Appendix on Methods

To date there have been two types of studies of government departments. Thereare a few analyses that attempt to cover all departments. These are either merelydescriptive (see Chester and Wilson 1968; McLean et al. 2000) or quantitative(especially Hood and Dunsire 1981). There are more studies of individualdepartments; although most of these are either descriptive or partial. In con-trast, we adopt a comparative case-study approach; comparing and contrastingchange in a limited number of departments (on the comparative case studymethod see Yin 1984).

However, before justifying our choice of departments, it is worth a brief con-sideration of a broader problem. As Hogwood (1992) points out, there is littleagreement as to the number of departments. So, Hood and Dunsire (1981: 40)argue that: ‘the question is a deep legal (indeed philosophical) one and there iscertainly no single and all-encompassing definition of such a thing’. This isdemonstrated by the plethora of definitions of, and schemas for, classifyinggovernment departments. Many authors include only the departments whichare headed by Cabinet ministers (see Rose 1987; and for similar lists seeMadgwick 1991: 20; Clarke 1975: 65; Hennessy 1989). Such lists, however, arepartial. In contrast, a number of authors have offered much more comprehen-sive definitions of government departments (Dewry and Butcher 1988;Dunleavy 1989; Hood et al. 1978; Hood and Dunsire 1981; Pitt and Smith 1981;Pollitt 1984). Dunleavy (1989: 273), for instance, disaggregates departments,recognising that many have departmental agencies attached. Consequently, heidentifies 44 ‘ministerial departments (and elements of)’ and lists a further 38‘non-ministerial departments, departmental agencies, and other semi-detachedagencies etc.’

Hood et al. (1978), when beginning their research into the management ofgovernment, soon found that there was ‘no single or self evident definition of“a central government agency” in Britain’. They point out that different govern-ment lists offer varying lists of agencies that are attached to departments and,perhaps most ironically, the departments listed in the Treasury’s ‘Memorandumon the Estimates’: ‘are by no means the same Departments which actuallyappear in the estimates’ (Hood et al. 1978). Consequently, they distinguishbetween departments which are 5 star, i.e. the departments which appear on allfive departmental lists, and departments which are 4 star appearing on four etc.They finally accept a total of 69 departments.

In the end this debate can seem arcane so we settled for the most obvious list;that published in the Civil Service Year Book. In 1993, this listed 61 departmentsof which 19 were headed by Cabinet ministers, with a further two, the LawOfficer’s Department and the Lord Advocate’s Department, defined asDepartments of the State. Given this list we were still spoilt for choice. We hada clear resource constraint that suggested that we could undertake a study ofonly four departments. Obviously, no four departments could be regarded asrepresentative. However, we wanted a spread of departments to ensure that anygeneral conclusions we reached weren’t the product of choosing departments

251

that were of the same type. Of course, any choice involves establishing criteria.Our starting point was Richard Rose’s classification (1987) of departmentswhich, in our view, is the most accessible. He categorises departments accordingto their dates of origin, resource claims and political status. His analysis focusesmainly on the period between 1945 and 1983. Of course, this means that it isdated. Some of the departments he identifies have been amalgamated (e.g.Employment and Education; Transport and Environment) and others disbanded(e.g. Energy). At the same time, the creation of separate Executive Agencies hassignificantly altered the pattern of resource claims. In addition, the politicalstatus of departments clearly fluctuates. So, for example, Hoopes’ (1996) studyof oil privatisation gives ample evidence that the political status of theDepartment of Energy fluctuated significantly between its creation in 1974 andits dismantling in 1993.

Nevertheless, Rose’s classification is a useful starting point. Figure A.1 isadapted from Rose (1987) and summarises his classification of those depart-ments that existed in 1983. We wanted a spread of departments that reflectedRose’s criteria but, given that a key focus of our research was structural and cul-tural change, we also wanted most of our departments to be ones which hadexperienced significant structural change. Consequently, we decided upon thefollowing departments: the Home Office; the Department of Trade andIndustry; the Department of Social Security; and the, now dismantled,Department of Energy. As such, we had one of the main departments of state,the Home Office, which ranks high in relation to all Rose’s criteria, but that hasexperienced relatively few structural changes. In contrast, the DTI, according toRose (1987: 49, Table 2.5) is a department characterised by almost constantchange; it had twice as many transfers of function between 1946 and 1983 as

252 Appendix

Figure A.1 Classifying government departments

Department Date of Resource Political origin (1) claims (2) status (3)

Treasury Old High HighDefence Old High MediumTrade in Industry Old Medium HighForeign Old Medium HighHome Office Old High HighHealth/Social Security Middle-aged/New (4) High MediumEducation Middle-aged Medium LowEnvironment Middle-aged Medium MediumScotland Middle-aged Medium MediumAgriculture Middle-aged Low LowEmployment Middle-aged Low MediumTransport New Medium MediumEnergy New Low MediumWales New Low LowNorthern Ireland New Low Medium

any other department. It was split into three in 1974 with the creation of aDepartment of Industry, a Department of Trade and a Department of ConsumerAffairs. Subsequently, it was recreated in 1983. In Rose’s classification, the DTI isan old ministry with medium resource claims and high political status,although it is probably fairer to claim that its political status has fluctuated. TheDepartment of Social Security has also experienced significant changes. It wassplit from Health in 1988 and was very affected by the move to ExecutiveAgencies. In Rose’s terms, it is young, with high resource claims and a mediumpolitical status. The Department of Energy was a very small department that wascreated in 1974 and amalgamated with the DTI in 1993. In Rose’s classificationit was new with low resource claims and medium political status. However, theminers’ strike in 1984 and the privatisations in the 1980s subsequently gave it avery high political profile. Overall, the four departments upon which we focusgive us a good spread of government departments and particularly of thosewhich have experienced structural change.

We initially collected quantitative data on the size, functions, budgets andorganisation of the four departments. This was mainly taken from official publi-cations, although we also had limited access to a number of internal, unpub-lished government documents. However, the main source of material used inthis book is drawn from 191 semi-structured interviews we conducted with min-isters, civil servants and interest group representatives (see Figure A.2) whobetween 1974 and 1997 had an association with our four departments. Theinterviews were conducted between October 1995 and August 1998.

Appendix 253

Figure A.2 The interviewees

Civil servantsGrade Retired Contemporary

1/1A 20 52 27 133 16 275 12 267/HEO 8

Cabinet ministers Interest group reps22 25

Total interviewed 191

Bibliography

Adonis, A. and Hames, T. (1994) The Thatcher-Reagan Revolution, Manchester:Manchester University Press.

Alveson, M. (1995) Cultural Perspectives on Organizations, Cambridge: CambridgeUnviersity Press.

Artis, M. J. (1998) ‘The United Kingdom’, in J. Forder and A. Menon (eds), TheEuropean Union and National Macroeconomic Policy, London: Routledge.

Auction, P. (1990) ‘Adminstrative Reforms in Public Managment: Paradigms,Principles, Paradoxes and Pendulums’, Governance, 3(2), 115–37.

Bache, I. (1996) ‘EU Regional Policy: Has the UK Government Succeeded inPlaying the Gatekeeper Role Over the Domestic Impact of the EuropeanRegional Fund?’ PhD Thesis, University of Sheffield.

Baker, A. (1997) ‘The Transnationalisation of the Core Executive in the UK: theCase of HM Treasury’s International Finance Directorate’, paper presented atthe ECPR Joint Sessions of Workshops, Bern, 27 March–4 April.

Baker, K. (1993) The Turbulent Years: My Life in Politics, London: Faber and Faber.Bale, T. (1999) Sacred Cows and Common Sense, Aldershot: Ashgate.Balogh, T. (1959) ‘The Apotheosis of the Dilettante: the Establishment of

Mandarins’, in H. Thomas (ed.), The Establishment: a Symposium, London:Anthony Blond.

Barberis, P. (1996) The Elite of the Elite: Permanent Secretaries in the British HigherCivil Service Aldershot: Dartmouth.

Barker, A. and Wilson, G. (1997) ‘Whitehall’s Disobedient Servants? SeniorOfficials’ Potential Resistance to Ministers in British GovernmentDepartments’, British Journal of Political Science, 27, 223–46.

Beer, S. (1982) Britain Against Itself, London: Faber.Bender, B. (1991) ‘Governmental Processes: Whitehall, Central Government and

1992’, Public Policy and Administration, 6, 13–21.Benn, T. (1980) Arguments for Socialism, London: Jonathan Cape.Benn, T. (1990), Conflicts of Interest: Diaries 1977–80, London: Arrow.Benson, J. K. (1977) ‘Organizations: a Dialetical View’, Administrative Science

Quarterly, 22, 1–21.Benyon, J. (1993) Law and Order Review 1993: an Audit of Crime, Policing and

Criminal Justice Issues, Leicester: Centre for the Study of Public Order.Berger P. and Luckman, T. (1967) The Social Construction of Reality,

Harmondsworth: Penguin.Bevir, M. and Rhodes, R. A. W. (2001) Interpreting British Governance, Oxford:

Oxford University Press.Birch, A. (1964) Representative and Responsible Government, London: Allen and

Unwin.Birch, M. and Holliday, I. (1996) The British Cabinet System, Hemel Hempstead:

Prentice Hall.Blackstone, T. and Plowden, W. (1988) Inside the Think-tanks: Advising the British

Cabinet 1971–83, London: William Heinemann.

