Suchergebnisse

Governmental systems are deeply inscribed by processes of path dependence and lock-ins, yet they are also required to play a central role in both policy reform and institutional transformation. This paper offers an account of governance networks and posits a solution to the traditional problem of dynamic inertia in governmental institutions and thus provides the foundations for a theory of transformation. By first identifying network governance as a typology of institutional ensembles, the paper describes how the 'complementary configurations' of institutions may provide crucial pathways for change. Such networks are also identified as viable enabling structures for the learning, storage, and sharing of hidden alternatives to established institutional routines. The key to their success is identified in administrative rather than political authorization. Adapted from the source document.

Design involves an account of expertise which foregrounds implicit, heuristic skills. Most models of policy making have a stronger interest in structural and exogenous pressures on decision making. Research suggests that high‐level experts develop unique capacities to process data, read a situation, and see imaginative solutions. By linking some of the key attributes of a design model of decision making to an account of expertise, it is possible to formulate a stronger model of public policy design expertise. While other approaches often concern themselves with constraints and structural imperatives, a design approach has a focus upon the capacities of individual actors such as policy experts. Such an approach rests upon central propositions in regard to goal emergence, pattern recognition, anticipation, emotions engagement, fabulation, playfulness, and risk protection. These provide a starting point for further research and for the professional development of policy specialists.Related Articles
Ralston, Shane. 2008. "." Politics & Policy 36 (): 1155. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1747‐1346.2008.00157_11.x/abstract

Norman, Emma R., and Rafael Delfin. 2012. "." Politics & Policy 40 (): 369‐402. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1747‐1346.2012.00356.x/abstract

Sinclair, Thomas A. P. 2006. "." Politics & Policy 34 (): 481‐504. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1747‐1346.2006.00025.x/abstract
El diseño involucra un aspecto de la especialización que destaca habilidades heurísticas implícitas. La mayoría de los modelos para la elaboración de políticas tienen un fuerte interés en presiones estructurales y exógenas en la toma de decisiones. Un número de investigaciones sugieren que los expertos de alto nivel desarrollan capacidades únicas para procesar información, interpretar una situación, e idear soluciones imaginativas. Enlazando algunos de los atributos de un modelo de diseño para la toma de decisiones con un enfoque en la especialización es posible formular un modelo más fuerte de diseño de políticas públicas. Mientras otras perspectivas se enfocan en restricciones e imperativos estructurales, una perspectiva basada en el diseño se concentra en las capacidades individuales actores tales como expertos en legislación. Esta perspectiva se basa en proposiciones centrales que conciernen la emergencia de objetivos, el reconocimiento de patrones, la anticipación, compromiso de emociones, y la protección al riesgo. Estas proposiciones proveen de un punto de partida para futuras investigaciones y para el desarrollo profesional del los expertos en legislación.

Résumé Le système d'emploi australien a été complètement reconstruit par trois gouvernements successifs ; aussi bien à droite qu'à gauche de l'échiquier politique, l'accord s'est fait sur une privatisation des services préférable au « tout public » ou à un système mixte État et opérateurs privés. Néanmoins, l'impact de la privatisation en Australie n'a pas toujours été anticipé. Dans cet article, nous soulignons comment le secteur de l'emploi a été externalisé. Alors que le système australien se veut un exemple d'efficacité d'aide à l'emploi, les décideurs ont encore du chemin à faire avant de trouver le juste équilibre entre un système bien régulé et la possibilité de laisser place à des réponses innovantes au chômage.

This study examines the impact of adminstrative reforms upon the work of frontline staff in the employment services of three refrom-oriented countries – Australia, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. These changes have involved greater use of private agents, more detailed performance contracts, clearer expectations about outcomes for job-seekers, and increased competition between agencies seeking government work. The study compares the work characteristics and strategies of front-line staff in agencies in the three systems in 2008 and a decade earlier, using surveys.The results show that there are substantial differences in the level of tailoring and investment in these countries. There are three relatively stable modes of governance in these cases and the most stable of these types across countries and across time is what we term the corporate-market mode – more generally labelled New Public Management (NPM). Despite the expectations of theorists and of reformers, the role of network governance proves neither as stable nor as generalised as expected.

Innovation and innovators inhabit an institutional space, which is partially defined by formal positions and partially by informal networks. This article investigates the role of politicians and bureaucrats in fostering innovation inside government and provides an empirical explanation of who the innovators are, whether this is mostly an attribute of position or role, or mostly an effect of certain forms of networking. The study uses original data collected from 11 municipal governments in Australia in order to define and describe the normative underpinnings of innovation inside government and to show the importance of advice and strategic information networks among politicians and senior bureaucrats (n = 947). Social network analysis is combined with conventional statistical analysis in order to demonstrate the comparative importance of networks in explaining who innovates.

This book examines the different normative approaches politicians, bureaucrats and community actors use to frame the innovation puzzle, arguing that these create specific cultures of innovation. The authors explore the role of formal institutions and informal networks in promoting and impeding governmental innovation.

Effective public administration relies on the passage of information through interpersonal communication networks. While we have a vast research literature concerning formal structures and roles in organizations, including public agencies and government institutions, we know far less about the flow of information through semiformal, voluntary interactions. In this paper we use a large survey to explore the networking patterns of politicians and bureaucrats and to compare these with the more formal structural attributes of hierarchy and functional specialization. Social network analysis and standard quantitative measures are used to examine which actors are most central in advice and strategic information networks and how this varies across governments. The results suggest that the communication networks of politicians and bureaucrats differ substantially, with politicians being surprisingly peripheral in their patterns of interaction. Differences across governments are also observed with some municipalities being markedly more hierarchical, cross‐organizational, and externally focused in their networking behaviour.