Despite the increased attention of evaluation theorists and practitioners on theory-based evaluation, there is still no agreement regarding how to apply this evaluation approach in practice. In order to further advance the application of theory-based evaluation, the article elaborates a specific causal model for the in-depth evaluation of capacity-building interventions supported by the European Social Fund. This model of program outcomes is used to make a contribution claim: that better results of one set of performance management projects can be explained by their better design and more favorable conditions for their implementation compared to other similar projects. The article suggests setting some specific conditionalities – such as assessing the organizational maturity of potential beneficiaries and improving their project management systems before the start of project execution – to improve the implementation of future capacity-building interventions.
This introductory article presents the common research questions of this special issue and offers a joint framework for analysing the change and politicisation of the senior levels of management of different groups of Lithuanian public sector organisations (agencies, state-owned enterprises, personal health care organisations and educational organisations). A comparison of all contributions to this special issue revealed that repeating alterations of governing majorities and governments best explain the frequent turnover of heads of different Lithuanian public sector organisations (except those of personal health care and educational organisations). However, their politicisation is associated with party entrenchment in power, density of the party networks and politicians' beliefs. The factor of civil service legislation and its enforcement is only important in the case of ministerial agencies whose heads hold career civil service positions. Furthermore, variations in the scope of politicisation are related to such administrative factors as the political salience of policy areas and organisational functions, as well as the budget size. This indicates different politicisation motivations and opportunities in the public sector. Therefore, it is the interplay of political and administrative factors that determines the change and politicisation of management in various public sector organisations. In the context of alternating ruling majorities, changing governments and positions, patronage strategies are exercised by political parties and incumbent managers on the 'top-down' or 'bottom-up' basis. These strategies are more actively pursued in policy areas and organisations that are characterised by higher political salience, larger funding or revenue. The likelihood and scope of politicisation is also affected by such facilitating factors as party networks or such constraining factors as legal regulation of the civil service.These results of politicisation research to a large extent correspond to the previous theoretical propositions based on a game theory (prisoner's dilemma) approach. Competing party blocs exercise patronage strategies, responding to their opponents' behaviour in office. If one party bloc politicises the positions of career managers, a competing bloc attempts to force the incumbent managers out of office through organisational restructuring and changing the status of civil service positions. Although political parties may be aware of the negative effects of politicisation, as rational actors they may have no interest in discontinuing their patronage practices in the absence of party cooperation and credible agreements concerning the professional management of public sector managers.The mechanism of 'top-down' politicisation can account for the level of politicisation and its dynamics at the central level, especially among the government agencies and state-owned enterprises. However, unlike at the central level, managers of local-level organisations (especially personal health care organisations, educational organisations and forestry companies) are involved in a different politicisation game. First, if under the 'top-down' politicisation mechanism political parties exercise patronage in order to reward loyal party members and control decision-making, under the 'bottom-up' politicisation mechanism some heads of public sector organisations themselves engage in patronage relations in order to keep their managerial positions, reward loyal members of their organisations and control organisational performance. Second, these mechanisms also differ in terms of politicisation results and processes: if 'top-down' politicisation results in high politicisation and low institutional stability (frequent organisational changes and managers' turnover), the mix of a relatively stable institutional environment and high levels of actual politicisation can co-exist under 'bottom-up' politicisation. ; Šiame įvadiniame straipsnyje pristatomi specialiojo "Politologijos" numerio tiriamieji klausimai ir turinys, taip pat pateikiamas bendras analizės pagrindas, kurį taikant nagrinėjama, kokie veiksniai gali paaiškinti vadovų kaitą ir politizaciją skirtingose Lietuvos viešojo sektoriaus organizacijų (agentūrų, valstybės valdomų įmonių, asmens sveikatos priežiūros ir švietimo įstaigų) grupėse. Palyginus visų straipsnių rezultatus nustatyta, kad viešojo sektoriaus organizacijų vadovų kaitą geriausiai paaiškina valdančiosios daugumos ir vyriausybių pokyčiai, o politizaciją – politinių partijų dalyvavimas valdžioje, jų tinklai ir politikų įsitikinimai. Tačiau asmens sveikatos priežiūros ir švietimo įstaigų grupėse, kurioms būdinga didesnė politizacija, yra statistinis ryšys tarp vadovų stabilumo ir politizacijos. Valstybės tarnybos reglamentavimo bei teisinių nuostatų įgyvendinimo užtikrinimo veiksnys nėra labai reikšmingas – tai daro įtaką tik ribotam įstaigų prie ministerijų vadovų skaičiui. Pagaliau aiškinant politizacijos skirtumus gana svarbūs yra tokie viešojo administravimo veiksniai kaip politinis valdymo sričių jautrumas ir finansiniai organizacijų ištekliai.