254

Bradshaw, J. (1992), ‘Social Security’, in D. Marsh and R. Rhodes (eds),Implementing Thatcherite Policies: Audit of an Era, Buckingham: OpenUniversity Press.

Breton, A. and Wintrobe, R. (1974) The Logic of Bureaucratic Control: an EconomicAnalysis of Competition, Exchange and Efficiency in Private and PublicOrganisations, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Breton, A. and Wintrobe, R. (1982) The Logic of Bureaucratic Control: an EconomicAnalysis of Competition, Exchange and Efficiency in Private and PublicOrganisations, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Bridges, Lord (1964) The Treasury, London: George Allen and Unwin.Brittan, S. (1964) The Treasury Under the Tories, Harmondsworth: Penguin.Brittan, S. (1971) Steering the Economy, Harmondsworth: Penguin.Brittan, S. (1975), ‘The Economic Contradictions of Democracy’, British Journal

of Political Science, 5(2), 129–59.Brittan, S. (1979) Participation without Politics, London: Institute for Economic

Affairs.Bruce-Gardyne, J. and Lawson, N. (1976) The Power Game, Basingstoke:

Macmillan – now Palgrave.Buller, J. (2000) ‘The Advantage of “Tying One’s Hands”: Rules, Autonomy and

the Europeanisation of British Economic Policy’, paper presented at PSAannual conference, LSE, 10–13 April.

Buller, J. and Smith, M. J. (1998) ‘Civil Service Attitudes to the EuropeanUnion’, in D. Baker and D. Seawright (eds), Britain: For and Against Europe,Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bulmer, S. and Burch, M. (1998) ‘Organizing for Europe: Whitehall, the BritishState and the European Union’, Public Administration, 76, 601–28.

Bulpitt, J. (1983) Territory and Power in the United Kingdom, Manchester:Manchester University Press.

Bulpitt, J, (1986) ‘The Discipline of the New Democracy: Mrs Thatcher’sDomestic Statecraft’, Political Studies, 34, 19–39.

Bulpitt, J. (1988) ‘Rational Politicians and Conservative Statecraft in an OpenPolitiy’, in P. Byrd (ed.), British Foreign Policy Under Thatcher, Deddington:Philip Allen.

Burrell, G. (1998) ‘Modernism, Postmodernism and Organizational Analysis: theContribution of Michel Foucault’, in A. McKinlay and K. Starkey (eds),Foucault, Management and Organization Theory, London: Sage.

Burrell, G. and Morgan, G. (1979) Sociological Paradigms and OrganizationalAnalysis: Elements of the Sociology of Corporate Life, London: Heinemann.

Burt, R. S., Gabbay, S. M., Holt, G. and Moran, P. (1994) ‘ContingentOrganization as a Network Theory: the Culture-Performance ContingencyFunction’, Acta Sociologica, 37, 345–70.

Butcher, T. (1995) Delivering Welfare: the Governance of the Social Services in the1990s, Buckingham: Open University Press.

Cabinet Office (1996), The Civil Service Yearbook 1996, London: HMSO.Callaghan, J. (1982), ‘Cumber and Variables’, in The Home Office: Perspectives on

Policy and Administration Bicentenary Lectures 1982, London: RIPA.Callaghan, J. (1987) Time and Chance, London: Collins.Campbell, C. and Wilson, G. (1995) The End of Whitehall: Death of a Paradigm,

Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Bibliography 255

Carrington, P. (1988) Reflect on Things Past, London: Collins.Carruthers, B. G. (1994) ‘When is the State Autonomous? Culture, Organ-

ization Theory and the Political Sociology of the State’, Sociological Theory,12, 19–44.

Castells, M. (1998) The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture, Vol III: Endof Millennium, Oxford: Blackwell.

Castle, B. (1984) The Castle Diaries 1964–70, London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson. Cerny, P. (1990) The Changing Architecture of the State, London: Sage.Chapman, J. (1999) ‘The Policy Process and the Decline of the Deep Mine Coal

Industry, 1965–95’, Unpublished PhD, University of Sheffield.Chapman, R. A. (1988) Ethics in the British Civil Service, London: Routledge.Chapman, R. A. (1997) The Treasury in Public Policy Making, London: Routledge. Chester, D. N. and Wilson, F. M. G. (1968) The Organisation of British Central

Government, 1914–1964, London: Allen and Unwin.Child, J. (1972) ‘Organizational Structure, Environment and Performance: the

Role of Strategic Choice’, Sociology, 6, 1–22.Clarke, R. (1975) ‘The Machinery of Government’, in W. Thornhill (ed.), The

Modernization of British Government, London: Pitman.Clegg, S. (1990) Modern Organisations: Organisation Studies in the Postmodern

World, London: Sage.Clegg, S. (1998) ‘Foucault, Power and Organizations’ in A. McKinlay and

K. Starkey (eds), Foucault, Management and Organization Theory, London:Sage.

Clifford, J. (1983) ‘On Ethnographic Authority’, Representations, 1, 118–46.Cm 2627 (1992) Continuity and Change in the Civil Service, London: HMSO.Cmnd 4506 (1970), The Reorganisation of Central Government, London: HMSO.Cmnd 9517 (1985), Reform of Social Security, Department of Health and Social

Security, London: HMSO. Cmnd 9691 (1985), Reform of Social Security: Programme for Action, Department of

Health and Social Security, London: HMSO. Coates, D. (1980) Labour in Power?, London: Longman.Coates, D. (1989), The Crisis of Labour: Industrial Relations and the State in

Contemporary Britain, London: Longman.Cockett, R. (1995) Thinking the Unthinkable: Think-tanks and the Economic

Counter-revolution, London: Fontana.Cortell, A. P. and Peterson, S. (1997) ‘Altered States: Explaining Domestic

Institutional Change’, mimeo.Cram, L. (1997) Policy-Making in the European Union, London: Routledge.Cronin, J. (1991) The Politics of State Expansion: War, State and Society in

Twentieth-Century Britain, London: Routledge.Cross, J. A. (1970) British Public Administration, London: University Tutorial

Press.Crossman, R. (1972a) Inside View, London: Jonathan Cape.Crossman, R. (1972b) The Myths of Cabinet Government, Cambridge, Mass:

Harvard University Press.Crossman, R. (1975) The Diaries of a Cabinet Minister, Volume 1, Minister of

Housing, London: Hamilton and Cape.Daintith, T. and Page, E. (1999) The Executive in the Constitution, Oxford: Oxford

University Press.

256 Bibliography

Dale, H. E. (1941) The Higher Civil Service of Great Britain, Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.

Deakin, N. and Parry, R. (2000) The Treasury and Social Policy, Basingstoke:Macmillan – now Palgrave.

Department of Trade and Industry (1983) ‘History and Composition of theBoard of Trade’, mimeo, London: DTI.

Devine, F. (1995) ‘Qualitative Methods’, in D. Marsh, and G. Stoker (eds),Theories and Methods in Political Science, Basingstoke: Macmillan – now Palgrave.

DiMaggio, P. J. and Powell, W. W. (1991) ‘Introduction’, in W. W. Powell and P. J. DiMaggio (eds), The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis,Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Dolowitz, W. and Marsh, D. (1996) ‘Who Learns What From Whom: a Reviewof the Policy Transfer Literature’, Political Studies, 44, 343–57.

Dolowitz, W. and Marsh, D. (2000) ‘Learning from Abroad: the Role of PolicyTransfer in Contemporary Policy- Making’, Governance 13 (1), 5–23.

Dolowitz, D., Marsh, D., O’Neil, F. and Richards, D. (1996) ‘Thatcherism and the3 “Rs”: Radicalism, Realism and Rhetoric in the Third Term of the ThatcherGovernment’, Parliamentary Affairs, 49(3), 455–79.

Donaldson, L. (1996) For Positivist Organization Theory, London: Sage.Donoughue, P. (1987) Prime Minister: the Conduct of Policy Under Harold Wilson

and James Callaghan, Basingstoke: Macmillan – now Palgrave.Douglas, M. (1982) In the Active Voice, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Dowding, K. (1995) The Civil Service, London: Routledge.Drewry, G. and Butcher, T. (1988) The Civil Service Today, Oxford: Blackwell.DTI (1995) Implementing the Civil Service White Papers in the Department of Trade

and Industry, London: DTI.Dudley, G. and Richardson, J. (1996) ‘Promiscuous and Celibate Ministerial

Styles: Policy Changes, Policy Network, and UK Roads Policy’, Essex Papers inPolitics and Government No. 107, Colchester: University of Essex.

Dunleavy, P. (1989) ‘The Architecture of the British Central State, Part I:Framework for Analysis’, Public Administration, 67, 3, 391–417.

Dunleavy, P. (1991) Democracy, Bureaucracy and Public Choice, HemelHempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.

