1

Central European University Doctoral School in Political Science, Public Policy and International Relations

Public Administration (Part 1.) Course Director: Professor Diane Stone Email: stone@ceu.edu Office Hour: Following the seminar or by appointment. Course Overview:

This course is a review of government reform and modernization efforts. The course focuses on the issues and practices related to public sector reform such as the old and new public management, public value and policy design. It will addresses core issues surrounding the concept of bureaucracy, the context of public administration and some of the core functions of public sector management where the ‘public sector’ has evolved and expanded from government bureaucracy to include other domains of public activity and administration. The course outlines the complexity of the tasks before public administrators and the tensions between different notions of good practice and efficiency. We will begin with discussion on the nature of public administration and governance alongside the increasingly blurred frontiers of the public sector, then move to organization theory and the effects of government structure on executive behavior. We will also examine the “people” side of government organizations and leadership in organizations. Course Objectives:

The objective is to help you think, act, communicate and cooperate in fast moving and fluid public sector environments.

1. Evaluate administration of policies.

2. Compare and contrast effective versus non-effective leadership and management;

3. Identify the public sector as a rapidly changing environment.

Part A of Public Administration is worth 2 credits. Part B of Public Administration – which will run in the Winter Semester – is also worth 2 credits. Part 2 will be with Dr Achim Kemmerling. It is necessary to complete both Part A and Part B to fulfill the requirements of the course. The course is structured into three main parts, after the Introductory session:

2

A. Introduction

B. Public Administration for Evolving Society and Economy

• NPM, Core Executive and Executive Agencies

• Beyond Market and State 1: Non Profit Management & Partnership

• Beyond Market and State 2: Networks

• Internationalizing Public Sector and Transnational Administration

C. Public Administration Arenas: Inside Bureaucracy

• Leadership in Public Organisations

• Management and Measurement in the Public Sector

• Organisational Cultures and Control: Why Management Matters

• ‘Public Value’ in an Era of Austerity

D. Design Principles in Public Administration

• Carrots, sticks and sermons (incentives, sanctions or norms).

• Tools of Administration

• Design Dilemmas: Wicked Problems, Innovation & Policy Termination

Readings

The reading for the discussion each week is listed. Everybody is expected to read this material. Additional readings – and web-sites – on the subject for each week are provided and which are useful starting points for essays. Seminar participants are expected to come with questions based on the reading, as well as from your own web-searches. There is no text, but some of the recommended or further readings will draw from two well known texts: Peters, B. G. (2010). The Politics of Bureaucracy–an introduction to comparative public administration, London and New York, Routledge. (6 edition). Raadschelders, J., & Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2015). Global Dimensions of Public Administration and Governance: A Comparative Voyage. John Wiley & Sons. Nevertheless, there are many other valuable Public Administration texts on the market that are also worth consulting and can be found in CEU Library. Seminar Chair and Discussant

Each week one student had to take care of leading the discussion, distributing the readings and giving additional input and structure to the discussion. Depending on student numbers, this means that each student does this twice – and possibly three

3

times – a semester. Feedback on your role as discussant and chair of the seminar session will also be provided in order to facilitate improvement throughout the course.

You are expected to read beyond the set reading of the week and to consult additional sources in order to guide discussion and facilitate debate as well as cover key concepts and research questions. Feed-back will include comments on the basis of, but not limited to:

1. Time management 2. Inclusiveness 3. Structuring discussion of the topic 4. Argument

This type of exercise is useful if any of you go on to higher education teaching positions, but also good practice for future academic conferences and general meeting management. Assessment.

Seminar Chair: 40% Allocations in first week Essay: 60% Due 5.00pm 20th December 2016 Semester 2

The course will continue in semester 2 with Dr Achim Kemmerling who will cover the following topics (not necessarily in this order) some of which cross connect with semester 1 topics:

1) Normative Theories of Bureaucracy

2) Economic Theories of Public Administration

3) The Political Economy of Public Administration

4) Development and Bureaucracy

5) Bureaucracies in Developing Countries

6) Recruitment, Motivation and Performance

7) Corruption in Public Services

8) Federalism and Multiethnic Societies

9.) Fiscal Federalism and (Fiscal) Decentralization

10) Privatization and Contracting

11.) Budget Making

12) Wrapping up: Can We Make Public Administration ‘Smarter’?