This introductory article presents the common research questions of this special issue and offers a joint framework for analysing the change and politicisation of the senior levels of management of different groups of Lithuanian public sector organisations (agencies, state-owned enterprises, personal health care organisations and educational organisations). A comparison of all contributions to this special issue revealed that repeating alterations of governing majorities and governments best explain the frequent turnover of heads of different Lithuanian public sector organisations (except those of personal health care and educational organisations). However, their politicisation is associated with party entrenchment in power, density of the party networks and politicians' beliefs. The factor of civil service legislation and its enforcement is only important in the case of ministerial agencies whose heads hold career civil service positions. Furthermore, variations in the scope of politicisation are related to such administrative factors as the political salience of policy areas and organisational functions, as well as the budget size. This indicates different politicisation motivations and opportunities in the public sector. Therefore, it is the interplay of political and administrative factors that determines the change and politicisation of management in various public sector organisations. In the context of alternating ruling majorities, changing governments and positions, patronage strategies are exercised by political parties and incumbent managers on the 'top-down' or 'bottom-up' basis. These strategies are more actively pursued in policy areas and organisations that are characterised by higher political salience, larger funding or revenue. The likelihood and scope of politicisation is also affected by such facilitating factors as party networks or such constraining factors as legal regulation of the civil service.These results of politicisation research to a large extent correspond to the previous theoretical propositions based on a game theory (prisoner's dilemma) approach. Competing party blocs exercise patronage strategies, responding to their opponents' behaviour in office. If one party bloc politicises the positions of career managers, a competing bloc attempts to force the incumbent managers out of office through organisational restructuring and changing the status of civil service positions. Although political parties may be aware of the negative effects of politicisation, as rational actors they may have no interest in discontinuing their patronage practices in the absence of party cooperation and credible agreements concerning the professional management of public sector managers.The mechanism of 'top-down' politicisation can account for the level of politicisation and its dynamics at the central level, especially among the government agencies and state-owned enterprises. However, unlike at the central level, managers of local-level organisations (especially personal health care organisations, educational organisations and forestry companies) are involved in a different politicisation game. First, if under the 'top-down' politicisation mechanism political parties exercise patronage in order to reward loyal party members and control decision-making, under the 'bottom-up' politicisation mechanism some heads of public sector organisations themselves engage in patronage relations in order to keep their managerial positions, reward loyal members of their organisations and control organisational performance. Second, these mechanisms also differ in terms of politicisation results and processes: if 'top-down' politicisation results in high politicisation and low institutional stability (frequent organisational changes and managers' turnover), the mix of a relatively stable institutional environment and high levels of actual politicisation can co-exist under 'bottom-up' politicisation.
