Suchergebnisse

AbstractWhen supervising emerging technologies, regulators are more effective when they collaborate with business. Yet, innovative businesses are often small, inexperienced, and mistrustful. How can regulators motivate them to collaborate? This study examines this question by applying responsive regulation theory to a case study of the United Kingdom's regulatory sandbox for financial technology. This study illustrates how frontline regulatory interactions foster regulator–innovator collaboration, in ways that differ from how these interactions foster collaboration between regulators and the mature industries upon whose study responsive regulation is based. As one of the first academic studies to collect data from sandbox participants, this article offers unique insights into "what works" about the United Kingdom's much‐imitated model.

This article contributes to the discussion about managing the risks and uncertainties of emerging technologies through increased stakeholder participation. Authorities have increasingly invited stakeholders from high-technology sectors to participate in assessing the risks of, and designing responses to, new technologies. Yet authorities often struggle to attract stakeholders from such sectors to participate; a critical challenge identified but still undertheorised in the literature. Responding to this gap, this article presents a case study of the UK's regulatory sandbox for financial technologies, applying a document study, questionnaire and interviews to explore fintech firm motivations and apprehensions about participation. Drawing on the bureaucratic reputation literature, the study finds that fintech firms have a range of practical, reputational and normative motivations to participate, and these motivations are inextricably tied to the regulator's strong reputation with the sector as procedurally correct, high-performing and morally committed to facilitating innovation. On this basis, recommendations for practitioners and hypotheses for future research into the drivers of stakeholder participation in regulatory decision-making surrounding emerging technologies are proposed.

This open access book presents case studies of twelve organisations which the public have come to view as institutions. From the BBC to Doctors Without Borders, from the Amsterdam Concertgebouw Orchestra to CERN, this volume examines how some organisations rise to prominence and remain in high public esteem through changing and challenging times. It builds upon the scholarly tradition of institutional scholarship pioneered by Philip Selznick, and highlights common themes in the stories of these highly diverse organizations; demonstrating how leadership, learning, and luck all play a role in becoming and remaining an institution. This case study format makes this volume ideal for classroom use and practitioners alike. In an era where public institutions are increasingly under threat, this volume offers concrete lessons for contemporary organisation leaders.

1. Guardians of Public Value: How public organizations become and remain institutions -- 2. The Election Commission of India: Guardian of democracy -- 3. Singapore's Corrupt Practices Investigations Bureau: Guardian of public integrity -- 4. The BBC: Guardian of public understanding -- 5. Sweden's Riksbank: Guardian of monetary integrity -- 6. The European Court of Justice: Guardian of European integration -- 7. The Amsterdam Concertgebouw Orchestra: Guardian of symphonic music -- 8. The World Anti-Doping Agency: Guardian of elite sport's credibility -- 9. CERN: Guardian of the human aspiration to understand the universe -- 10. Rijkswaterstaat: Guardian of the Dutch delta -- 11. Médecins Sans Frontières: Guardian of humanitarian values -- 12. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: Guardian of climate science -- 13. The ACCC: Guardian of viable markets and consumer rights.

Invented in 2008 with Bitcoin, cryptocurrencies represent a radical technological innovation in finance and banking; one which threatened to disrupt the existing regulatory regimes governing those sectors. This article examines, from a reputation management perspective, how regulatory agencies framed their response. Through a content analysis, we compare communications from financial conduct regulators in the UK, US, and Australia. Despite the risks, challenges, and uncertainties involved in cryptocurrency supervision, we find regulators treat the technology as an opportunity to bolster their reputation in the immediate wake of the Global Financial Crisis. Regulators frame their response to cryptocurrencies in ways which reinforce the agency's ingenuity and societal importance. We discuss differences in framing between agencies, illustrating how historical, political, and legal differences between regulators can shape their responses to radical innovations.

Invented in 2008 with Bitcoin, cryptocurrencies represent a radical technological innovation in finance and banking; one which threatened to disrupt the existing regulatory regimes governing those sectors. This article examines, from a reputation management perspective, how regulatory agencies framed their response. Through a content analysis, we compare communications from financial conduct regulators in the UK, US, and Australia. Despite the risks, challenges, and uncertainties involved in cryptocurrency supervision, we find regulators treat the technology as an opportunity to bolster their reputation in the immediate wake of the Global Financial Crisis.Regulators frame their response to cryptocurrencies in ways which reinforce the agency's ingenuity and societal importance. We discuss differences in framing between agencies, illustrating how historical, political, and legal differences between regulators can shape their responses to radical innovations.

IMPACT: The goal of this article is to identify evidence-based building blocks for smart and sensible practices of policy design, public leadership and management, while recognizing that universal templates for success are not the right approach. It is critical that strategies to improve governance show appropriate sensitivity to context. The authors offer an alternative for high-level assessments of institutional qualities of 'good government'. The article presents a practical toolkit to identify, assess, interpret, compare, and learn from concrete instances of public policy successes, highly successful public organizations, and collaborative, networked governance.

WADA is a hybrid public–private agency that leads the global fight against doping. This chapter explores why and how this agency developed into an institution that receives support from sports organizations and governments worldwide. Despite initial scepticism about its ability to overcome the ineffectiveness of anti-doping policies prior to its foundation in 1999, WADA quickly grew into a broadly trusted and well-respected organization. It successfully developed a globally harmonized anti-doping system that reinforced the credibility of international sports competitions and the legitimacy of elite sport policies. From its inception, it had a distinct identity as a neutral, impartial and objective standard setter and referee agent in a morally challenging organizational field. Nonetheless, being relatively young, WADA remains a vulnerable institution. It must continuously take an independent position with regard to partial interests of sporting and public authorities that are responsible for WADA's funding and governance. This requires institutional leadership that the organization cannot always offer, as recent doping affairs show.

WADA is a hybrid public–private agency that leads the global fight against doping. This chapter explores why and how this agency developed into an institution that receives support from sports organizations and governments worldwide. Despite initial scepticism about its ability to overcome the ineffectiveness of anti-doping policies prior to its foundation in 1999, WADA quickly grew into a broadly trusted and well-respected organization. It successfully developed a globally harmonized anti-doping system that reinforced the credibility of international sports competitions and the legitimacy of elite sport policies. From its inception, it had a distinct identity as a neutral, impartial and objective standard setter and referee agent in a morally challenging organizational field. Nonetheless, being relatively young, WADA remains a vulnerable institution. It must continuously take an independent position with regard to partial interests of sporting and public authorities that are responsible for WADA's funding and governance. This requires institutional leadership that the organization cannot always offer, as recent doping affairs show.