4

Week 1. Classic Concepts in Public Administration

• Introductions. Assessment and allocation of seminar presentation • Max Weber and Bureaucratic power; The Wilsonian Tradition and Minnowbrook • Public Administration as Profession Hajnal, G. (2015). Public administration education in Europe Continuity or reorientation? Teaching Public Administration, 33(2), 95-114. Raadschelders, Jos C. N. (2008) “Understanding Government: Four intellectual Traditions in the Study of Public Administration.” Public Administration 86 4: 925-949. Tulloch, Gordon. (1993) ‘The Economic Theory of Bureaucracy’, in Michael Hill (ed) The Policy Process: A Reader, Harvester Wheatsheaf. Weber, Max “Rational-legal authority and bureaucracy’, except from The Theory of Social and Economic Organisation (1947) edited and translated by T. Parsons, New York, the Free Press. Wilson, W. (1887). The study of administration. Political science quarterly, 2 (2), 197-222 Further Reading: Bailey, M. T., & Mayer, R. T. (1992). Public management in an interconnected world: Essays in the Minnowbrook tradition (No. 293). Greenwood Publishing Group. Bowornwathana, B. (2010), Minnowbrook IV in 2028: From American Minnowbrook to Global Minnowbrook. Public Administration Review, 70: s64–s68. Drechsler, W. (2015). 5. Paradigms of non-Western public administration and governance. The International Handbook of Public Administration and Governance, 104. Frederickson, H. George. "Minnowbrook II: Changing epochs of public administration." Public Administration Review 49, no. 2 (1989): 95. Lauer Schachter, Hindy. (2007) ‘“When Political Science Championed Public Service Training: The American Political Science Association Campaign for Professional Public Administration’, The American Review of Public Administration 37(3):362-375 O'Leary, R., & Kim, S. (2010). The future of public administration around the world: The Minnowbrook perspective. Georgetown University Press. Download at: https://muse.jhu.edu/book/685 Peters, B. G. (2010). The Politics of Bureaucracy–an introduction to comparative public administration, London and New York, Routledge. (6 edition).

5

Raadschelders, J., & Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2015). Global Dimensions of Public Administration and Governance: A Comparative Voyage. John Wiley & Sons. Riggs, F. W. (1998). Public Administration in America: Why Our Uniqueness is Exceptional and Important. Public Administration Review, 58(1), 22-31. Rutgers, M. R. (1997). Beyond Woodrow Wilson The Identity of the Study of Public Administration in Historical Perspective. Administration & Society, 29(3), 276-300. Stillman, R. J. (1997). American vs. European public administration: does public administration make the modern state, or does the state make public administration?. Public Administration Review, 332-338. Verheijen, T., & Connaughton, B. (2003). Public administration education and Europeanization: prospects for the emancipation of a discipline? Public Administration, 81(4), 833-851. Waldo, D. (2006). The administrative state: A study of the political theory of American public administration. Transaction Publishers.

Week 2. Public Sector Reform Modalities

• What are the important distinctions between the ‘old’ and the ‘new’ public management?

• Managerialism – what is it? • Core executive and Executive Agencies - what are the benefits, disadvantages and

tensions? • Whole of government approach Christensen, T. and Laegreid, P. (2007) “The whole-of-government approach to public sector reform”, Public Administration Review: 67. 6: 1059-1066. Dunleavy, P. and Hood, Ch. (1994) “From Old Public Administration to New Public Management”, Public Money & Management, 14. 3: 9-16 Hartley, Jean (2005) Innovation in Governance and Public Services: Past and Present, Public Money & Management, 25(1): 27- Osborne, Stephen P. (2006) The New Public Governance? Public Management Review, (3): 377-387 Further Reading: David Osborne and Ted Gaebler, Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Sprity is Transforming the Public Sector, New York Plume Books, 1992.

6

Brinkerhoff, Derick W. and Benjamin L. Crosby, (2002) Managing Policy Reform: Concepts and Tools for Decision-Makers in Developing and Transitioning Countries, Kumarian Press (Chapter 4 on Policy Partnerships) Gains, Francesca (2003)‘Executive Agencies in Government: The Impact of Bureaucratic networks on Policy Outcomes’, Journal of Public Policy, 23 (1): 55-79. Meyer-Sahling, J. H. (2009) “Varieties of Legacies: a Critical Review of Legacy Explanations of Public Administration Reform in East-Central Europe”, International Review of Administrative Sciences, 75. 3: 509-528. van Donge, Jan Kees . (2003)‘Agencification’, in Colin Kirkpatrick, Ron Clarke and Charles Polidano (eds) Handbook on Development Policy and Managment, Edward Elgar. Peters, B. G. (2009) The Politics of Bureaucracy: an Introduction to Comparative Public Administration, London: Routledge (ch 9). Pollitt, C. (1993). The development of management thought. The Policy Process: A Reader. Christopher Pollitt, Colin Talbot, Janice Caulfield and Amanda Smullen, Agencies: How Governments Do Things Through Semi-Autonomous Organizations, Palgrave 2004. Pollitt, C. and Bouckaert, G. (2011) Public Management Reform – a Comparative Analysis: New Public Management, Governance and the Neo-Weberian State, 3rd edn, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Saint-Martin, D. (2004) Building the New Managerialist State: Consultants and the Politics of Public Sector Reform in Comparative Perspectives, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Verhoest, Koen. B. Guy Peters, Geert Bouckaert and Bram Verschuere (2004) ‘The Study of Organisational Autonomy: A Conceptual Review’, Public Administration and Development, 24: 2004: 101-118. Wettenhall, R. (2005). Agencies and non-departmental public bodies: The hard and soft lenses of agencification theory. Public Management Review, 7(4), 615-635.