This article analyses main public management doctrines (traditional administration, NPM and post-NPM), assesses the doctrinal basis of public management reforms in the 2004–2010 period, provides suggestions concerning principles, directions and process of future public management reforms in Lithuania. Despite different political views and terms of various Governments, important decisions of public management reforms were based on the party logic, whose purpose is to strengthen political authority of the government in office. The implementation of the 'bureaucratic' public administration strategy, whose content was informed by the ideas of post-NPM, was initially unsuccessful because of limited political ownership and the legalistic approach. The XV Lithuanian Government undertook wide public management reforms based on the managerial doctrine with prevailing NPM characteristics. A mix of the party logic and the NPM doctrine could be contradictory and risky in Central and Eastern European countries. Also, the NPM has not yielded good results in continental Europe, its solutions do not match Lithuania's problems and there is no solid empirical evidence about its effectiveness in Lithuania. Therefore, its application should be limited and selective during Lithuania's public management reforms. Post-NPM is the best doctrine for future public management reforms, whose implementation in Lithuania should be supported by broader political consensus, better inter-institutional cooperation and a more managerial implementation approach.
This article analyses main public management doctrines (traditional administration, NPM and post-NPM), assesses the doctrinal basis of public management reforms in the 2004–2010 period, provides suggestions concerning principles, directions and process of future public management reforms in Lithuania. Despite different political views and terms of various Governments, important decisions of public management reforms were based on the party logic, whose purpose is to strengthen political authority of the government in office. The implementation of the 'bureaucratic' public administration strategy, whose content was informed by the ideas of post-NPM, was initially unsuccessful because of limited political ownership and the legalistic approach. The XV Lithuanian Government undertook wide public management reforms based on the managerial doctrine with prevailing NPM characteristics. A mix of the party logic and the NPM doctrine could be contradictory and risky in Central and Eastern European countries. Also, the NPM has not yielded good results in continental Europe, its solutions do not match Lithuania's problems and there is no solid empirical evidence about its effectiveness in Lithuania. Therefore, its application should be limited and selective during Lithuania's public management reforms. Post-NPM is the best doctrine for future public management reforms, whose implementation in Lithuania should be supported by broader political consensus, better inter-institutional cooperation and a more managerial implementation approach.
This article analyses main public management doctrines (traditional administration, NPM and post-NPM), assesses the doctrinal basis of public management reforms in the 2004–2010 period, provides suggestions concerning principles, directions and process of future public management reforms in Lithuania. Despite different political views and terms of various Governments, important decisions of public management reforms were based on the party logic, whose purpose is to strengthen political authority of the government in office. The implementation of the 'bureaucratic' public administration strategy, whose content was informed by the ideas of post-NPM, was initially unsuccessful because of limited political ownership and the legalistic approach. The XV Lithuanian Government undertook wide public management reforms based on the managerial doctrine with prevailing NPM characteristics. A mix of the party logic and the NPM doctrine could be contradictory and risky in Central and Eastern European countries. Also, the NPM has not yielded good results in continental Europe, its solutions do not match Lithuania's problems and there is no solid empirical evidence about its effectiveness in Lithuania. Therefore, its application should be limited and selective during Lithuania's public management reforms. Post-NPM is the best doctrine for future public management reforms, whose implementation in Lithuania should be supported by broader political consensus, better inter-institutional cooperation and a more managerial implementation approach.
This article analyses main public management doctrines (traditional administration, NPM and post-NPM), assesses the doctrinal basis of public management reforms in the 2004–2010 period, provides suggestions concerning principles, directions and process of future public management reforms in Lithuania. Despite different political views and terms of various Governments, important decisions of public management reforms were based on the party logic, whose purpose is to strengthen political authority of the government in office. The implementation of the 'bureaucratic' public administration strategy, whose content was informed by the ideas of post-NPM, was initially unsuccessful because of limited political ownership and the legalistic approach. The XV Lithuanian Government undertook wide public management reforms based on the managerial doctrine with prevailing NPM characteristics. A mix of the party logic and the NPM doctrine could be contradictory and risky in Central and Eastern European countries. Also, the NPM has not yielded good results in continental Europe, its solutions do not match Lithuania's problems and there is no solid empirical evidence about its effectiveness in Lithuania. Therefore, its application should be limited and selective during Lithuania's public management reforms. Post-NPM is the best doctrine for future public management reforms, whose implementation in Lithuania should be supported by broader political consensus, better inter-institutional cooperation and a more managerial implementation approach.