Dunleavy, P. (1995) ‘Estimating the Distribution of Positional Influence inCabinet Committees under Major’, in R. A. W. Rhodes and P. Dunleavy (eds),Prime Minister, Cabinet and Core Executive, Basingstoke: Macmillan – nowPalgrave.

Dyrberg, T. B. (1997) The Circular Structure of Power, London: Verso.Emmerson, H. (1956) The Ministry of Works, London: George Allen and Unwin.English R. and Kenny, M. (2000) Rethinking British Decline, Basingstoke:

Macmillan – now Palgrave.Evans, M., Piachaud, D. and Sutherland, H. (1994), ‘Designed for the Poor –

Poorer by Design? The Effects of the 1986 Social Security Act on FamilyIncomes’, STICERD Welfare State Programme Discussion Paper, WSP/105,London: London School of Economics.

Fitzgerald, T. H. (1988) ‘Can Change in Organizational Culture Really beManaged?’ Organizational Dynamics, 18, 4–16.

Flinders, M. (2000) ‘The Politics of Accountablity’, PhD, University of Sheffield.

Bibliography 257

Flinders, M. and Smith, M. J. (1998) Quangos, Accountablity and Reform,Basingstoke: Macmillan – now Palgrave.

Foley, M. (1992) The Rise of the British Presidency, Manchester: ManchesterUniversity Press.

Foster, C. D. (1997) A Stronger Centre of Government, London: ConstitutionalUnit.

Foster, C. and Plowden, F. (1996) The State Under Stress, Buckingham: OpenUniversity Press.

Foucault, M. (1977) Discipline and Punish: Birth of the Prison, New York: RandomHouse.

Fowler, N. (1991) Ministers Decide, London: Chapman.Franklin, B. (2001) ‘The Hand of History: New Labour, News Management and

Governance’, in S. Ludlam and M. J. Smith (eds), New Labour in GovernmentBasingstoke: Macmillan – now Palgrave.

Frost, P. J., Moore, L. F., Louis, M. R., Lundberg, C. C. and Martin, J. (1983) ‘AnAllegorical View of Organizational Culture’, in P. J. Frost (ed.), OrganizationalCulture, California: Sage.

Fry, G. (1984) ‘The Development of the Government’s Grand Strategy for CivilService Reform’, Public Administration, 62.

Fry, G. (1993) Reforming the Civil Service: the Fulton Committee in the British HomeCivil Service 1966–68, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Fry, G. (1995) Policy and Management in the British Civil Service, HemelHempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf

Furlong, P. and Marsh, D. (2001) ‘A Skin not a Pullover: Ontology andEpistemology in Political Science’, in D. Marsh and G. Stoker (eds), Theory andMethods in Polotical Science, 2nd edn, Basingstoke: Palgrave.

Gains, F. (2000) ‘Understanding Department-Next Steps Relationships’, PhD,University of Sheffield.

Gamble, A. (1994), The Free Economy and the Strong State, Basingstoke: Macmillan– now Palgrave.

Gamble A. (1999) ‘State, Economy and Society’, in I. Holliday, A. Gamble andG. Parry (eds), Fundamentals in British Politics, Basingstoke: Macmillan – nowPalgrave.

Gamble, A. and Payne, A. (1996) Regionalism and World Order, Basingstoke:Macmillan – now Palgrave.

Garfinkel, H. (1967) Studies in Ethnomethodology, Oxford: Polity.George, S. (1998) An Awkward Partner: Britain in the European Community,

Oxford: Oxford University Press.Giddens, A. (1986) The Consitution of Society, Oxford: Polity Press.Gilmour, I. (1992) Whatever Happened to the Conservative Party?, London: Fourth

Estate.Glennerster, H. (1995) British Social Policy since 1945, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Goffman, E. (1969) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, Harmondsworth:

Penguin.Grant, W. (1978) ‘Insider Groups, Outsider Groups and Interest Group Strategies

in Britain’, University of Warwick, Department of Politics Working Paper No. 32.

Grant, W. (1995) Business and Politics, Basingstoke: Macmillan – now Palgrave.

258 Bibliography

Green, D. and Shapiro, I. (1994) Pathologies of Rational Choice Theory, NewHaven, Yale Univeristy Press.

Greer, P. (1994) Transforming Central Government: the Next Steps Initiative,Buckingham: Open University Press.

Grugel, J. and Hout, W. (1999) ‘Regions, Regionalism and the South’, in J. Grugel and W. Hout (eds), Regionalism Across the North-South Divide,London: Routledge.

Haines, J. (1977) The Politics & Power, London: Cape.Hall, P. and Taylor, R. (1996) ‘Political Science and the Three Institutionalisms’,

Political Studies, 44, 936–57.Hall, S. (1985), ‘Authoritarian Populism: a Reply’, New Left Review, 151,

112–24.Hay, C. (1995) ‘Structure and Agency’, in D. Marsh and G. Stoker (eds), Theories

and Methods in Political Science, Basingstoke: Macmillan – now Palgrave.Hay, C. (1996), Restating Social and Political Change, Buckingham: Open

University Press.Hay, C. (1997a), ‘Political Time and the Temporality of Crisis’, Paper presented

at Institute of Western Europe, Columbia University, New York, 25 January.Hay, C. (1997b), ‘Anticipating Accommodations: the Appeasement of Capital in

the “Modernisation” of the British Labour Party, 1987–92’, Politics and Society,25(2), 234–56.

Hay, C. and Richards, D. (2000) ‘The Tangled Webs of Westminster andWhitehall: the Discourse, Strategy and Practice of Networking within theBritish Core Executive’, Public Administration, 78, 1, 1–28.

Hay, C. and Watson, M. (1998) ‘Rendering the Contingent Necessary: New Labour’s Neo-liberal Conversion and the Discourse of Globalisation’,Center for European Studies Working Paper 8.4, Cambridge, Mass: HarvardUniversity Press.

Headey, B. (1974) British Cabinet Ministers, London: George Allen and Unwin.Heath, E. (1998) The Course of my Life: the Autobiography of Edward Heath,

London: Hodder and Stoughton.Heclo, H. and Wildavsky, A. (1974) The Private Government of Public Money,

Basingstoke: Macmillan – now Palgrave.Heclo, H. and Wildavsky, A. (1981) 2nd edition, The Private Government of Public

Money, Basingstoke: Macmillan – now Palgrave.Held, D., McGrew, A., Goldblatt, D. and Perraton, J. (1999) Global

Transformations, Oxford: Polity.Hennessy, P. (1986) Cabinet, Oxford: Blackwell.Hennessy, P. (1989) Whitehall, London: Fontana Press. Hennessy, P. (1998) ‘The Blair Style of Government: an Historical Perspective

and an Interim Audit’, Government and Opposition, 33, pp. 3–20.Hennessy, P., Hughes, R. and Seaton, J. (1997) Ready, Steady, Go! New Labour and

Whitehall, London: Fabian Society.Heseltine, M. (1987) Where There’s a Will, London: Hutchinson.Hindmoor, A. (1998) ‘The Importance of Being Trusted: Transaction Costs and

Policy Networks’, Public Administration, 76, 25–43.Hirst, P. and Thompson, G. (1996) Globalisation in Question, Cambridge: Polity.Hogg, S. and Hill, J. (1995) Too Close to Call, London: Little, Brown.

Bibliography 259

Hogwood, B. (1988), ‘The Rise and Fall and Rise of the Department of Trade andIndustry’, in C. Campbell and B. G. Peters (eds), Organizing Governance:Governing Organisation, Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.

Hogwood, B. (1992) ‘Government Departments’, mimeo, University ofStrathclyde.

Hogwood, B. (1997) ‘The Machinery of Government’, Political Studies, 45(4),704–15.

Hood, C. (1990) ‘Control Over Bureaucracy: Cultural Theory and InstitutionalVariety’, Journal of Public Policy, 15, 207–30.

Hood, C. (1991) ‘A New Public Management for all Seasons’, PublicAdministration, 69, 3–19.

Hood, C. (1998) The Art of the State, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Hood, C. and Dunsire, A. (1981) Bureaumetrics, Farnborough: Gower.Hood, C., Dunsire, A. and Thompson, S. (1978) ‘So You Think You Know

What Government Departments Are?’, Public Administration Bulletin, 27,20–32.

Hoogvelt, A. (1997) Globalisation and the Postcolonial World, Basingstoke:Macmillan – now Palgrave.

Hoopes, S. (1996) Oil Privatization, Public Choice and International Force,Basingstoke: Macmillan – now Palgrave.