Week 3. The Non Profit Sector, Partnerships and Public Administration • Definitions: what are the different meanings to the terms third sector, independent

sector; voluntary sector, non- and not-for-profit sector? • In what manner is the ‘third sector’ a part of the ‘public sector’? • What are the challenges of managing non-profit/hybrid organisations?

7

Bode, I., & Brandsen, T. (2014). State–third sector partnerships: a short overview of key issues in the debate. Public Management Review, 16(8), 1055-1066. Brinkerhoff, D. W., & Brinkerhoff, J. M. (2011). Public–private partnerships: perspectives on purposes, publicness, and good governance. Public Administration and Development, 31(1), 2-14. Patricia J. Fredericksen, ‘Managing in the Nonprofit Sector’, Public Administration Review, 63 (1) 2003: 112-15 Lewis, David (2003) ‘Theorizing the organization and management of non-governmental development organizations: Towards a composite approach’, Public Management Review, 5(3): 325-344. Further Reading: Anheier, H. K. (2000). Managing non-profit organisations: Towards a new approach. Centre for Civil Society, London School of Economics and Political Science. Anheier, H. K. (2014). Nonprofit organizations: Theory, management, policy. Routledge. Batley, Richard and McLoughlin, Claire. (2010) “Engagement with Non-State Service Providers in Fragile States: Reconciling State-Building and Service Delivery.” Development Policy Review 28(2): 136-148 Bowen, F., Newenham-Kahindi, A., & Herremans, I. (2010). When suits meet roots: The antecedents and consequences of community engagement strategy. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(2), 297-318. Brinkerhoff, Jennifer (2002) Partnership for International Development: Rhetoric or Results? Lynne Reinner. Carmel, Emma and Harlock, Jenny (2008) “Instituting the ‘third sector’ as a governable terrain: partnership, procurement and performance in the UK.” Policy and Politics 36(2): 155-171 Lecy, J. D., Schmitz, H. P., & Swedlund, H. (2012). Non-governmental and not-for-profit organizational effectiveness: A modern synthesis. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 23(2), 434-457. Lewis, David. (2003) ‘The rise of non-governmental organizations: issues in development management’, in Colin Kirkpatrick, Ron Clarke and Charles Polidano (eds) Handbook on Development Policy and Managment, Edward Elgar. Light, Paul C. (2002) Pathways to Nonprofit Excellence, Washington DC., Brookings Institution Press.

8

Najam, Adil. (2000) “The Four-C’s of Third Sector– Government Relations: Cooperation, Confrontation, Complementarity, and Co-optation.” Nonprofit Management and Leadership 10, (4): 375-396 Mandeville, John. (2007) ‘Public Policy Grant Making: Building Organizational Capacity Among Nonprofit Grantees, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 36: 282-298 Moulton, S., & Eckerd, A. (2012). Preserving the publicness of the nonprofit sector resources, roles, and public values. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 41(4), 656-685. Pestoff, V., Brandsen, T., & Verschuere, B. (Eds.). (2013). New public governance, the third sector, and co-production (Vol. 7). Routledge. Skelcher, C., & Smith, S. R. (2015). Theorizing hybridity: Institutional logics, complex organizations, and actor identities: The case of nonprofits. Public administration, 93(2), 433-448. Seibel, Wolfgang. (2015). “Welfare Mixes and Hybridity: Analytical and Managerial Implication.” VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organisations 26(3), 1759-1768. Smith, S. R. (2010). Nonprofits and public administration reconciling performance management and citizen engagement. The American Review of Public Administration, 40(2), 129-152. Ray Struyk, Managing Think Tank: Practical Guidance for Maturing Organizations, Washington DC and Budapest, Urban Institute and Local Government and Public Sector Initiative, 2002. This book can be downloaded at: http://www.eldis.org/static/DOC10339.htm Suárez, D. F. (2011). Collaboration and professionalization: The contours of public sector funding for nonprofit organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(2), 307-326. Wettenhall, R., & Thynne, I. (2009). Ownership in the public sphere: the significance of community and organisational form. International journal of public policy, 5(1), 5-23. Web-sites on Non profit resources: Center for Non Profit Management: http://www.cnm.org/ Charity Village: http://charityvillage.com/ Independent Sector: http://www.independentsector.org/ International Center for Not-for-profit Law: www.icnl.org

