Organizing Public Governance

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Morten Egeberg ◽  
Jarle Trondal
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Organization Theory ◽  
Organizational Factors ◽  
Design Approach ◽  
Middle Ground ◽  
Organization Studies ◽  
Public Governance ◽  
Science Understanding ◽  
Organizational Approach

Chapter 9 concludes the volume by offering the contours of a design approach in political science. The ambition is to use insights from the volume to set out design implications from an organizational approach to public governance. The chapter thus draws a middle ground in an old turf war in organization studies and public administration between science and craft. Insights into how organizational factors affect public governance is a necessary precondition for using organization theory to meta-govern. This concluding chapter advocates that organization theory as craft requires organization theory as science. Understanding and design are thus complementary and not opposed, as is too often assumed.

scholarly journals Governing European Affairs

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-23
Author(s):  
Jarle Trondal ◽  
Nadja Kühn
Keyword(s):  
Organization Theory ◽  
National Level ◽  
Organizational Factors ◽  
Theory Approach ◽  
Public Governance ◽  
Organizational Variables ◽  
Decision Making Behavior ◽  
Governance Processes ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThe aim of this article is to examine the role of ministerial officials in an integrated European multilevel administrative order. This study argues that organizational variables at the national level constitute a decisive filtering factor regarding how decision premises emanating from European Union (EU)-level institutions are received by domestic government institutions and officials. The study contributes to the literature in two main ways: Empirically it provides a comprehensive study of the role of Norwegian ministerial officials in the EU multilevel administrative order over a time period of 20 years (n = 3562). Secondly, it applies an organization theory approach to explain variation in actual decision-making behavior. The article discusses factors of general relevance to political science applicable beyond the case at hand. The study shows that ministerial officials are deeply involved with the EU multilevel administration. Moreover, it confirms the pivotal role of organizational factors in public governance processes.

The Organizational Basis for Public Governance

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Morten Egeberg ◽  
Jarle Trondal
Keyword(s):  
Organization Theory ◽  
Organizational Design ◽  
Organizational Factors ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Public Governance ◽  
Full Account ◽  
Nation States ◽  
Reform Processes ◽  
Organizational Architecture ◽  
Governance Processes

An organizational approach to public governance focuses on the organizational architecture of public organizations and contributes to explaining governance processes by the organizational characteristics of such organizations. The dependent variable “public governance” is defined as the process through which the steering of society takes place. Such steering of society can unfold directly (“governance”) as well as indirectly (“meta-governance”), the latter denoting the process of organizing the apparatus within which governance happens. Governance is not only about making formal decisions, but also about agenda setting, development of alternative policy directions, implementation, and learning. In practice, it is about hammering out legislation, budgets, policy programs, and law application (“governance”), as well as organizing, staffing, and locating the machinery of government (“meta-governance”). Organization structure, organization demography, and organization locus make up the key independent variables. Such a partial model is not thought to provide a full account of what happens in governance processes, but the organizational factors are expected to intervene and bias governance processes systematically and significantly. Since these factors are, arguably, relatively amenable to deliberate change, they constitute at the same time potential design tools. However, rational organizational design also depends on knowledge about the conditions under which the organizational factors themselves may be changed (“meta-governance”). Knowledge about these two relationships is, arguably, ultimately a prerequisite for (rational) organizational design. Public organization literature has largely neglected theorizing meta-governance and conditions for institutional (re)design. Organizational factors may influence meta-governance in two ways: first, existing organization structures, demographics, and locations may affect reform processes; secondly, reform processes themselves may be deliberately organized on a temporary basis to achieve particular goals. Organization theory is helpful in dissecting how different ways of organizing reform processes may produce different reform trajectories and outcomes. The idea sees reform processes as decision-making processes that allocate attention, resources, capabilities, roles, and identities. Reform organizations have structures, demographics, and locations that distribute rights and obligations, power and resources, and normally do so unevenly. Yet, when considering organizational (re-)design, its limitations should be considered as well. Organizational designers might benefit from being aware of the potential stickiness of existing organizational arrangements and the influence of environmental demands, as well as temporal sorting of events. Moreover, the limits to design are greater in complex organizational orders with nested rules such as in nation states, meta-organizations, and supranational institutions such as the European Union, than in single organizations such as government ministries and agencies.