Horn, M. (1995) The Political Economy of Public Administration, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

Hoskyns, J. (1983) ‘Whitehall and Westminster’, Parliamentary Affairs, 36.Howard, A. (1987), RAB: the Life of R. A. Butler, London: Jonathan Cape.Howell, D. (1970) A New Style of Government, London: Conservative Political

Centre.James, S. (1992) British Cabinet Government, London: Routledge.Jay, P. (1977) ‘Englanditis’, in R. E. Tyrell (ed.), The Future That Doesn’t Work,

New York: Doubleday.Jenkins, G. (1959) The Ministery of Transport and Civil Aviation, London: George

Allen and Unwin.Jenkins, R. (1991) A Life at the Centre, Basingstoke: Macmillan – now Palgrave.Jennings, R. F. (1977) Education and Politics, London: Batsford.Jensen, L. (1998) ‘Cultural Theory and Democratizing Functional Domains: the

Case of Danish Housing’, Public Administration, 76, 117–39.Jessop, B. (1974) Traditionalism, Conservatism and British Political Culture,

London: Allen and Unwin.Jessop, B., Bonnett, K., Bromley, S. and Ling, T. (1988), Thatcherism: a Tale of

Two Nations, Cambridge: Polity Press.Judge, D. (1993) The Parliamentary State, London: Sage.Judge, D. (1999) Representation, London: Routledge.Kandiah, M. and Seldon, A. (1996) Ideas and Think Tanks in Contemporary Britain

Volumes 1 & 2, London: Frank Cass.Kaufman, G. (1997) How to be a Minister, London: Faber and Faber.Kavanagh, D. (1987) Thatcherism and British Politics: the End of Consensus?,

Oxford: Oxford University Press.Kavanagh, D. (1997) The Reordering of British Politics, Oxford: Oxford University

Press.

260 Bibliography

Kavanagh, D. and Richards, D. (2000a) ‘Departmentalism and Joined-UpGovernment: Back to the Future?’, Parliamentary Affairs, September, 53(4).

Kavanagh, D. and Richards, D. (2000b) ‘Prime Ministers, Ministers and CivilServants in Britain’, paper presented at the World Congress of IPSA, QuebecCity, Canada, 1–5 August.

Kavanagh, D. and Seldon, A. (1999) The Powers behind the Prime Minister,London: Harper Collins.

Kellner, P. and Crowther Hunt, N. (1980) The Civil Service: an Enquiry intoBritain’s Ruling Class, London: Macdonald.

Kenny, M. (1999) ‘Ideas, Ideologies and the British Political Tradition’, in I.Holliday, A. Gamble and G. Parry (eds), Fundamentals in British Politics,Basingstoke: Macmillan – now Palgrave.

King, A. (1975) ‘Overload: Problems of Governing in the 1970s’, Political Studies,23 (2/3), 284–96.

King A. (1985) The British Prime Minister, Basingstoke: Macmillan – now Palgrave.Kingdom, J. (1999) Government and Politics in Britain, Oxford: Polity.Klein, R. (1989) The Politics of the NHS, London: Longman.Klymlicka, W. (1999) ‘Citizenship in an Era of Globalization’, in I. Shapiro and

C. Hacker-Cordon (eds), Democracy’s Edges, Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.

Kogan, M. (1971) Educational Policy Making, London: Allen and Unwin.Lawson, N. (1992) The View from No. 11, London: Bantam Press.Lee, J., Jones, G. and Burnham, J. (1998) Government at the Centre, Basingstoke:

Macmillan – now Palgrave.Legg, T. and Ibbs, R. (1998) Report of the Sierra Leone Arms Investigation, London:

HMSO.Ling, T. (1998) The British State Since 1945, London: Polity Press.Louis, M. R. (1985) ‘An Investigator’s Guide to Workplace Culture’ in P. J. Frost

(ed.), Organizational Culture, California: Sage.Lowndes, V. (1996) ‘Varieties of the New Institutionalism: a Critical Appraisal’,

Public Administration, 74: 181–97.Ludlam, S. and Smith, M. J. (1996) Contemporary British Conservatism,

Basingstoke: Macmillan – now Palgrave. Madgwick, P. (1991) British Government: the Central Executive Territory, London:

Philip Allen.March J. and Olsen, J. (1984) ‘The New Institutionalism: Organizational Factors

in Political Life’, American Political Science Review, 78, 734–49.Marquand, D. (1988) The Unprincipled Society: New Demands and Old Politics,

London: Fontana.Marr, A. (1995) Ruling Britannia: the Failure of British Democracy,

Harmondsworth: Penguin.Marsh, D. (1980) The British Political Tradition, University of Essex, Mimeo.Marsh, D. (1996) ‘Explaining “Thatcherite” Policies: Beyond Uni-dimensional

Explanation’, Political Studies, 43(1).Marsh, D. (1998) Comparing Policy Networks, Milton Keynes: Open University

Press.Marsh, D. (2001) ‘It’s Always the Happy Hour for Men with Money, Knowledge

and Power: Beyond Pluralism as the Approach to the Study of British Politics’,in C. Hay (ed.), British Politics Today, Oxford: Polity.

Bibliography 261

Marsh, D. and Rhodes, R. A. W. (1992a) Policy Networks in British Government,Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Marsh, D. and Rhodes, R. (1992b), Implementing Thatcherite Policies: Audit of anEra, Buckingham: Open Univeristy Press.

Marsh, D., Richards, D. and Smith, M. J. (2001) ‘Unequal Plurality: Towards anAsymmetic Power Model of the British Polity’, unpublished paper, Universityof Birmingham.

Marsh, D. and Smith M. (2000) ‘Understanding Policy Networks: Towards aDialectical Approach’, Political Studies, 48, 4–21.

Marsh, D., Smith, M. J. and Richards, D. (2000) ‘Bureaucrats, Politicians andReform in Whitehall: Analysing the Bureau-Shaping Model’, British Journal ofPolitical Science, 30, 461–82.

Marsh, D. et al. (1999) Postwar British Politics in Perspective, Cambridge: Polity.

Mather, G. (1994) ‘The Market, Accountability and the Civil service’, paperpresented at Public administration conference, University of York, 5–7September 1994.

McAnnula, S. (2001) ‘Structure and Agency’, in D. Marsh and G. Stoker (eds),Theory and Methods in Political Science, Basingstoke: Palgrave.

McCaig, C. (2001) ‘New Labour and Education, Education, Education’, in S. Ludlam and M. J. Smith (eds), New Labour in Government, BBasingstoke:Palgrave.

McFarland, A. (1987) ‘Interest Groups and Theories of Power in America’, BritishJournal of Political Science, 17, 129–47.

McKinlay, A. and Starkey, K. (1998) ‘Managing Foucault: Foucault, Managementand Organization Theory’, in A. McKinlay, and K. Starkey (eds), Foucault,Management and Organization Theory, London: Sage.

McLean, I. Clifford, C. and McMillan, A. (2000) ‘The Organisation of CentralGovernment Departments: a History 1964–92’, in R. A. W. Rhodes (ed.),Transforming British Government, Vol. 1, Basingstoke: Macmillan – now Palgrave.

McLeay, E. (1998) ‘Policing Policy and Policy Networks in Britain and NewZealand’ in D. Marsh (ed.), Comparing Policy Networks, Milton Keynes: OpenUniversity Press.

Menon, A. and Forder, J. (1998) ‘Conclusion: States, the European Union andMacroeconomic Policy’, in J. Forder, and A. Menon (eds), The European Unionand Macroeconomic Policy, London; Routledge.

Menon, A. and Hayward J. (1996) ‘States, Industrial Policy and the EuropeanUnion’ in H. Kassim, and A. Menon (eds) The European Union and NationalIndustrial Policy, London: Routledge.

Metcalfe, L. (1993) ‘Conviction Politics and Dynamic Conservatism: Mrs Thatcher’s Managerial Revolution’, International Political Science Review,14(4).

Meyerson, D. (1991) ‘“Normal” Ambiguity? A Glimpse of an OccupationalCulture’, in P. Frost, L. Moore, M. Louis, C. Lundberg, and J. Martin (eds),Reframing Organizational Culture, London: Sage.

Middlemas, K. (1979) Politics in Industrial Society, London: André Deutsch.Middlemas, K. (1991), Power, Competition and the State, Vol 3: the End of the Post-

War Era, Basingstoke: Macmillan – now Palgrave.

262 Bibliography

Migue, J. and Berlanger, G. (1974) ‘Towards a General Theory of ManagerialDiscretion’, Public Choice 17.

Milner, H. and Keohane, R. (1996) ‘Internationalization and Domestic Politics’,in R. Keohane and H. Milner (eds), Internationalisation and Domestic Politics,Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Minogue, K. and Biddiss, M. (eds) (1988) Thatcherism: Personality and Politics,Basingstoke: Macmillan – now Palgrave.

Moran, M. (1984) The Politics of Banking, Basingstoke: Macmillan – nowPalgrave.

Mountfield, R. (1997) ‘The New Senior Civil Service: Managing the Paradox’,Public Administration, 75, 307–12.

Newton, S. and Porter, D. (1988), Modernisation Frustrated: the Politics ofIndustrial Decline in Britain since 1990, London: Unwin Hyman.

Niskanen, W. (1971) Bureaucracy and Representative Government, New York:Aldine Atherton.

Niskanen, W. (1973) Bureucracy: Servant or Master?, London: Institute ofEconomic Affairs.

Niskanen, W. (1978) ‘Competition among Government Bureaus’, in J. M.Buchanan (ed.), The Economics of Politics, London: Institute for EconomicAffairs.

Noll, R. G. and Fiorina, M. P. (1979) ‘Voters, Bureaucrats and Legislators: aRational Perspective on the Growth of Bureaucracy’, Journal of PublicEconomics, 9, 239–54.