9

Week 4 Beyond State and Market 2: Networks and Administration • Networks as administrative structures • Administering networks • What are the specific challenges related to network management compared to

traditional bureaucratic management of government agencies? Agranoff, Robert and McGuire, Michael (2001) ‘Big Questions in Public Network Management Research’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 11(3): 295-326. Börzel, T. A. (2011). Networks: reified metaphor or governance panacea?. Public Administration, 89(1), 49-63. Davies, Jonathan. (2011) Challenging Governance Theory: From Networks to Hegemony, Bristol, Policy Press. Chapter 2 Jackson, P. M., & Stainsby, L. (2000). The public manager in 2010: Managing public sector networked organizations. Public Money and Management, 20(1), 11-16. Provan, Keith and Kenis, Patrick. (2008) Modes of Network Governance: Structure, Management, and Effectiveness, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18 (2): 229–252. Further Reading: Agranoff, Robert. (2007) Managing Within Networks: Adding Value to Public Organizations, Washington DC., Georgetown University Press Börzel, Tanja. (1999) ‘Organizing Babylon -- on the different conceptions of policy networks’, Public Administration, 76 (summer): 253-73. Considine, M., Lewis, J.M. and Alexander, D. (2009) Networks Innovation and Public Policy: Politicians, Bureaucrats and the Pathways to Change Inside Government, Palgrave Macmillan. Davies, Jonathan. (2011) Challenging Governance Theory: From Networks to Hegemony, Bristol, Policy Press. Gormley, W. T. (1986) ‘Regulatory Issue Networks in a Federal System’, Polity, 18 (4): 595-620. Herranz, Joaquín Jr (2007) ‘The Multisectoral Trilemma of Network Management’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory,

10

Hayden, F. G. (2002) Policymaking Network of the Iron-Triangle Subgovernment for Licensing Hazardous Waste Facilities, Journal of Economic Issues. 36(2) Kickert, Walter J. M., Klijn, Erik-Hans & Koppenjan, Joop F. M. (1997) Managing Complex Networks: Strategies for the Public Sector, London, Sage. Klijn E. H. and Koppenjan J. F. M. (2000) ‘Public Management and Policy networks: foundations of A Network Approach to Governance, Public Management, 2( 2); 135-158 Klijn, E-H., Steijn, B. and Edelenbos, J. (2010) ‘The Impact f Network Management on Outcomes in Governance Networks’, Public Administration, 88: 1063–1082. Koliba, C., Meek, J. W., & Zia, A. (2010). Governance networks in public administration and public policy. CRC Press. Levi-Faur. (2011) ‘Regulatory Networks and Regulatory Agencification: Towards a Single European Regulatory Space’, Journal of European Public Policy, 18 (6) : 810-29. Lewis, JM (2011) ‘The future of network governance research: Strength in diversity and synthesis’ (Introduction to symposium of papers on network governance research), Public Administration 89(4): 1221-1234 Marcusen, Martin. & Torfing, Jacob. Eds. (2006) Democratic Network Governance in Europe, MacMillan. Roloff, Julia (2008) ‘A life cycle model of multi-stakeholder networks’, Business Ethics: A European Review, 17(3): 311-325. Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2011). Enhancing collaborative innovation in the public sector. Administration & Society, 0095399711418768. Sorensen, Eva and Torfing, Jacob (2005) Network Governance and Post Liberal Democracy’, Administrative Theory & Praxis, 27(2): Thompson, Graeme. (2003) Between Hierarchies and Markets: The Logic and Limits of Network Forms of Organization, Oxford, Oxford University Press. Week 5. International Public Sector Management and Transnational Administration

• Is the concept of transnational administration a new conceptual departure, or an

incremental step from comparative public administration? • How do global/regional dynamics impact upon and alter administrative realms? Gulrajani, N., & Moloney, K. (2012). Globalizing public administration: today's research and tomorrow's agenda. Public Administration Review, 72 (1), 78-86.