Integrating participatory institutions into the traditional representative and bureaucratic model of public governance

2016 ◽  
Vol 38 (5) ◽  
pp. 642-658 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pablo Bandeira ◽  
Agustín Ferraro
Keyword(s):  
Interest Groups ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Citizen Participation ◽  
Public Governance ◽  
Democratic Quality ◽  
Participatory Institutions ◽  
Governance Practices ◽  
To Come

Does more citizen participation necessarily improve the democratic quality and/or the effectiveness of government? What forms of participation have the potential to accomplish these goals? And, more important, how can these participatory mechanisms be integrated into traditional representative and bureaucratic governance practices, in order to grasp this potential? We discuss these questions in the article, building on theories and empirical evidence provided by both political science and public administration studies. The conclusion we reach is that participatory empowered mechanisms, such as popular initiatives and referendums, and public–private co-governance councils, have a clear potential to enhance the effectiveness and responsiveness of public governance. However, we also find that in order to secure these benefits and not compromise equality and accountability, the introduction of these mechanisms needs to come together with strong and highly representative legislatures, and with reforms that align the powers and increase the representativeness of interest groups.

An Organizational Approach to Public Governance

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Morten Egeberg ◽  
Jarle Trondal
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Base ◽  
Organizational Design ◽  
Organizational Factors ◽  
The Other ◽  
Public Governance ◽  
Independent Variables ◽  
The One ◽  
Governance Processes ◽  
Systematic Knowledge ◽  
Organizational Approach

This chapter launches a general organizational approach to public governance. It outlines key theoretical dimensions that cut across governance structures and processes horizontally as well as vertically, thus paving the way for integrating separate empirical analyses into a coherent theoretical whole. Moreover, the organizational (independent) variables outlined represent classical dimensions in the organization literature that are generic in character. This allows for generalizations across time and space. The chapter also highlights the potential for organizational design that follows from our approach. By building systematic knowledge on how organizational factors shape governance processes on the one hand, and how organizational factors themselves might be deliberately changed on the other, the chapter offers a framework for developing a knowledge base for organizational design.

Michel Crozier,

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philippe Bezes
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Organizational Structure ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Organization Theory ◽  
Relational Theory ◽  
Organizational System ◽  
Organization And Management ◽  
Depth Study ◽  
Systematic Program

This chapter examines Michel Crozier’sThe Bureaucratic Phenomenon, an in-depth study of public administration in France in which he challenged the view that overemphasizes the formal and rational organizational structure of bureaucracy. Crozier developed a relational theory of power and a systematic program that explored bureaucracy as an “organizational system.” The chapter considers the ways in whichThe Bureaucratic Phenomenonrepresents a classic in public policy and administration and other disciplines such as sociology, organization theory, and political science. It also discusses the evolution of citations from the first half of the 1980s andThe Bureaucratic Phenomenon’s increasing prominence in research in the fields of organization and management studies. Finally, it analyzes Crozier’s intellectual background, his central arguments inThe Bureaucratic Phenomenon, and the book’s contribution to contemporary research on bureaucracy.

An Organizational Approach to Public Governance

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Morten Egeberg ◽  
Jarle Trondal
Keyword(s):  
Organizational Design ◽  
Organizational Factors ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Public Governance ◽  
Policy Choices ◽  
Governance Challenges ◽  
The One ◽  
Governance Processes ◽  
National Governments ◽  
Organizational Approach

Political science is often criticized for being insufficiently relevant for coping with governance challenges of our time. This book aims to fill this void by launching a general organizational approach to public governance. To achieve this, the book outlines key theoretical dimensions that cut across governance structures and processes horizontally as well as vertically, thus paving the way for integrating separate empirical analyses into a coherent theoretical whole. Moreover, the organizational (independent) variables outlined in this book represent classical dimensions in the organization literature that are generic in character. This allows for generalizations across time and space. The volume addresses how organizational characteristics of the governmental apparatus (within international organizations, the European Union, national governments, and sub-governments) systematically enable, constrain, and shape public governance processes, thus making some policy choices more likely than others. The second ambition of the volume is to focus on (organizational) design implications: By building systematic knowledge on how organizational factors shape governance processes on the one hand, and how organizational factors themselves might be deliberately changed on the other, the book offers a knowledge base for organizational design.