Norton, P. (2000) ‘Barons in a Shrinking Kingdom: Senior Ministers in BritishGovernment’, in R. A. W. Rhodes (ed.), Transforming British Government, Vol 2:Changing Roles and Relationships, Basingstoke: Macmillan – now Palgrave.

Ohmae, K. (1990) The Borderless World, London: Collins.Parsons, W. (1998) ‘Fuzzy in Theory and Getting Fuzzier in Practice: Post-

Modern Reflections on Responsibility in Public Administration andManagement’, in A. Hondeghem (ed.), Ethics and Accountability in a Context ofGovernance and New Public Management: EGPA Year Book, Amsterdam: IOSPress.

Part, A. (1990) The Making of a Modern Mandarin, London: André Deutsch.Perrow, C. (1970) Organizational Analysis, London: Tavistock.Peters, B. G. (1999) Institutional Theory in Political Science, London: Pinter.Peters, T. and Waterman, R. (1982) In Search of Excellence: Lessons from America’s

Best Run Companies, New York: Harper and Row.Peterson, J. (1999) ‘Sovereignty and Interdependence’, in I. Holliday, A. Gamble,

and G. Parry (eds), Fundamentals in British Politics, Basingstoke: Macmillan –now Palgrave.

Phillips, Lord (2000) The BSE Inquiry, London: HMSO.Pierson, P. (1994) Dismantling the Welfare State, Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.Pile, W. (1979) The Department of Education and Science, London: George Allen

and Unwin.Pitt, D. C. and Smith, B. C. (1981) Government Departments, London: Routledge.Plowden, W. (1994) Ministers and Mandarins, London: IPPR.Pollitt, C. (1984) Manipulating the Machine: Changing the Pattern of Government

Departments, London: Allen and Unwin.

Bibliography 263

Pollitt, C. (1990) Managerialism and the Public Services: the Anglo-AmericanExperience, London: Basil Blackwell.

Ponting, C. (1986) Whitehall: Tragedy and Farce, London: Hamish Hamilton.Powell, W. W. and DiMaggio, P. J. (1991) The New Institutionalism in

Organizational Analysis, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Pryce, S. (1998) Presidentializing the Premiership, Basingstoke: Macmillan – now

Palgrave.Purnell, S. (1995) ‘An Empire Falls Back’, Financial Times, 16 October.Pyper, R. (1991) Political Realities: the Evolving Civil Service, London:

Longman.Radcliffe, J. (1991) The Reorganisation of British Central Government, Aldershot:

Dartmouth.Rhodes, R. A. W. (1981) Control and Power in Central-Local Government Relations,

Farnborough: GowerRhodes, R. A. W. (1988) Beyond Westminster and Whitehall, London: Allen &

Unwin.Rhodes, R. A. W. (1992) ‘Local Government Finance’, in D. Marsh, and R. A. W.

Rhodes (eds) Implementing Thatcherite Policies: Audit Of An Era, Buckingham:Open University Press.

Rhodes, R. A. W. (1995) ‘From Prime Ministerial Power to Core Executive’, in R. A. W. Rhodes and P. Dunleavy (eds), Prime Minister, Cabinet and CoreExecutive, Basingstoke: Macmillan – now Palgrave.

Rhodes, R. A. W. (2000) ‘The Governance Narrative: Key Findings and Lessonsfrom the ESRC’s Whitehall Programme’, Public Administration, 78, 345–63.

Rhodes, R. A. W. (1997) Understanding Governance: Policy Networks, Governance,Reflexivity and Accountabilty, Buckingham: Open University Press,.

Rhodes, R. A. W and Dunleavy, P. (1995) Prime Minister, Cabinet and CoreExecutive, Basingstoke: Macmillan – now Palgrave.

Richards, D. 1996 ‘Elite Interviewing: Approaches and Pitfalls’ Politics 16(3).Richards, D. (1997) The Civil Service Under the Conservatives 1979–97: Whitehall’s

Politcal Poodles?, Brighton: Sussex Academic Press.Richards, D and Smith, M. J. (1997) ‘How Departments Change: Windows of

Opportunity and Critical Junctures in Three Departments’, Public Policy andAdminstration, 12/2.

Richards, D. and Smith, M. J. (1998) ‘The Gatekeepers of the CommonGood–Power and the Public Service Ethos’, in. A Hondeghem (ed.), Ethics andAccountability in a Context of Governance and New Public Management,Amsterdam: IOS Press.

Richards, D. and Smith, M. J. (2000) ‘Power, Knowledge and the Civil Service:the Living Chimera of the Public Service Ethos and the Role of the CivilService’, West European Politics, 23.

Richards, D. and M. J. Smith (2001a) ‘Breaking the Policy Bias: Windows ofOpportunity and the Realignment of Structural Constraints in ThreeGovernment Departments’, in A. Cortell and S. Peterson (eds), TransformingPolitical Institutions: a Comparative Study of the Sources and Consequences ofDomestic Change, Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Press.

Richards, D. and Smith, M. J. (2001b) ‘New Labour, the State and theConsitution’, in S. Ludlam, and M. J. Smith (eds), New Labour in Government,Basingstoke: Macmillan – now Palgrave.

264 Bibliography

Richards, D., Smith, M. J. and Marsh, D. (forthcoming) ‘Conviction Ministersand the Whitehall Paradigm: the Case of Tony Benn’.

Riddell, P. (1998) Parliament under Pressure, London: Victor Gollancz.Ridley, N. (1991) My Style of Government, London: Hutcheson.Riley, P. (1983) ‘A Structurationist Account of Political Culture’, Administrative

Science Quarterly, 28, 414–37.Roll, E. (1966) ‘The Machinery for Economic Planning: 1. The Department of

Economic Affairs’, Public Administration, 44 (1), 1–11.Rose, R. (1987) Ministers and Ministries: a Functional Analysis, Oxford: Clarendon

Press.Rose, R. (1990) ‘Inheritance before Choice in Public Policy’, Journal of Theoretical

Politics, 2 (3), 263–91.Rose, R. (1993) Lesson-Drawing in Public Policy: a Guide to Learning across Time

and Space, Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.Rose, R. (2000) ‘When and Why Does a Prime Minister Change?’, in R. Rhode,

(ed.), Transforming British Government, vol. 2: Changing Roles and Relationships,Basingstoke: Macmillan – now Palgrave.

Rose, R. and Davies, P. (1994), Inheritance in Public Policy: Change without Choicein Britain, New Haven: Yale University Press.

Rosevere, H. (1969) The Treasury: the Evolution of a British Institution, London:Allen Lane.

Salter, B. and Tapper, T. (1981) Education, Politics and the State, London: GrantMcIntyre.

Sampson, A. (1962) Anatomy of Britain, London: Hodder and Stoughton.Saran, R. (1973) Policy Making in Secondary Education, Oxford: Clarendon.Saward, M. (1997) ‘In Search of the Hollow Crown’, in P. Weller, H. Bakvis and

R. A. W. Rhodes (eds), The Hollow Crown: Countervailing Trends in CoreExecutives, Basingstoke: Macmillan – now Palgrave.

Schein, E. (1989) ‘Organizational Culture: What it is and How to Change it’, inP. Evans, Y. Doz, and A. Laurent (eds), Resource Management in InternationalFirms, Basingstoke: Macmillan – now Palgrave.

Scott, R. (1996) Report of the Inquiry into the Export of Defence Equipment and DualUse Goods to Iraq and Related Prosecution, London: HMSO.

Seldon, A. (1994), ‘Consensus: a Debate too Long?’, Parliamentary Affairs, 47 (4),501–14.

Seldon, A. (1997) Major, London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.Self, P. (1993) Government by the Market? The Politics of Public Choice, London:

Macmillan – now Palgrave.Sharp, E. (1969) The Ministry of Housing and Local Government, London: George

Allen and Unwin.Smircich, L. (1983) ‘Is the Concept of Culture a Paradigm for Understanding

Organizations and Ourselves’, in P. J. Frost (ed.), Organizational Culture,California: Sage.

Smith, B. and Stanyer, J. (1976) Administering Britain, London: Fontana.Smith, M. J. (1991) ‘From Policy Community to Issue Network: Salmonella in

Eggs and the New Politics of Food’, Public Administration, 69: 235–55.Smith, M. J. (1993) Pressure, Power and Policy, Hemel Hempstead: Harvester

Wheatsheaf.

Bibliography 265

Smith, M. J. (1995) ‘Pluralism’, in D. Marsh and G. Stoker (eds), Theories andMethods in Political Science, London: Macmillan – now Palgrave.

Smith, M. J. (1998) ‘Reconceptualising the State: Theoretical and EmpiricalChallenges to British Central Government’, Public Administration, 76, 45–72.

Smith, M. J. (1999a) The Core Executive in Britain, London: Macmillan – nowPalgrave.

Smith, M.J. (1999b) ‘The Institutions of Central Government’, in I. Holliday, A.Gamble, and G. Parry (eds), Fundamentals in British Politics, Basingstoke:Macmillan – now Palgrave.

Smith, M. J., Marsh, D. and Richards, D. (1995) ‘Central GovernmentDepartments and the Policy Process’, in R. A. W. Rhodes and P. Dunleavy(eds), Prime Minister, Cabinet and Core Executive, London: Macmillan – nowPalgrave.