11

Knill, C., & Bauer, M. W. (2016). Policy-making by international public administrations: concepts, causes and consequences. Journal of European Public Policy, 23(7), 949-959. Perry, James, (2014) ‘Building Public Administration Theory for Global Governance’, in Kim, S., Ashley, S., & Lambright, W. H. (Eds.). Public Administration in the Context of Global Governance. Edward Elgar Publishing. Stone, D., & Ladi, S. (2015). Global public policy and transnational administration. Public Administration, 93(4), 839-855. Further Reading: Bauer, Michael and Ege, Jorn (2014) ‘The Autonomy of International Bureaucracies’, Kim, S., Ashley, S., & Lambright, W. H. (Eds) Public Administration in the Context of Global Governance. Edward Elgar Publishing. Castillo, M. (2014). Antiterrorism and the Separation of Powers: How Public Administration Theory Can Help Us Meet the New Security Challenge. Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 11(1), 61-71. Kettl, D. F. (2000). The Transformation of Governance: Globalization, Devolution, and the Role of Government. Public Administration Review, 60(6), 488-497. Kim, S., Ashley, S., & Lambright, W. H. (Eds.). (2014). Public Administration in the Context of Global Governance. Edward Elgar Publishing. Klingner, D. E., & Washington, C. W. (2000). Through the Looking Glass: The Benefits of an International and Comparative Perspective on Teaching Public Affairs. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 6(1), 35-44. Knill, C. and Bauer, M.W., 2007. Theorizing management reforms in International Organizations (pp. 191-200). Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG. Koppell, J. G. (2010). Administration without borders. Public Administration Review, 70(s1), s46-s55. Koppell (2009) World Rule: Accountability and the Administration of Global Governance Organizations, University of Chicago Press. Lemay-Hébert, N. (2013). Everyday Legitimacy and International Administration: Global Governance and Local Legitimacy in Kosovo. Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding, 7(1), 87-104 Mathiasen, D. (2005) “International public management”, in Ferlie, E., Lynn, L. E. and Pollitt, C. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Public Management, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 643-670. Murphy, J. (2008) ‘The Rise of Global Managers’ in Sadhvi Dar and Bill Cooke, (eds) The New Development Management:, Zed Books

12

Pal, L. A. (2012). Frontiers of governance: the OECD and global public management reform. Springer. Peters, B. G., Pierre, J., & Randma-Liiv, T. (2011). Global financial crisis, public administration and governance: Do new problems require new solutions?. Public Organization Review, 11(1), 13-27. Phua Chao rong, Charles (2015) ‘Value of Public Administration Management to International Relations: Scaffolding an Interdisciplinary Research Agenda’, International Relations and Diplomacy, 3(12):843-862 Pritchett, Lant. "The World Bank and public sector management: what next?" International Review of Administrative Sciences 79, no. 3 (2013): 413-419. O'Toole, L. (2002). American Public Administration and Impacts of International Governance. Public Administration Review, 62, 158-168. Schemeil, Y. (2013). Bringing international organization in: Global institutions as adaptive hybrids. Organization Studies, 34(2), 219-252. Schout, A., & Wolff, S. (2016). The ‘Paradox of Lisbon’: Supranationalism-Intergovernmentalism as an Administrative Concept. The EU's Lisbon Treaty: Institutional Choices and Implementation, 21. Vigoda, Eran and Levi-Faur, David. (eds.) International Public Policy and Management: Policy Learning and Policy Beyond Regional, Cultural, and Political Boundaries, New York: Marcel Dekker Welch, E., & Wong, W. (1998). Public Administration in a Global Context: Bridging the Gaps of Theory and Practice Between Western and non-Western Nations. Public Administration Review, 58(1), 40-49. Yi-Chong, X. U., & Weller, P. (2008). ‘To Be, But not To Be Seen’: Exploring the Impact of International Civil Servants. Public Administration, 86(1), 35-51

Week 6. Leadership in Public Organisations • Vision and charisma: can these attributes be acquired through professional

experience? • Can ‘leadership’ be taught? What is the role for leadership training in public sector

organisations? Boin, A. and P. t’Hart. 2003. “Public Leadership in Times of Crisis: Mission Impossible?” Public Administration Review 63, 544-553

13

Fairholm, M. R. 2004. “Different Perspectives on the Practise of Leadership.” Public Administration Review 64, 577-590. Orazi, D. C., Turrini, A., & Valotti, G. (2013). Public sector leadership: new perspectives for research and practice. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 79(3), 486-504. Van Wart, Montgomery . (2003) ‘Public Sector Leadership theory: An Assessment, Public Administration Review, 63(2): 214—228. Further Reading: Carver, J. (2011). Boards that make a difference: A new design for leadership in nonprofit and public organizations (Vol. 6). John Wiley & Sons. Eliassen, K. and Sitter, N. (2008) Understanding Public Management, London: SAGE (ch. 8). Fairholm, M. R. 2004. “Different Perspectives on the Practise of Leadership.” Public Administration Review 64, 577-590. Halligan, J. (2012) “Leadership and the Senior Service from a Comparative Perspective”, in G. Peters and J. Pierre (eds), The Sage Handbook of Public Administration, London: SAGE. Mansour, Javidan. and David A. Waldman (2003) ‘Exploring Charismatic Leadership in the Public Sector: Measurement and Consequences’, Public Administration Review 63 (2), 2003 Milner, E. and Joyce, P. (2005) Lessons in Leadership: Meeting the Challenges of Public Service Management, Abington: Routledge. Morrell, K. and Hartley, J. (2006) “A Model of Political Leadership”, Human Relations, 59: 483- 504. OECD (2001) Public Sector Leadership for the 21st Century, Paris: OECD. Robinson Hickman, G. and Sorenson, G. (2013) The Power of Invisible Leadership, LA: Sage. Storey, J. (ed.), (2004) Leadership in Organizations – Current Issues and Key Trends, Abington: Routledge. Van Wart, M. (2012) Leadership in Public Organizations, New York: M. E. Sharpe Web-sites: http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/CAFRAD/UNPAN014533.pdf