AbstractModern societies are facing an increasing number of transboundary systemic threats. The sudden spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic has once again highlighted concerns about governments' capacity to deal with disruptions and stressed the need for more resilient governance arrangements. Besides the usual policymaking, the latter might emerge from decisions, made during the crisis management as well. Building on ideas of the new institutionalism, more specifically, the normative logic of appropriateness and the rational logic of consequentiality, we examine how different mechanisms in varying contexts lead to different types of resilience building. Based on the results of pattern matching applied to the Lithuanian case of COVID‐19 crisis management in 2020, we argue that in environments where the logic of consequentiality was dominant, resilience was mostly strengthened because of major breakthroughs, stemming from coercive pressures as well as top‐down policy action from the centre of government. In contrast, more incremental developments contributed to resilience building through normative or mimetic pressures, professionalization, network‐based and bottom‐up practices in environments, where the logic of appropriateness prevailed. We claim that, while the logic of consequentiality helps to strengthen resilience in the context of turbulence, the logic of appropriateness is especially important for ensuring its sustainability.
[full article and abstract in Lithuanian; abstract in English]
Lithuania has a fragmented advisory system, with a total of 213 advisory bodies working at the central level of government in 2017. Ad hoc advisory bodies have low average lifespans, while the permanent advisory bodies usually have small administrative capacities. The Sunset Commissions were an exception because they advised Lithuanian governments for more than ten years – having been active since 1999 – and operated within a well-developed institutional framework. They provided recommendations on how to improve the efficiency and quality of public management for five Lithuanian governments until 2016 when Skvernelis's government decided to discontinue its activities. There was almost no systematic monitoring of the extent to which the recommendations were carried out. Therefore, it is important to analyze the impact of the Sunset Commissions' recommendations on public management policy in Lithuania.
By combining the advisory systems and public policy process literature, the article identifies the main factors that may affect the successful use of advice: the compatibility of recommendations with the dominant political ideas, the composition of an advisory body, the government's expectations toward its purpose, economic conditions, the support of the parliamentary majority and the political attention to its recommendations and the role of the changing leaders during public management reforms. Our empirical study – which was based on desk research, an analysis of administrative information, interviews and a survey of the Commissions' members – consisted of two main stages. First, we assessed the impact of the Sunset Commissions on public management policy. Second, we determined the causal configurations underpinning the adoption and implementation of the recommendations set out by this advisory body.
The results of our assessment reveals a good deal of variation in the use of the Commissions' recommendations. The 1999–2000 and 2009 Commissions were the most successful in terms of the recommendations adopted and implemented. The lifespan of these Sunset Commissions was marked by economic downturns that opened "windows of opportunity" for major reforms. These advisory bodies are also characterized by high performance indicators. In contrast, the advisory bodies that worked during 2006–2008 and 2013–2016 received less political attention in the Lithuanian government in the context of economic growth, which made implementation more difficult. Overall, our assessment suggests that a more active performance of the advisory body is not sufficient to explain the level of adoption and implementation of its recommendations, as the political and economic conditions significantly shape the use of advice.
The second part of the empirical study allowed us to determine the main causal configurations that explain the adoption and implementation of the recommendations suggested by the Sunset Commissions. The most important condition for successful adoption is the compatibility of advice: in other words, the more the given advice corresponds to a particular government's priorities, the more successful the use of recommendation becomes. In addition, the uptake of recommendations is more frequent during economic downturns as well as when prime ministers exercise transformational leadership during the reform process. Meanwhile, the composition of the advisory body, the expectations of the government toward its performance and the leadership exercised by the heads of the commissions are less important. The conditions for the successful implementation of recommendations are slightly different. Although transformational leadership maintains its importance during the implementation phase, the exercise of transactional leadership can also lead to an incremental change if policy implementation is pursued adequately at the administrative level.