Smith, M. J., Marsh, D. and Richards, D. (2000) ‘Departmentalism, the CoreExecutive and Joined-Up Government’, paper presented at the annual confer-ence of the PSA, London School of Economic, 10–13 April.

Smith, M. J., Richards, D., Marsh, D. and Chapman, J. (1998) ‘Bureaucrats,Politicians and the Reform of Whitehall’ (mimeo).

Spence, J. (1992) ‘The Role of Civil Servants in European Lobbying: the BritishCase’, in S. Mazey and J. Richardson (eds), Lobbying in the EuropeanCommunity, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Stephens, P. (1996) Politics and the Pound: the Conservatives’ Struggle with Sterling,London: Macmillan – now Palgrave.

Stones, R. (1990) ‘Government–Finance Relations in Britain 1964–7’, Economyand Society, 19, 32–55.

Stones, R. (1992) ‘Labour and International Finance, 1964–67’, in D. Marsh andR. A. W. Rhodes (eds), Policy Networks in British Government, Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.

Street, J. and Weale, A. (1992) ‘Aids Policy in the UK’, in D. Kirp and R. Bayer(eds), AIDS in the Industrialized Democracies: Passions, Politics, and Policies, NewBrunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press.

Tant, T. (1993) British Government: the Triumph of Elitism, Aldershot: Dartmouth.Taylor, A. (2000) ‘Hollowing Out or Filling In? Taskforces and the Management

of Crosscutting Issues in British Government’, British Journal of Politics andInternational Relations, 2, 46–71.

Taylor, P. (1990), Britain and the Cold War: 1945 and Geopolitical Transformation,London: Pinter.

Tebbit, N. (1988) Upwardly Mobile, London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.Thain, C. and Wright, M. (1995) The Treasury, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Thain, C. and Wright, M. (1996) The Treasury and Whitehall, Oxford: Clarendon.Thatcher, M. (1993) The Downing Street Years, London: Harper Collins.Theakston, K. (1995) The Civil Service since 1945, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Theakston, K. (1996) ‘Whitehall, Westminster and Industrial Policy’, in

D. Coates (ed.), Industrial Policy in Britain, London: Macmillan – now Palgrave.Theakston, K. (1999) Leadership in Whitehall, London: Macmillan – now Palgrave.The editors (1999) ‘Editorial: Studying British Politics’, British Journal of Politics

and International Relations, 1(1) pp. 1–11.Thomas, G. (1998) Prime Minister and Cabinet Today, Manchester: Manchester

University Press.

266 Bibliography

Thompson, M., Ellis, R. and Wildavsky, A. (1990) Cultural Theory, Oxford:Westview.

Toonan, A. J. (1991) ‘Europe of the Administrations: the Challenge of 1992’,Public Administation Review, 52, 108–15.

Van Maanen, B. and Barley, S. (1984) ‘Occupational Communities: Culture andControl in Organizations’, Research in Organizational Behaviour, 6, 287–365.

Walker, D. (1999) ‘A Thoroughly Modern Mandarin’, Public Finance, 21–27 May.Walsh, K. (1995) Public Services and Market Mechanism, London: Macmillan –

now Palgrave.Watson, M. (2000) ‘The Political Discourse of Globalization’, PhD dissertation,

University of Birmingham.Watt, R. (1998) ‘Towards a Synthesised Network Approach: an Analysis of UK

Nuclear and Renewable (Ware) Energy Programme, 1939–1985’, PhD disserta-tion, University of Birmingham.

Weir, S. and Beetham, D. (1999) Political Power and Democratic Control in Britain,London: Routledge.

Weller, P., Bakvis, H. and Rhodes, R. A. W. (eds.) (1997) The Hollow Crown:Countervailing Trends in Core Executives, London: Macmillan – now Palgrave.

Whitelaw, W. (1989) The Whitelaw Memoirs, London: Aurum Press.Willson, F. M. G. (1955) ‘Ministries and Boards: Some Aspects of Administrative

Development since 1832’, Public Administration, 33, 43–58.Wilson, H. (1976) The Governance of Britain, London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.Wilson, R. (1999) ‘The Civil Service in the New Millenium’, http://www.cabinet-

office.gov.uk/1999/senior/re_speech.htm.Winninfrith, J. (1962) The Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, London:

George Allen and Unwin.Yin, R. K. (1984) Case Study Research, London: Sage.Young, E. (1991) ‘On the Naming of the Rose: Understanding Multiple

Meanings as Elements of Organizational Culture’, in P. Frost, L. Moore, M. Louis, C. Lundberg and J. Martin (eds), Reframing Organizational Culture,London: Sage.

Young, H. (1982), ‘The Department of Civil Liberties’, in The Home Office:Perspectives on Policy and Administration Bicentenary Lectures 1982 London:RIPA.

Young, H. and Sloman, A. (1982) No, Minister, London: BBC.Young, Lord (1990), The Enterprise Years, London: Headline.Zey, M. (1998) Rational Choice Theory and Organizational Theory: a Critique,

London: Sage.

Bibliography 267

Index

268

ACPO see Association of Chief PoliceOfficers

‘action’ element of culture, 22–3, 24,38, 38

‘actors’ in society, 22–3administrative support, Prime

Minister’s, 103Adonis, A., 45, 55advisers, special, 143–4agency–departmental relations, DSS,

92–3agency development see Next Steps

programmeagency/structure issue, 3–4, 10–11,

242–3culture, 19–20, 100interest group relations, 199–200ministerial roles, 148–53structural change, 43

agenda-setting role of ministers, 133,133–9, 139, 153

‘anticipated actions’ process, 107–8appointment powers, Prime

Minister’s, 54, 105–7Armstrong, William, 39, 108‘arrogant’ features of Home Office,

78–80Artis, M., 224Association of Chief Police Officers

(ACPO), 184–6, 190–1, 197asymmetric power model, 246–50

Bache, I., 224Baker, Ken, 2, 138, 210–11, 223

dangerous dogs issue, 203, 204Home Secretary role, 73–4, 76–7,

108, 140, 160Bakvis, H., 7Bale, T., 16Balogh, T., 39Barker, A., 29

Barley, S., 20Beer, S., 39Bender, B., 214Benefits Agency, 20Benn, Tony, 7, 39, 94, 60–2, 150

agenda-setting aims, 133–4Civil Service relationship, 31–6

Benson, J. K., 24Benyon, J., 197Berger, P., 19Berlanger, G., 45Beveridge Report, 86, 88Bevir, M., 5Biddis, M., 2Blair, Tony, 109Bradshaw, J., 87Breton, A., 45British political tradition, 28–9, 180,

244, 247Brittan, S., 45Buller, J., 86, 212, 220, 241Bulmer, S., 215, 216Bulpitt, J., 51, 110, 153Burch, M., 214, 215, 216bureau-shaping model, 155, 156–64Burns, Terry, 121Burrell, G., 25, 26Butcher, T., 48, 64, 251Butler, Robin, 28

Cabinet, 105–6, 109–10, 141–2, 128‘Cabinet enforcer’, 109Cabinet ministers see ministerial rolesCabinet Office, 109, 213, 215, 216Callaghan, J., 71, 117–18Campbell, C., 41, 43, 44, 45, 52, 68,

147, 155, 164Carrington, Peter, 46–7, 141, 243Carruthers, B. G., 25Castells, M., 249Castle, B., 39, 124

References in italic indicate figures or tables

Cerny, P., 209Chapman, J., 95Chapman, R. A., 1, 29, 30, 121Chester, D. N., 251Citizen’s Charter, 105civil servant–minister relationships

see minister–civil servantrelationships

Civil Service: Taking Forward Continuityand Change, 55

Clarke, Ken, 73, 230Clarke, R., 251Clegg, S., 26, 27, 48Clifford, J., 18Coates, D., 210Cockett, R., 45codes of conduct, 29, 30–1Conservative structural reforms, 2,

52–9, 67managerial, 55–6personnel, 52–4

consultants, Conservatives’ use of,178–9

consultationConservatives’ use of, 190–4Labour’s use of, 194–6

Continuity and Change, 55co-ordinating mechanisms, European,

214–17co-ordination within departments,

European, 227–9core executive role, 101–31, 248–9

power dependency model, 168–70,168

Prime Minister, 102–19relations between departments,

124–30segmentation, 237–9Treasury, 119–24

Cram, I., 222‘critical realist’ perspective, 3–4Cronin, J., 64Crossman, R., 39, 124Crowther Hunt, N., 7, 39, 46cultural change, 14–42, 69–100,

232–3, 244–5change within Whitehall, 37–41, 38concept of culture, 16–27, 17, 24DEn, 94–8

DSS, 86–94DTI, 80–6Home Office, 70–80Whitehall, 27–37

cultural theory, 16–18, 17‘culture’ concept, 16–27, 17, 24

dependent or independent variable,15

importance, 14–15

Daintith, T., 1dangerous dogs issue, 204Dale, H. E., 27Davies, P., 70, 116Deakin, N., 1, 120–4, 238Dell, Edmund, 107DEn see Energy, Department ofdepartment–agency relations, DSS,

