Suchergebnisse

AbstractDespite some evidence that the experience of collaboration contributes to its institutionalization in the crisis management system, the mechanisms behind this process remain unclear. Building on existing research, we distinguish six building blocks (i.e., pressure to collaborate, clarity of roles, mutual trust, leadership, positive feedback and learning) that influence the institutionalization of collaborative crisis management. By applying theory‐building process tracing to the Lithuanian COVID‐19 and irregular migration crises management, we analyse the interplay on these factors to derive the following propositions: (1) when crisis management involves partners with limited collaborative experience, both transformational and boundary spanning leadership are critical at different stages to institutionalize collaboration; (2) the clarification of roles, provision of positive feedback and the subsequent growth of trust experienced by partners engaged in collaborative activities contribute to the informal institutionalization of collaborative crisis management; (3) positive feedback on previous collaborative experience facilitates learning within the crisis management system and, when supported by the efforts of transformational leaders, leads to the formal institutionalization of collaborative crisis management. These propositions demonstrate how collaborative approaches can be fostered to deal with future crises as well as raise the question on the balance between formal and informal institutionalization of these practices.

Straipsnyje analizuojamos naujojo viešojo valdymo sąsajos su šiuo­laikinio muziejų valdymo koncepcija, naujojo viešojo valdymo priemonių paplitimas Lietuvos muziejuose ir įtaką jų taikymui darantys veiksniai. Nors pasaulyje plinta šiuolaikinio muziejų valdymo teorija, kurios pagrindiniai teiginiai glaudžiai susiję su naujojo viešojo valdymo praktikomis (hierarchi­nio valdymo modelio atsisakymu, orientacija į lankytojus ir jų įtraukimu į muziejaus veiklą, tarpsektoriniu bendradarbiavimu, skaidrumo ir atskaitin­gumo siekiu), gyventojų apklausos rodo, kad Lietuvos muziejų veikla men­kai kinta, o specialistai muziejus priskiria tradicinėms institucijoms. Tyrimo metu atlikta Lietuvos muziejų veiklą reglamentuojančių teisės aktų analizė atskleidė įtvirtintus tiek tradicinio, tiek naujojo viešojo valdymo elementus. Remiantis kiekybinio tyrimo duomenimis, galima teigti, kad šiuolaikinio muziejų valdymo priemonės paplitusios tik iš dalies, o muziejų valdymas yra gana uždaras. Taikydamos naujojo viešojo valdymo priemones, šios ins­titucijos susiduria tiek su sisteminėmis, tiek su vidinėmis kliūtimis (jos na­grinėjamos kokybinio tyrimo metu) – nefunkcionaliu paskatų mechanizmu, bendros muziejų politikos trūkumu ir lemiamą reikšmę turinčiu muziejaus vadovo vaidmeniu. Įvardytų problemų sprendimas lemtų efektyvesnį naujojo viešojo valdymo priemonių taikymą Lietuvos muziejuose ir padėtų gerinti šių institucijų veiklą.

There is a broad consensus that public institutions must constantly change in order to provide high quality services and meet the needs of the public. However, population surveys and researchers in this field claim that Lithuanian museum governance is exclusive, with traditional forms of management still being dominant. Modern museum management theory emerged to contrast this kind of management. It is based on New Public Governance (further – NPG) principles and can be explained using four main ideas – the refusal of the hierarchical model of management; an orientation toward visitors and their inclusion in the museum's activities; cross-sectoral cooperation; transparency and accountability. This work provides an overview of how NPG tools are linked with modern museum governance; further discussed are their applications and main causes, which affect their usage in Lithuanian museums. The research consists of three main parts. In the first part, the Lithuanian judicial system and policies, related with the museums sector, were analyzed. Research revealed a lack of solid Lithuanian museum policy. The main Lithuanian Republic Museums Law is compulsory for all institutions, but it is old-fashioned and represents traditional forms of governance. On the other hand, the newest sector documents reflect the main NPG ideas, but their role is more of a consulting one, mandatory to fulfill only for a certain category of museums. With no strong judicial basis for their actions, the governance of museums highly depends on the ideas of certain museum authorities. The second part – quantitative research – was carried out according to the previously mentioned four ideas of modern museum governance. It was revealed that museums have made attempts to apply horizontal management inside the institutions but have still excluded external actors. So, even if this cooperation exists, it takes place in a formal exchange of information rather than the common creation of content. While most of the museum's activity data is open to the public, quantitative indicators do not reveal the quality of performance, and most museums do not tend to evaluate their results critically. Overall, the research results clearly stated that the practice of Lithuanian museum governance is still in the middle on the path toward the modern museum. In the third part, the main reasons that affect the usage of NPG tools in Lithuanian museums were analyzed by using the qualitative research method. We saw that the most important museum governance problem is the non-functional incentives and sanction mechanisms (the funding does not correlate with the performance of a museum) as well as a lack of a solid, national-level museum policy. The given circumstances provide a lot of decision-making freedom for heads of museums and allow them to set the main principles of a particular museum's governance, which usually leads to the strengthening of traditional management. To conclude, the research revealed that the theoretical model of reinvented museum governance is still not fully implemented in Lithuanian museums. It also allows an offering of practical recommendations for the further spread of NPG tools. Regarding internal museum governance, institutions should become more open and inclusive – constructive opinions of museum personnel, as well as open possibilities for co-operation with external actors, should be taken into account. The most important issues for the museum sector would be the creation of an unanimous museum policy, an inclusion of museum officials into the process of national-level policy creation and implementation as well as, finally, the establishment of a new financing mechanism for museums that would directly link a museum's performance to the funding it receives. ; Straipsnyje analizuojamos naujojo viešojo valdymo sąsajos su šiuo­laikinio muziejų valdymo koncepcija, naujojo viešojo valdymo priemonių paplitimas Lietuvos muziejuose ir įtaką jų taikymui darantys veiksniai. Nors pasaulyje plinta šiuolaikinio muziejų valdymo teorija, kurios pagrindiniai teiginiai glaudžiai susiję su naujojo viešojo valdymo praktikomis (hierarchi­nio valdymo modelio atsisakymu, orientacija į lankytojus ir jų įtraukimu į muziejaus veiklą, tarpsektoriniu bendradarbiavimu, skaidrumo ir atskaitin­gumo siekiu), gyventojų apklausos rodo, kad Lietuvos muziejų veikla men­kai kinta, o specialistai muziejus priskiria tradicinėms institucijoms. Tyrimo metu atlikta Lietuvos muziejų veiklą reglamentuojančių teisės aktų analizė atskleidė įtvirtintus tiek tradicinio, tiek naujojo viešojo valdymo elementus. Remiantis kiekybinio tyrimo duomenimis, galima teigti, kad šiuolaikinio muziejų valdymo priemonės paplitusios tik iš dalies, o muziejų valdymas yra gana uždaras. Taikydamos naujojo viešojo valdymo priemones, šios ins­titucijos susiduria tiek su sisteminėmis, tiek su vidinėmis kliūtimis (jos na­grinėjamos kokybinio tyrimo metu) – nefunkcionaliu paskatų mechanizmu, bendros muziejų politikos trūkumu ir lemiamą reikšmę turinčiu muziejaus vadovo vaidmeniu. Įvardytų problemų sprendimas lemtų efektyvesnį naujojo viešojo valdymo priemonių taikymą Lietuvos muziejuose ir padėtų gerinti šių institucijų veiklą.

