Although state executive branch reorganization has been surrounded by controversy and expense for more than sixty years and has been occurring at an unprecedented rate during the last thirteen, much of our knowledge of it has been anecdotal, fragmentary, conceptually imprecise, and untested, asserts Dr. Garnett. His book contributes conceptual and empirical order to the study of reorganization by analyzing competing and complementary models, evaluating research methodologies, stating hypotheses, and testing those hypotheses with data drawn from more than 150 of the state reorganizations that have taken place in this century. Dr. Garnett addresses three basic questions: Why do state reorganizations occur? How are they conducted? What forms do the reorganized executive branches take? His specific action guidelines for governors and other state officials, agenda for further research, and extensive bibliography will be particularly useful.
Hurricane Katrina was as much a communication disaster as it was a natural and bureaucratic disaster. Communication gaps, missed signals, information technology failures, administrative buffering, turf battles, and deliberate and unintentional misinterpretations delayed and handicapped both the recognition of the crisis that Katrina posed and the response to its devastation. This essay views crisis communication through four conceptual lenses: (1) crisis communication as interpersonal influence, (2) crisis communication as media relations, (3) crisis communication as technology showcase, and (4) crisis communication as interorganizational networking. A conceptual framework is presented that compares these lenses with regard to agency, transparency, technology, and chronology. The planning, response, and recovery stages of the Hurricane Katrina disaster are viewed through these communication conceptual lenses, illustrating key facets of each perspective and adding to our deepening understanding of the events. Many of the problems we have identified can be categorized as "information gaps"—or at least problems with information‐related implications, or failures to act decisively because information was sketchy at best. Better information would have been an optimal weapon against Katrina. Information sent to the right people at the right place at the right time. Information moved within agencies, across departments, and between jurisdictions of government as well. Seamlessly. Securely. Efficiently … One would think we could share information by now. But Katrina again proved we cannot. —U.S. House Select Bipartisan Committee With the floodwalls gashed and hemorrhaging billions of gallons of water into the city, it was only a matter of a few hours on Monday before the communications citywide began to fail … Communication was about to become the biggest problem of the catastrophe. —Christopher Cooper and Robert Block, Disaster: Hurricane Katrina and the Failure of Homeland Security Truth became a casualty, news organizations that were patting their own backs in early September were publishing protracted mea culpas by the end of the month. —Matt Welch, "They Shoot Helicopters, Don't They?"