92–3departmental ministers see ministerial

rolesdepartments

centrality of, 1choice of, 3, 251–3, 252cultures, 36, 69–70, 98–100, 99lack of research on, 1–2Prime Ministerial intervention,

109–10, 110–16relations between, 124–30relations with Europe, 212–18,

218–30, 241Treasury interventions, 116–24see also under names of individual

departments, e.g., Trade andIndustry, Department of

dependency model see powerdependency model

Devine, F., 3DHSS see Health and Social Security,

Department ofdifferentiated polity model, 6–8, 181,

233–42, 244, 246, 250ministerial roles, 147–8power issues, 8–9

DiMaggio, P. J., 19, 23, 42DoE see Environment, Department of

theDolowitz, D., 139Donaldson, L., 16

Index 269

Donoughue, P., 118Douglas, M., 16Dowding, K., 7, 11, 43, 44, 56, 156, 182Drewry, G., 48, 251DSS see Social Security, Department ofDTI see Trade and Industry,

Department of‘dual polity’ model, 110Dunleavy, P., 10, 11, 43, 110, 117,

155, 156, 218, 251Dunsire, A., 251Dyrberg, T. B., 25, 26

Eagle, Angela, 29economic context

effect on policy networks’ roles, 200effect on Prime Minister’s role,

116–17globalisation, 210–11

Education and Employment,Department for, 129

education policy, 248–9‘egalitarian’ way of life, 17, 17‘elitist political tradition’, 28–9, 180,

244Ellis, R., 16Employment Department, 117, 129Energy, Department of, 59–60, 62–3,

242–3cultural change, 94–8, 98–100, 99interest group relations, 186–7,

192–3, 200, 201ministerial agenda-setting, 135–6ministerial minimalist role, 141Prime Ministerial intervention,

112–14Environment, Department of the

(DoE), 193, 225–6EU co-ordination changes, 228–9

ethical position of civil servants, 28,29–30

ethnomethodological approach, 23European Secretariat, 215European Union (EU), 209–31, 233

departments’ relations with, 218–30globalisation of the state, 209–12‘hollowing out’ thesis, 240–2ministers’ role in, 143Whitehall’s relations with, 212–18

Evans, M., 87exchange relations patterns, 239, 248‘executive dominance reassertion’

view, 155, 164–8, 175executive role of ministers, 133,

145–7external constraints, pattern of,

249–50external consultants, Conservatives’

use of, 178–9

Falklands War, 111, 116‘fatalistic’ way of life, 17, 17FCO see Foreign and Commonwealth

OfficeFER see Fundamental Expenditure

ReviewFinancial Management Initiative, 2Flinders, M., 28, 53, 234Florina, M. P., 45Foley, M., 101Forder, J., 231Foreign and Commonwealth Office

(FCO), 20–1EU co-ordination changes, 228inter-departmental relations, 124–5Prime Ministerial intervention, 111relations with Europe, 213, 215,

216, 226Foster, C., 41, 44, 52, 68, 110, 147,

153, 155, 160, 164Foucault, M., 26Fowler, Norman, 87–8, 138–9, 139,

166Franklin, B., 206free trade vs interventionism, 80–4Frost, P. J., 19Fry, G., 2, 39, 40, 43, 44Fulton Report, 39, 46, 48Fundamental Expenditure Review

(FER), 121Furlong, P., 3

Gains, F., 94Gamble, A., 45, 46, 210, 212Garfinkel, H., 19, 23George, S., 241Giddens, A., 19Gilmour, Ian, 40, 46, 110

270 Index

Glennerster, H., 87globalisation issues, 209–12, 230, 240Goffman, E., 22–3‘governance’ vs ‘government’ debate,

6, 234–5‘grand strategy’, lack of, 44–7Grant, W., 184, 218Greer, P., 43, 91grid concept, 16, 17group concept, 16, 17Grugel, J., 212

Haines, J., 20Haldane model, 153Hames, T., 45, 55Hay, C., 10, 45, 46, 64, 169, 211Hayward, J., 231Headey, B., 70, 133, 140, 147Health and Social Security,

Department of (DHSS), 64–5,89–91, 129

Heath, E., 46Heclo, H., 1, 27Held, D., 209, 210Hennessy, P., 2, 39, 43, 48, 101, 102,

145, 251Heseltine, Michael, 145–6, 160hierarchical nature of Home Office, 78‘hierarchical’ way of life, 17, 17Hill, J., 105Hirst, P., 211Hogg, S., 105Hogwood, B., 49, 50, 251Holliday, I., 214‘hollowing out’ thesis, 7–8, 209,

239–42Home Office, 12

cultural change, 70–88, 98–100, 99,245

interest group relations, 184–6,190–1

intra-departmental relations, 125–6media relations, 202, 203–6ministerial agenda-setting, 134–5,

139, 139ministerial minimalist role, 141ministerial policy selectors, 140Prime Ministerial intervention,

111–12, 115

relations with Europe, 223, 241structural change analysis, 59, 65–7

Hood, C., 16, 17, 48, 251Hoogvelt, A., 210Hoopes, S., 152, 192, 200Hoskyns, J., 47Hout, W., 212Howard, Michael, 74–5, 76, 166–7, 230

agenda-setting role, 134–5, 139, 139Benn and Lilley compared, 150interest group relations, 185–6media relations, 205–6

Howell, David, 44–5, 113Hungerford massacre, 204–5Hurd, Douglas, 111, 140, 160, 203,

204–5, 223

Ibbs, R., 27ideas/institutions relationship, 11–12,

153–4, 243–5IMF crisis 118‘individualistic’ way of life, 17, 17Industry, Department of, 60, 80–1, 82

ministerial agenda-setting, 137–8‘institutions’ element of culture,

23–4, 24, 38, 38inter-departmental relations, 124–30,

233interest group relations, 181,

182–201, 233explanation of changes, 199–200policy network approach, 182–97power distribution, 197–9

internationalisation perspective, 211,212

interventionism vs free trade, 80–4interventions by prime ministers,

109–10, 110–16interview methods/interpretation,

3–4, 253, 253isolation of Home Office, 78–80

James, S., 2Jay, P., 45Jenkin, Patrick, 87, 114–15, 116, 141

policy initiator role, 139–40Jenkins, Roy, 71–2, 115

agenda-setting role, 133, 134media relations, 205

Index 271

Jensen, L., 16, 17Jessop, B., 39Jobseekers’ Allowance (JSA), 117, 129joined-up government, 128–9, 249Joseph, Keith, 82, 149

agenda-setting role, 134, 137–8,139

JSA see Jobseekers’ AllowanceJudge, D., 36, 102

Kavanagh, D., 2, 45, 46, 101, 108,143, 190, 202, 238, 246

Kellner, P., 7, 39, 46Kemp, Peter, 49–50, 159, 160Kenny, M., 28Keohane, R., 211, 212, 217King, A., 2, 39, 45, 190Kingdom, J., 10knowledge and power, 25–6Kogan, M., 20Klymlicka, W., 210

Labour government, 122, 128–9approach to consultation, 194–6media relations, 206–7

Lawson, Nigel, 106, 107, 145, 149,160

agenda-setting role, 134, 135–6energy policy, 62–3, 96, 97, 242–3interest group relations, 186–7Prime Ministerial interference, 113,

114Lee, J., 108, 112Legg, T., 27legitimacy resource of Prime Minister,

102–3liberty vs order perspectives, 70,

71–7Lilley, Peter, 87, 88–9, 113, 141, 194

agenda-setting role, 134, 137, 139Benn and Howard compared, 150social security reforms, 173–4

Ling, T., 49Louis, M. R., 21, 25Lowndes, V., 19‘loyalty’ aspect of Whitehall culture,

33–6, 176Luckman, T., 19Ludlam, S., 46, 139

Madgwick, P., 2, 251MAFF (Ministry for Agriculture,

Fisheries and Food), 214, 217–18Major, John, 55, 56, 105, 118–19managerial reforms, 55–9managerial role of civil servants, 156,

157–9, 161–3managerial role of ministers, 133,

145–7‘managerialism’ culture, 38, 48–9

DSS, 90–1DTI, 84–6Home Office, 78–9

Mandelson, Peter, 142March, J., 19Marsh, M. J., 3, 8, 9, 28, 102, 169,

182, 201, 246D. Richards, M. J. Smith and, 1, 5,

28, 53, 109, 122, 129, 156R. Rhodes and, 7, 127, 139, 182,

235McAnulla, S., 10, 118McCaig, C., 249McFarland, A., 9McKinlay, A., 26McLean, I., 251McLeay, E., 184, 185, 190, 191, 197media, departments’ relations with,

181, 201–7Menon, A., 231Metcalfe, L., 58–9Meyerson, D., 18Migue, J., 45Milner, H., 211, 212, 217Miners’ Strike, 112–13, 116‘minimalist’ role of ministers, 140–1minister–civil servant relationships,

6–7, 8, 36–7, 53–5, 155–80, 233bureau-shaping model, 156–64power dependency model, 168–79,