Exploration of the technocratic mentality among European civil servants

2021 ◽  
pp. 002085232199642
Author(s):  
Ringa Raudla ◽  
James W. Douglas ◽  
Zachary Mohr
Keyword(s):  
Organizational Performance ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Survey Data ◽  
Civil Servants ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Positive Interactions ◽  
Technical Knowledge ◽  
High Level ◽  
Proper Balance

Civil servants vary in the degree to which they hold technocratic attitudes. We explore whether bureaucrats’ exposure to politics and politicians is associated with the depoliticization dimension of the technocratic mentality. We use survey data of high-level executives in 19 European countries to explore factors that are associated with executives’ perceptions that removing issues and activities from the realms of politics leads to more farsighted policies. We find that respondents’ level of exposure to politics and politicians is indeed negatively associated with technocratic mentality. Bureaucrats have studied political science or public administration, work closer to politicians (in terms of type of organization), interact with them more frequently, and have more positive perceptions of these interactions tend to have lower levels of technocratic attitudes. Points for practitioners Beliefs affect behaviors and behaviors affect outcomes. Technocratic attitudes may limit the ability of civil servants to work effectively with politicians. We show that educational degrees that promote democratic values and exposure to politicians (particularly positive interactions) are associated with lower levels of technocratic attitudes. Given that a proper balance between political and technical knowledge can enhance organizational performance (Krause et al., 2006), these findings should be taken into account when staffing and structuring public organizations.

A Note on “Public Policy”

1973 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 661-664 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Vaison
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Public Policy ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Government Policy ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
The Social ◽  
Political Studies ◽  
Policy Analysts ◽  
Government Body

Normally in political studies the term public policy is construed to encompass the societally binding directives issued by a society's legitimate government. We usually consider government, and only government, as being able to “authoritatively allocate values.” This common conception pervades the literature on government policy-making, so much so that it is hardly questioned by students and practitioners of political science. As this note attempts to demonstrate, some re-thinking seems to be in order. For purposes of analysis in the social sciences, this conceptualization of public policy tends to obscure important realities of modern corporate society and to restrict unnecessarily the study of policy-making. Public policy is held to be public simply and solely because it originates from a duly legitimated government, which in turn is held to have the authority (within specified limits) of formulating and implementing such policy. Public policy is public then, our usual thinking goes, because it is made by a body defined somewhat arbitrarily as “public”: a government or some branch of government. All other policy-making is seen as private; it is not public (and hence to lie essentially beyond the scope of the disciplines of poliitcal science and public administration) because it is duly arrived at by non-governmental bodies. Thus policy analysts lead us to believe that public policy is made only when a government body acts to consider some subject of concern, and that other organizations are not relevant to the study of public policy.

Political Science and Public Administration: A Note on the State of the Union

1952 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 660-676 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roscoe C. Martin
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Russell Sage Foundation ◽  
Special Study ◽  
Woodrow Wilson ◽  
State Of The Union ◽  
The Social ◽  
Original Essay ◽  
The Subject

By tradition public administration is regarded as a division of political science. Woodrow Wilson set the stage for this concept in his original essay identifying public administration as a subject worthy of special study, and spokesmen for both political science and public administration have accepted it since. Thus Leonard White, in his 1930 article on the subject in the Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, recognizes public administration as “a branch of the field of political science.” Luther Gulick follows suit, observing in 1937 that “Public administration is thus a division of political science ….” So generally has this word got around that it has come to the notice of the sociologists, as is indicated in a 1950 report of the Russell Sage Foundation which refers to “political science, including public administration….” “Pure” political scientists and political scientists with a public administration slant therefore are not alone in accepting this doctrine, which obviously enjoys a wide and authoritative currency.But if public administration is reckoned generally to be a child of political science, it is in some respects a strange and unnatural child; for there is a feeling among political scientists, substantial still if mayhap not so widespread as formerly, that academicians who profess public administration spend their time fooling with trifles. It was a sad day when the first professor of political science learned what a manhole cover is! On their part, those who work in public administration are likely to find themselves vaguely resentful of the lack of cordiality in the house of their youth.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document