy officials use these tools. Technology alone does not improve policy evaluations, and a misfit between regulative, normative and cultural–cognitive institutional elements can lead to merely symbolic displays of impact assessments through the means of digital tools.
{"title":"Introducing a digital tool for sustainability impact assessments within the German Federal Government: A neo-institutional perspective","authors":"Camilla Wanckel","doi":"10.1177/00208523211047093","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523211047093","url":null,"abstract":"This study examines the institutionalization of information technologies for policy formulation by investigating the case of eNAP. The digital tool was introduced in the spring of 2018 with the aim of supporting and improving sustainability impact assessments (SIAs) within the German Federal Government. Applying a neo-institutional perspective, this study shows how a tool like eNAP is embedded into prevailing regulative, normative, and cultural–cognitive structures. Findings from 10 semi-structured interviews indicate that the application of eNAP varies according to intra-ministerial coordination practices and portfolio-specific information-processing schemata. Overall, the tool serves to translate the abstract regulation to conduct an SIA, as well as to translate the vague norm of “sustainability” into a concrete assessment requirement, thereby helping increase policy officials’ awareness of sustainability goals. However, consistent with previous studies, great importance is not attached to SIAs in policy formulation, and prevailing norms and routines make the implementation of eNAP to increase the use of evidence or in-depth considerations of policy alternatives and their consequences unlikely. Points for practitioners Information and communication technologies (ICTs) provide new opportunities to support ex-ante policy evaluations. Practitioners enforcing ICTs for impact assessments should take a comprehensive perspective on the institutional context because both formal organizational structures and implicit expectations, habits and routines affect how policy officials use these tools. Technology alone does not improve policy evaluations, and a misfit between regulative, normative and cultural–cognitive institutional elements can lead to merely symbolic displays of impact assessments through the means of digital tools.","PeriodicalId":47811,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Administrative Sciences","volume":"89 1","pages":"433 - 449"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2021-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43630531","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：