168reassertion of executive dominance,

164–8Tony Benn, 31–6

ministerial roles, 132–54changing pattern of governance,

147–8changing roles, 132–47, 133, 139European roles, 229–30

272 Index

explaining change, 148–54Ministry for Agriculture, Fisheries and

Food (MAFF), 214, 217–18Minogue, K., 2mission statement, Home Office, 67Moore, John, 65, 141, 173Mountfield, R., 14

NACRO, Home Office relations with,191

neo-liberal policies, 46, 47globalisation, 210, 211, 240

networks see policy networksNew Deal, 122‘new institutionalism’, 19New Public Management (NPM),

43–4, 48–51and globalisation, 210

New Right ideology, 45–6, 200Next Steps programme, 2, 55–9

civil servants’ role in, 156, 159–61effect on work balances, 158

Niskanen, W., 45Noll, R. G., 45Norton, P., 133Nott, John, 145–6NPM see New Public Managementnuclear energy policy, 94–5

Office of Public Service, 105Ohmae, K., 210Olsen, J., 19order vs liberty perspectives, 70, 71–7organisation/culture relationship,

23–4organisational change, Prime

Minister’s powers, 104–5organisational context of ministerial

roles, 151–2organisational culture, 70, 98–100, 99

DEn, 98DSS, 89–94DTI, 84–6Home Office, 77–80

Page, E., 1Parliament, ministers in, 142Parry, R., 1, 120–4, 238Parsons, W., 48

‘party leader’ basis of Prime Minister’slegitimacy, 103

‘party’ role of ministers, 143–5Payne, A., 212‘performances’ in society, 22–3Permanent Secretaries, work

preferences/balances, 157–8,161–3

personnel reform, 53–5Peters, B. G., 10Peterson, J., 210Phillips, Lord, 30Pitt, D. C., 251Plowden, F., 43, 48

C. Foster and, 41, 44, 52, 68, 147,153, 155, 160, 164

pluralist model of power, 8–9, 181,199, 207, 245–6

policing policy network, 184–6,190–1, 196–7

policy advisers, 143–4Home Office officials as, 77–8, 79

policy chimneys, 125–6, 128–9, 238policy culture, 70, 98–100, 99

DEn, 94–8DSS, 86–9DTI, 80–4Home Office, 70–7

‘policy initiatives’ role of ministers,139–40

‘policy legitimators’ role of ministers,140–1

policy-making preferences of civilservants, 156, 157–9

policy networks, 7, 181, 182–201,235–7

changes over time, 189–96changing role, 199–201policy outcomes, 196–7power distribution, 197–9

policy outcomes, influence of policynetworks, 196–7

policy role of civil servants, 156,161–3, 170–4

policy role of ministers, 133, 133–41,139

‘policy selectors’ role of ministers,140

political advisers, Benn’s use of, 32–3

Index 273

political contexteffect on policy networks’ roles,

200effect on Prime Minister’s role,

116–17globalisation, 211–12

political role of ministers, 133, 141–5Pollitt, C., 2, 251Ponting, C., 48, 124Portillo, Michael, 229–30Powell, W. W., 19, 23, 42power dependency model, 51–2, 68,

155, 168–79, 168core executive, 101–2Home Office, 80

power distribution of policynetworks, 197–9

power issues, 8–9culture and, 18–19, 24–7structural change, 44Whitehall culture, 28–9

powers of Prime Minister, 103–4,104–19

Prices and Consumer Protection,Department of, 60, 62

Prime Minister role, 101, 102–19, 130,237

and departments, 102–4power dependency model, 168–70,

168powers, 104–19

Prime Minister’s Office, 108Prison Service, 160–1‘Prison Works’, 74privatisation policy, DEn, 97–8, 192,

201Pryce, S., 101Public Expenditure Committee, 121public opinion, departments’

relationship with, 181, 201–7public relations advisers, 143–4public relations role of ministers, 133,

145–7public service ethos, 31, 36, 38–41Purnell, S., 219Pyper, R., 48

Radcliffe, J., 14, 60rational choice theory, 163

Rees, Merlyn, 106, 185regionalisation perspective, 211, 230Reorganisation of Central Government,

The, 44, 45research, lack of, 1–2research methods, 3, 251–3, 252, 253researcher status, 4resource use, Prime Minister’s,

117–19, 168–70, 168Rhodes, R. A. W., 5, 6–7, 44, 52, 101,

110, 181, 2091997, 5, 7, 43, 48, 168D. Marsh and, 127, 139, 182, 235

Richards, D., 3, 49, 58, 153, 167–8,238, 246

1997, 2, 14, 39, 46, 48, 54, 147,153, 178

D. Marsh, M. J. Smith and, 1, 5, 28,53, 109, 122, 129, 156

Riley, P., 19, 21, 25Rose, R., 64, 70, 103, 116, 209, 251,

252–3

Sampson, A., 39Saward, M., 53Scott, R., 27, 30sectionalism in DEn, 95segmentation of core executive,

237–9, 248–9Seldon, A., 2, 101, 108, 117, 118, 143,

202Senior Management Review (SMR), 2,

55, 86, 92, 105Sloman, A., 20Smircich, L., 21Smith, B. C., 251Smith, M. J., 7, 9, 23, 29, 86, 198,

217, 2341999a, 2, 44, 49, 52, 53, 101, 102,

168D. Marsh and, 182, 201D. Marsh, D. Richards and, 1, 5, 28,

53, 109, 122, 129, 156D. Richards and, 49, 58, 153,

167–8S. Ludlam and, 46, 139

SMR see Senior Management Reviewsocial conservatism views, Home

Office, 71–2

274 Index

social context, and Prime Minister’srole, 116–17

social liberalism views. Home Office,71–7

Social Security, Department of, 59,64–5

cultural change, 86–94, 98–100, 99,245

inter-departmental relations, 129interest group relations, 189, 193–4,

195Jobseekers’ Allowance dispute, 117media relations, 202–3ministerial agenda-setting, 137,

138–9, 139ministerial policy initiatives, 140power dependency example,

173–4Prime Ministerial intervention,

114–15relations with Europe, 222relations with Treasury, 120–3

social security payments reform,88–9

social welfare principles, 64, 86–7special advisers, 143–4Spence, J., 215Starkey, K., 26Stephens, P., 210Stones, R., 210Strangeways breakout, 203Straw, Jack, 75structural change, 43–69

departmental changes, 59–67lack of ‘grand strategy’, 44–7post-1979, 48–51, 52–9power dependency perspective,

51–2, 177Prime Minister’s powers, 104–5

structural context of ministerial roles,148–9, 151–2

structure/agency issue seeagency/structure issue

structured inequality perspective, 9,247

sub-cultures and sub-systems, 20–1Whitehall, 30, 36–7

‘support’ powers, Prime Minister’s,107–8

Tebbitt, Norman, 82–3, 107, 116, 118Thain, C., 1, 27, 224Thatcher, Margaret, 10, 101–2, 106,

108, 160interventions, 111–15, 118–19, 237view of Civil Service, 40, 47

Thatcherism, 39–40, 45–6Theakston, K., 48theoretical framework development,

4–5Thomas, G., 102Thompson, G., 211Thompson, M., 16timing of research, 2Toonan, A. J., 214top-down budgeting approach, 121Total Managed Expenditure, 121Trade, Department of, 60, 81Trade and Industry, Department of

(DTI), 3, 12cultural change, 80–6, 98–100, 99,

245EU co-ordination changes, 228European role, 143, 230inter-departmental relations, 124–5interest group relations, 187–9,

191–2, 195–6, 200, 201intra-departmental relations, 126–7ministerial agenda-setting, 136,

137–8, 139, 139relations with Europe, 218–22, 241structural change, 59, 60–2

transnationalisation, 210–11Treasury, 1, 17, 20

EU co-ordination changes, 227opposition to Next Steps, 56–7relations with departments, 119–24,

130–1, 238relations with Europe, 224–5

‘trust’ aspect of Whitehall culture,32–33, 163

universality principle, social welfare,88, 89

value element of culture, 21–22, 24,38, 38

Van Maanen, B., 20veto powers, Prime Minister’s, 107–8

Index 275

Waddington, David, 73, 106, 141,160, 203, 223

agenda-setting role, 135, 139Wakeham, John, 97, 115–16Walker, D., 20Walker, Peter, 95–6, 115Watson, M., 211, 240Watt, R., 94‘webs of meaning’, 21–2welfare principles, 64, 86–7welfare to work programme, 122, 238Weller, P., 7, 48Westminster model, 5–6, 164–8, 179,

233, 247Whitehall culture, 27–41, 164–8, 232–3

changes within, 37–41, 38competing frameworks, 36–7, 38relationship with Europe, 212–18Tony Benn, 31–6

Whitelaw, Willie, 112, 115–16, 145–6,203

Wildavsky, A., 1, 16, 27Williams, Shirley, 60Wilson, F. M. G., 251Wilson, G., 29, 41, 43, 44, 45, 52, 68,

147, 155, 164Wilson, R., 14, 38Wintrobe, R., 45Wright, M., 1, 27, 224

Young, David, 83–4, 154, 160agenda-setting role, 134, 136, 138,

139, 139Young, E., 20Young, H., 20

‘zero sum game’, 7, 68, 101, 239Zey, M., 16

276 Index