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.

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.

Data shows that significant events such natural disasters, anthropogenic disasters and malign activities by hostile actors, often having cross-border effects, have been on the rise. However, the studies of the effects of those events on public policies, governance and institutions remain inconclusive. In this article we present a research agenda which proposes the classification of the significant events on the basis of their characteristics backing it with a newly compiled data set on significant events which took place in Lithuania in 2004-2020 and outline the directions for an in-depth analysis of the causal mechanisms of how those events affect policy and institutional change. We conclude with concrete proposals for further research which could provide theoretically innovative and policy relevant insights into the political processes which translate responses to significant events into policy and institutional changes affecting welfare institutions and resilience of society.

Data shows that significant events such natural disasters, anthropogenic disasters and malign activities by hostile actors, often having cross-border effects, have been on the rise. However, the studies of the effects of those events on public policies, governance and institutions remain inconclusive. In this article we present a research agenda which proposes the classification of the significant events on the basis of their characteristics backing it with a newly compiled data set on significant events which took place in Lithuania in 2004-2020 and outline the directions for an in-depth analysis of the causal mechanisms of how those events affect policy and institutional change. We conclude with concrete proposals for further research which could provide theoretically innovative and policy relevant insights into the political processes which translate responses to significant events into policy and institutional changes affecting welfare institutions and resilience of society.

Data shows that significant events such natural disasters, anthropogenic disasters and malign activities by hostile actors, often having cross-border effects, have been on the rise. However, the studies of the effects of those events on public policies, governance and institutions remain inconclusive. In this article we present a research agenda which proposes the classification of the significant events on the basis of their characteristics backing it with a newly compiled data set on significant events which took place in Lithuania in 2004-2020 and outline the directions for an in-depth analysis of the causal mechanisms of how those events affect policy and institutional change. We conclude with concrete proposals for further research which could provide theoretically innovative and policy relevant insights into the political processes which translate responses to significant events into policy and institutional changes affecting welfare institutions and resilience of society. ; Pastaruoju laikotarpiu susiduriama su vis labiau augančiu reikšmingų įvykių skaičiumi. Tokio pobūdžio įvykiai apima stichines, antropogenines nelaimes ir sąmoningus priešiškai nusiteikusių veikėjų veiksmus bei neretai pasižymi sektoriaus, valdymo srities ar valstybės ribas viršijančiu poveikiu. Nepaisant to, išvados apie šių įvykių poveikį viešajai politikai, valdymui ir institucijoms – nevienareikšmiškos. Šis straipsnis svariai papildo esamas akademines diskusijas, siūlydamas reikšmingų įvykių tyrimų darbotvarkę. Joje pateikiama tokio pobūdžio įvykių klasifikacija pagal jų charakteristikas, kuri empiriškai patikrinama remiantis naujai sudarytu duomenų rinkiniu apie 2004–2020 m. laikotarpiu Lietuvoje vykusius reikšmingus įvykius. Darbotvarkėje taip pat nubrėžiamos pagrindinės kryptys išsamiai priežastinių mechanizmų analizei, atskleisiančiai reikšmingų įvykių poveikį viešosios politikos, valdymo ir instituciniams pokyčiams. Straipsnio išvadose ir diskusijoje išskiriamos tolesnei disciplinos raidai bei sprendimų priėmėjams reikšmingos tyrimų kryptys. Jų įgyvendinimas leistų paaiškinti politinius procesus, kurių metu atsakas į reikšmingus įvykius tampa viešosios politikos, valdymo ir instituciniais pokyčiais, darančiais poveikį gerovės valstybės institucijoms ir visuomenės atsparumui.