To conclude, our research reveals that the Sunset Commissions had a substantial impact on Lithuanian public management policy. Even though the effectiveness of the advisory body varied during the rule of the Lithuanian governments, a majority of the Commissions' members agreed that its work should be continued. The research also allows us to offer practical recommendations for the further performance of the Sunset Commissions. The main suggestions include, but are not limited to, strengthening the mandate of the Commission, enhancing administrative discipline during the execution of the recommendations and allocating financial resources for supporting the performance of the Commission.
Lithuania has a fragmented advisory system, with a total of 213 advisory bodies working at the central level of government in 2017. Ad hoc advisory bodies have low average lifespans, while the permanent advisory bodies usually have small administrative capacities. The Sunset Commissions were an exception because they advised Lithuanian governments for more than ten years – having been active since 1999 – and operated within a well-developed institutional framework. They provided recommendations on how to improve the efficiency and quality of public management for five Lithuanian governments until 2016 when Skvernelis's government decided to discontinue its activities. There was almost no systematic monitoring of the extent to which the recommendations were carried out. Therefore, it is important to analyze the impact of the Sunset Commissions' recommendations on public management policy in Lithuania. By combining the advisory systems and public policy process literature, the article identifies the main factors that may affect the successful use of advice: the compatibility of recommendations with the dominant political ideas, the composition of an advisory body, the government's expectations toward its purpose, economic conditions, the support of the parliamentary majority and the political attention to its recommendations and the role of the changing leaders during public management reforms. Our empirical study – which was based on desk research, an analysis of administrative information, interviews and a survey of the Commissions' members – consisted of two main stages. First, we assessed the impact of the Sunset Commissions on public management policy. Second, we determined the causal configurations underpinning the adoption and implementation of the recommendations set out by this advisory body. The results of our assessment reveals a good deal of variation in the use of the Commissions' recommendations. The 1999–2000 and 2009 Commissions were the most successful in terms of the recommendations adopted and implemented. The lifespan of these Sunset Commissions was marked by economic downturns that opened "windows of opportunity" for major reforms. These advisory bodies are also characterized by high performance indicators. In contrast, the advisory bodies that worked during 2006–2008 and 2013–2016 received less political attention in the Lithuanian government in the context of economic growth, which made implementation more difficult. Overall, our assessment suggests that a more active performance of the advisory body is not sufficient to explain the level of adoption and implementation of its recommendations, as the political and economic conditions significantly shape the use of advice. The second part of the empirical study allowed us to determine the main causal configurations that explain the adoption and implementation of the recommendations suggested by the Sunset Commissions. The most important condition for successful adoption is the compatibility of advice: in other words, the more the given advice corresponds to a particular government's priorities, the more successful the use of recommendation becomes. In addition, the uptake of recommendations is more frequent during economic downturns as well as when prime ministers exercise transformational leadership during the reform process. Meanwhile, the composition of the advisory body, the expectations of the government toward its performance and the leadership exercised by the heads of the commissions are less important. The conditions for the successful implementation of recommendations are slightly different. Although transformational leadership maintains its importance during the implementation phase, the exercise of transactional leadership can also lead to an incremental change if policy implementation is pursued adequately at the administrative level. To conclude, our research reveals that the Sunset Commissions had a substantial impact on Lithuanian public management policy. Even though the effectiveness of the advisory body varied during the rule of the Lithuanian governments, a majority of the Commissions' members agreed that its work should be continued. The research also allows us to offer practical recommendations for the further performance of the Sunset Commissions. The main suggestions include, but are not limited to, strengthening the mandate of the Commission, enhancing administrative discipline during the execution of the recommendations and allo inancial resources for supporting the performance of the Commission.