14

Week 7. Management and Measurement • Do targets/benchmarking/ranks improve administration? • Measurement as the de-politicisation of public administration? • Digital era administration Hansen, H. K., & Mühlen-Schulte, A. (2012). The power of numbers in global governance. Journal of International Relations and Development, 15(4), 455-465. Hood C, (2012) Public management by numbers as a performance-enhancing drug: two hypotheses, Public administration review, DOI: 10.111/j.1540-6210.2012.02634.x. Maciejewski, M. (2016). To do more, better, faster and more cheaply: using big data in public administration. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 0020852316640058. Wood, M., & Flinders, M. (2014). Rethinking depoliticisation: Beyond the governmental. Policy & Politics, 42(2), 151-170. Further Reading Barnow, B. S., & Heinrich, C. J. (2010). One standard fits all? The pros and cons of performance standard adjustments. Public Administration Review, 70(1), 60-71. Bertelli AM and John P, (2010) Government checking government: how performance measures expand distributive politics, Journal of politics, 72, 2, 545–558. Bevan G and Hood C, (2006) What’s measured is what matters: targets and gaming in the English public health care system, Public administration, 84, 3, 517-538. Hood, C. C., & Margetts, H. Z. (2007). The tools of government in the digital age. Palgrave Macmillan. Hood, C., James, O. and Scott, C. (2000) “Regulation Inside Government – Has it Increased? Is it Increasing? Should it be Diminished?”, Public Administration, 78. 2: 283-304. Ingraham, P. W., Joyce, P. G., & Donahue, A. K. (2003). Government performance: Why management matters. Taylor & Francis. Meyer Sahling, Jan Hinrik (2004) 'Civil Service Reform in Post-Communist Europe: The Bumpy Road to Depoliticization'. West European Politics 27(1): 69-101 Modell, S. (2012). Strategy, political regulation and management control in the public sector: institutional and critical perspectives. Management Accounting Research, 23(4), 278-295.

15

Park, S, and Berry, F, 2014, ‘Successful Diffusion of a Failed Policy: The case of pay-for-performance in the US federal government’, Public Management Review, 16, 6, 763-781 Raadschelders, J., & Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2015). Global Dimensions of Public Administration and Governance: A Comparative Voyage. John Wiley & Sons. Chapters, 6,7 and 8. Talbot C, 2010, Theories of performance: organisational and service improvement in the public domain, Oxford: Oxford University Press, chs 1-3. Van Thiel S and Leeuw FL, 2002, The performance paradox in the public sector, Public performance and management review, 25, 3, 267-281. Web-sites: World Bank: http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPUBLICSECTORANDGOVERNANCE/0,,contentMDK:23413163~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:286305,00.html

Week 8. Organizational Cultures and Control / Managerial Responsibility • How can managers change or channel organisational culture? Consider the following

factors: * Individual behaviour: Personality and motivation * Groups and teams in organisations * Power and conflict in organisations * Networking skills and emotional intelligence

• Are public managers best considered as administrative actors executing Innovation and Creativity; Expertise; or Experience

Ingraham, P. W., Joyce, P. G., & Donahue, A. K. (2003). Government performance: Why management matters. Taylor & Francis. Kelman, Steven (2007) 'Chapter 5: Public Administration and Organization Studies', The Academy of Management Annals, 1:1,225 — 267 Lynn, L. E. (1996). Public Management as Art. Science Profession. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House. Chapt 2. ‘The Public Manager as Administrator’ Meyer, R. E., Egger-Peitler, I., Höllerer, M. A., and Hammerschmid, G. (2014). Of bureaucrats and passionate public managers: Institutional logics, executive identities, and public service motivation. Public Administration, 92(4), 861-885.