[full article and abstract in Lithuanian; abstract in English] Lithuania has a fragmented advisory system, with a total of 213 advisory bodies working at the central level of government in 2017. Ad hoc advisory bodies have low average lifespans, while the permanent advisory bodies usually have small administrative capacities. The Sunset Commissions were an exception because they advised Lithuanian governments for more than ten years – having been active since 1999 – and operated within a well-developed institutional framework. They provided recommendations on how to improve the efficiency and quality of public management for five Lithuanian governments until 2016 when Skvernelis's government decided to discontinue its activities. There was almost no systematic monitoring of the extent to which the recommendations were carried out. Therefore, it is important to analyze the impact of the Sunset Commissions' recommendations on public management policy in Lithuania. By combining the advisory systems and public policy process literature, the article identifies the main factors that may affect the successful use of advice: the compatibility of recommendations with the dominant political ideas, the composition of an advisory body, the government's expectations toward its purpose, economic conditions, the support of the parliamentary majority and the political attention to its recommendations and the role of the changing leaders during public management reforms. Our empirical study – which was based on desk research, an analysis of administrative information, interviews and a survey of the Commissions' members – consisted of two main stages. First, we assessed the impact of the Sunset Commissions on public management policy. Second, we determined the causal configurations underpinning the adoption and implementation of the recommendations set out by this advisory body. The results of our assessment reveals a good deal of variation in the use of the Commissions' recommendations. The 1999–2000 and 2009 Commissions were the most successful in terms of the recommendations adopted and implemented. The lifespan of these Sunset Commissions was marked by economic downturns that opened "windows of opportunity" for major reforms. These advisory bodies are also characterized by high performance indicators. In contrast, the advisory bodies that worked during 2006–2008 and 2013–2016 received less political attention in the Lithuanian government in the context of economic growth, which made implementation more difficult. Overall, our assessment suggests that a more active performance of the advisory body is not sufficient to explain the level of adoption and implementation of its recommendations, as the political and economic conditions significantly shape the use of advice. The second part of the empirical study allowed us to determine the main causal configurations that explain the adoption and implementation of the recommendations suggested by the Sunset Commissions. The most important condition for successful adoption is the compatibility of advice: in other words, the more the given advice corresponds to a particular government's priorities, the more successful the use of recommendation becomes. In addition, the uptake of recommendations is more frequent during economic downturns as well as when prime ministers exercise transformational leadership during the reform process. Meanwhile, the composition of the advisory body, the expectations of the government toward its performance and the leadership exercised by the heads of the commissions are less important. The conditions for the successful implementation of recommendations are slightly different. Although transformational leadership maintains its importance during the implementation phase, the exercise of transactional leadership can also lead to an incremental change if policy implementation is pursued adequately at the administrative level. To conclude, our research reveals that the Sunset Commissions had a substantial impact on Lithuanian public management policy. Even though the effectiveness of the advisory body varied during the rule of the Lithuanian governments, a majority of the Commissions' members agreed that its work should be continued. The research also allows us to offer practical recommendations for the further performance of the Sunset Commissions. The main suggestions include, but are not limited to, strengthening the mandate of the Commission, enhancing administrative discipline during the execution of the recommendations and allocating financial resources for supporting the performance of the Commission. ; [straipsnis ir santrauka lietuvių kalba; santrauka anglų kalba] Vis didėjantis įrodymais grįsto valdymo poreikis skatina analizuoti, kokiomis aplinkybėmis politikai ir viešojo valdymo institucijų vadovai yra linkę priimti ir įgyvendinti patariamųjų darinių teikiamas rekomendacijas. Siekiant atsakyti į šį klausimą, šiam moksliniam tyrimui buvo pasirinkti vieni ilgiausiai Lietuvoje veikusių patariamųjų darinių – Saulėlydžio komisijos, 1999–2016 m. Vyriausybėms teikusios pasiūlymus dėl viešojo valdymo efektyvumo ir kokybės tobulinimo. Straipsnyje derinama patariamųjų sistemų bei viešosios politikos proceso literatūra, leidžianti išskirti pagrindinius veiksnius, galbūt darančius įtaką sėkmingam rekomendacijų panaudojimui (rekomendacijų suderinamumas su politinėmis idėjomis, patariamojo darinio sudėtis, jam keliami lūkesčiai, ekonominis veikimo kontekstas, politinis dėmesys, parlamentinės daugumos palaikymas ir kaitos lyderių vaidmuo). Atsižvelgiant į poveikio vertinimo ir proceso atsekimo rezultatus, atskleidžiama, kad Saulėlydžio komisijų teiktų rekomendacijų priėmimui didžiausią poveikį daro jų turinio suderinamumas su dominuojančiais politiniais tikslais, Ministro Pirmininko transformacinės lyderystės aktyvumas bei ekonominis veikimo kontekstas. Nors šios sąlygos aktualios ir nagrinėjant rekomendacijų įgyvendinimą, šiame etape taip pat išryškėja transakcinės lyderystės svarba. Remiantis tyrimo duomenimis, straipsnio išvadose pateikiamos rekomendacijos viešosios politikos formuotojams, padėsiančios efektyviau organizuoti Saulėlydžio komisijų ar kitų patariamųjų darinių veiklą.
Lithuania has a fragmented advisory system, with a total of 213 advisory bodies working at the central level of government in 2017. Ad hoc advisory bodies have low average lifespans, while the permanent advisory bodies usually have small administrative capacities. The Sunset Commissions were an exception because they advised Lithuanian governments for more than ten years – having been active since 1999 – and operated within a well-developed institutional framework. They provided recommendations on how to improve the efficiency and quality of public management for five Lithuanian governments until 2016 when Skvernelis's government decided to discontinue its activities. There was almost no systematic monitoring of the extent to which the recommendations were carried out. Therefore, it is important to analyze the impact of the Sunset Commissions' recommendations on public management policy in Lithuania. By combining the advisory systems and public policy process literature, the article identifies the main factors that may affect the successful use of advice: the compatibility of recommendations with the dominant political ideas, the composition of an advisory body, the government's expectations toward its purpose, economic conditions, the support of the parliamentary majority and the political attention to its recommendations and the role of the changing leaders during public management reforms. Our empirical study – which was based on desk research, an analysis of administrative information, interviews and a survey of the Commissions' members – consisted of two main stages. First, we assessed the impact of the Sunset Commissions on public management policy. Second, we determined the causal configurations underpinning the adoption and implementation of the recommendations set out by this advisory body. The results of our assessment reveals a good deal of variation in the use of the Commissions' recommendations. The 1999–2000 and 2009 Commissions were the most successful in terms of the recommendations adopted and implemented. The lifespan of these Sunset Commissions was marked by economic downturns that opened "windows of opportunity" for major reforms. These advisory bodies are also characterized by high performance indicators. In contrast, the advisory bodies that worked during 2006–2008 and 2013–2016 received less political attention in the Lithuanian government in the context of economic growth, which made implementation more difficult. Overall, our assessment suggests that a more active performance of the advisory body is not sufficient to explain the level of adoption and implementation of its recommendations, as the political and economic conditions significantly shape the use of advice. The second part of the empirical study allowed us to determine the main causal configurations that explain the adoption and implementation of the recommendations suggested by the Sunset Commissions. The most important condition for successful adoption is the compatibility of advice: in other words, the more the given advice corresponds to a particular government's priorities, the more successful the use of recommendation becomes. In addition, the uptake of recommendations is more frequent during economic downturns as well as when prime ministers exercise transformational leadership during the reform process. Meanwhile, the composition of the advisory body, the expectations of the government toward its performance and the leadership exercised by the heads of the commissions are less important. The conditions for the successful implementation of recommendations are slightly different. Although transformational leadership maintains its importance during the implementation phase, the exercise of transactional leadership can also lead to an incremental change if policy implementation is pursued adequately at the administrative level. To conclude, our research reveals that the Sunset Commissions had a substantial impact on Lithuanian public management policy. Even though the effectiveness of the advisory body varied during the rule of the Lithuanian governments, a majority of the Commissions' members agreed that its work should be continued. The research also allows us to offer practical recommendations for the further performance of the Sunset Commissions. The main suggestions include, but are not limited to, strengthening the mandate of the Commission, enhancing administrative discipline during the execution of the recommendations and allo inancial resources for supporting the performance of the Commission.