16

Peters, B. G. (2010). The Politics of Bureaucracy–an introduction to comparative public administration, London and New York, Routledge. (6 edition). Chapter 2 Raadschelders, J., & Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2015). Global Dimensions of Public Administration and Governance: A Comparative Voyage. John Wiley & Sons. Chapters, 6, 7 and 8. Further Reading Ashworth R, Boyne G and Entwistle T, eds, 2010, Public service improvement: theories and evidence, Oxford: Oxford University Press Bertelli, A., M., Lawrence and E. Lynn. 2003. “Managerial Responsibility.” Public Administration Review 63, 259-268. Mark Brown, (2009) “Fairly Balanced: The Politics of Representation on Government Advisory Committees.” Political Research Quarterly 61, (4): 547-560 Dobel, J. Patrick (2003) ‘The Odyssey of Senior Public Service: What Memoirs Can Teach Us’, Public Administration Review 63(1) Juliet Kaarbo and Debroah Gruenfeld, ‘The Social Psychology of Inter- and Intragroup Conflict in Government Politics’, Mershon International Studies Review, 42(2) 1998: 226—233 Reed, Michael. (2011) “The Post-Bureaucratic Organization and the Control Revolution.” In Managing Modernity: Beyond Bureaucracy?, edited by Stewart Clegg, Martin Harris, and Harro Hopfl, 230-256. Oxford: Oxford University Press Stivers, Camilla 1994: “The Listening Bureaucrat: Responsiveness in Public Administration,” Public Administration Review 54 (4), pp. 364-369 Taylor, Jeannette. (2014) "Organizational culture and the paradox of performance management." Public Performance & Management Review 38 (1):7-22. Westover, J. H., & Taylor, J. (2010). International differences in job satisfaction: The effects of public service motivation, rewards and work relations. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 59(8), 811-828. Web-site

Kathryn A. Baker, ‘Organizational Culture’ http://www.sc.doe.gov/sc-5/benchmark/Ch%2011%20Organizational%20Culture%2006.08.02.pdf Culture and Complexity: http://www.new-paradigm.co.uk/culture-complex.htm

17

Week 9: Public Value in Administrative Realms • Public value for whom? • Austerity and the impacts of the GFC on public administration Alford, J., & O'Flynn, J. (2009). Making sense of public value: Concepts, critiques and emergent meanings. Intl Journal of Public Administration, 32(3-4), 171-191. Moore, M.H. (2014) “Public Value Accounting: Establishing the Philosophical Basis.” Public Administration Review 74, 465-477 Murray JG, Erridge A and Rimmer N, (2012) International lessons on austerity strategy, International journal of public sector management, 25, 4, 248-259. Rhodes, R. A., & Wanna, J. (2007). The limits to public value, or rescuing responsible government from the platonic guardians. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 66(4), 406-421. Further Reading: Alford, J., & Hughes, O. (2008). Public value pragmatism as the next phase of public management. The American Review of Public Administration. Bowman, J. S., West, J. P., Berman, M., & Van Wart, M. (2016). The professional edge: Competencies in public service. Routledge. Breunig C and Busemeyer MR, 2012, Fiscal austerity and the trade-off between public investment and social spending, Journal of European public policy, 1, 6, 921–938. Bryson, R., B.C. Crosby and L. Bloomberg. 2014. “Public Value Governance: Moving Be-yond Traditional Public Administration and the New Public Management.” Public Administration Review 74, 445-456. Hood C, Emmerson C and Dixon R, 2009, Public spending in hard times, London: Institute for Fiscal Studies, available at http://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/4542. Lee, D. J., Oakley, K., & Naylor, R. (2011). ‘The public gets what the public wants’? The uses and abuses of ‘public value’in contemporary British cultural policy. International journal of cultural policy, 17(3), 289-300. Meynhardt, T. (2009). Public value inside: What is public value creation?. Intl Journal of Public Administration, 32(3-4), 192-219.

18

Mintrom, M., & Luetjens, J. (2015). Creating Public Value: Tightening Connections Between Policy Design and Public Management. Policy Studies Journal. Moore, Mark (1995) Creating Public Value: Strategic Management in Government, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Pollitt C, (2010) Cuts and reforms – public services as we move into a new era, Society and economy, 32 1, 17–31 Randma-Liiv, T. (2014). Introduction to the Special Issue: The Impact of the Fiscal Crisis on Public Administration. Administrative Culture, (15-1), 4-9. Stoker, G. (2006). Public value management a new narrative for networked governance?. The American review of public administration, 36(1), 41-57. Williams, I., & Shearer, H. (2011). Appraising public value: Past, present and futures. public administration, 89(4), 1367-1384.

Week 10. Design Principles in Public Administration: Carrots Sticks and Sermons • Carrots, Sticks and Sermons in administrative practice plus Nudge • How are the roles and responsibilities of bureaucrats conceived in relation to the

design and construction of public sector programs and service delivery?

Michael Howlett (2011) Designing Public Policies: Principles and Instruments, Chapter 2 Hussein Kassim, Patrick Le Galès (2010) Exploring Governance in a Multi-Level Polity: A Policy Instruments Approach’, West European Politics, 33 (1): The Economist (2012) ‘Nudge Nudge; Think, Think: the use of behavioural economics in public policy shows promise’, March 24th: http://www.economist.com/node/21551032 Whitehead, M., Jones, R., Howell, R., Lilley, R., & Pykett, J. (2014). Nudging All Over the World. Economic and Social Research Council. Section 1 and 2. Further Reading on Policy Design: Michael Barzelay, and Fred Thompson. “Back to the Future: Making Public Administration a Design Science.” Public Administration Review 70, no. 1 (2010): s295-s297. Marie-Louise Bemelmans-Videc, Ray C. Rist, Evert Oskar Vedung Eds (2010) Carrots, Sticks, and Sermons: Policy Instruments and Their Evaluation, New Brunswick, New Jersey, Transaction Publishers.