Lithuania has a fragmented advisory system, with a total of 213 advisory bodies working at the central level of government in 2017. Ad hoc advisory bodies have low average lifespans, while the permanent advisory bodies usually have small administrative capacities. The Sunset Commissions were an exception because they advised Lithuanian governments for more than ten years – having been active since 1999 – and operated within a well-developed institutional framework. They provided recommendations on how to improve the efficiency and quality of public management for five Lithuanian governments until 2016 when Skvernelis's government decided to discontinue its activities. There was almost no systematic monitoring of the extent to which the recommendations were carried out. Therefore, it is important to analyze the impact of the Sunset Commissions' recommendations on public management policy in Lithuania. By combining the advisory systems and public policy process literature, the article identifies the main factors that may affect the successful use of advice: the compatibility of recommendations with the dominant political ideas, the composition of an advisory body, the government's expectations toward its purpose, economic conditions, the support of the parliamentary majority and the political attention to its recommendations and the role of the changing leaders during public management reforms. Our empirical study – which was based on desk research, an analysis of administrative information, interviews and a survey of the Commissions' members – consisted of two main stages. First, we assessed the impact of the Sunset Commissions on public management policy. Second, we determined the causal configurations underpinning the adoption and implementation of the recommendations set out by this advisory body. The results of our assessment reveals a good deal of variation in the use of the Commissions' recommendations. The 1999–2000 and 2009 Commissions were the most successful in terms of the recommendations adopted and implemented. The lifespan of these Sunset Commissions was marked by economic downturns that opened "windows of opportunity" for major reforms. These advisory bodies are also characterized by high performance indicators. In contrast, the advisory bodies that worked during 2006–2008 and 2013–2016 received less political attention in the Lithuanian government in the context of economic growth, which made implementation more difficult. Overall, our assessment suggests that a more active performance of the advisory body is not sufficient to explain the level of adoption and implementation of its recommendations, as the political and economic conditions significantly shape the use of advice. The second part of the empirical study allowed us to determine the main causal configurations that explain the adoption and implementation of the recommendations suggested by the Sunset Commissions. The most important condition for successful adoption is the compatibility of advice: in other words, the more the given advice corresponds to a particular government's priorities, the more successful the use of recommendation becomes. In addition, the uptake of recommendations is more frequent during economic downturns as well as when prime ministers exercise transformational leadership during the reform process. Meanwhile, the composition of the advisory body, the expectations of the government toward its performance and the leadership exercised by the heads of the commissions are less important. The conditions for the successful implementation of recommendations are slightly different. Although transformational leadership maintains its importance during the implementation phase, the exercise of transactional leadership can also lead to an incremental change if policy implementation is pursued adequately at the administrative level. To conclude, our research reveals that the Sunset Commissions had a substantial impact on Lithuanian public management policy. Even though the effectiveness of the advisory body varied during the rule of the Lithuanian governments, a majority of the Commissions' members agreed that its work should be continued. The research also allows us to offer practical recommendations for the further performance of the Sunset Commissions. The main suggestions include, but are not limited to, strengthening the mandate of the Commission, enhancing administrative discipline during the execution of the recommendations and allo inancial resources for supporting the performance of the Commission.