19

B. Davis Bobrow, (2006). Policy design: Ubiquitous, necessary and difficult. Handbook of public policy, 75-96. John Dryzek, and B. Ripley. “The Ambitions of Policy Design.” Policy Studies Review 7, no. 4 (1988): 705-719. P. Ingraham (1987) “Toward More Systematic Considerations of Policy Design.” Policy Studies Journal 15 (4): 611-628. Peter J. May (1991) ‘Reconsidering Policy Design: Policies and Publics’, Journal of Public Policy, 11, pp 187-206 doi:10.1017/S0143814X0000619X Lester Salamon (2002) The Tools of Government: A Guide to the New Governance. New York: Oxford University Press. Michael Trebilcock. (2005) Chapter 3 in F. Pearl Eliadis, Margaret M. Hill, Michael Patrick Howlett Eds. Designing Government: From Instruments To Governance, McGill-Queens University Press Further Reading on ‘Nudge’: On Amir and Orly (2008) ‘Stumble, Predict, Nudge: How Behavioral Economics Informs Law and Policy’, Columbia Law Review, 108(9): 2098-2137 D. M. Hausman and B Welch (2010), Debate: To Nudge or Not to Nudge. Journal of Political Philosophy, 18: 123–136. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9760.2009.00351.x Peter John, Sarah Cotterill, Alice Moseley, Liz Richardson, Graham Smith, Gerry Stoker, and Corinne Wales. (2011) Nudge, Nudge, Think, Think: Experimenting with Ways to Change Civic Behaviour. London; New York: Bloomsbury Academic and book review at: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/archives/17031 Lissowska, (2011) ‘Overview of Behavioural Economics Elements in the OECD Consumer Policy Toolkit’, Journal of Consumer Policy, 34(3): 393-398 Gerry Stoker (2012) ‘The Politics of Nudge: dilemmas in implementing policies for sustainable consumption’, University of Southampton. August 2012: http://www.anzsog.edu.au/magma/media/upload/ckeditor/files/Stoker%20Wellington%2012%20-%20Stoker,%20forthcoming.pdf T. M. Wilkinson (2013) “Nudging and Manipulation.” Political Studies, 61(2), 341-355. Web-site UK Behavioural Insights Team: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/behavioural-insights-team

20

Week 11. Design Principles 2: Tools and Instruments • Financial tools (taxes & subsidies; mechanisms of financial oversight eg. audit) • Regulatory tools • Information tools

Essential Reading:

Hood, C. C., & Margetts, H. Z. (2007). The tools of government in the digital age. Palgrave Macmillan. Michael Howlett (2011) Designing Public Policies: Principles and Instruments, Pierre Lascomes, and Patrick Le Gales. (2007) “Introduction: Understanding Public Policy through Its Instruments - From the Nature of Instruments to the Sociology of Public Policy Instrumentation.” Governance 20(1): 1-21. Christopher Hood (2006) ‘The tools of government in the information age’, in Michael Moran, Martin Rein and Robert Goodin (eds) Handbook of Public Policy, Oxford, OUP. John, Peter. (2014) All tools are informational now. How information and persuasion define the tools of government’, in Ayers, S. and Flinders, M. (Eds.) Rethinking Policy and Politics, Policy Press.

Further Reading: 2010, Special Issue: Governing the European Union: Policy Instruments in a Multi-Level Polity, West European Politics, 33(1): Considine, M., Alexander, D., & Lewis, J. M. (2014). Policy design as craft: teasing out policy design expertise using a semi-experimental approach. Policy sciences, 47(3), 209-225. Berkhard Eberlein (2013) Virtual Special Issue: ‘Regulation in the EU’, Journal of European Public Policy, 20(1). http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/explore/RJPP_VSI13.pdf Peter John (2011) Making Policy Work, Routledge. David Levi-Faur, Levi-Faur, D. (2011). Regulation and regulatory governance. Handbook on the Politics of Regulation, 1-25. OECD (2009) Regulatory Policy and the Road to Sustainable Growth: http://www.oecd.org/regreform/policyconference/46270065.pdf

21

Lester M. Salamon, Ed. (2002) The Tools of Government: A Guide to the New Governance, Oxford University Press. Including chapter by Christopher Howard ‘Tax expenditures’ S. Linder and B. G. Peters.(1990) “The Design of Instruments for Public Policy.” In Policy Theory and Policy Evaluation: Concepts, Knowledge, Causes, and Norms, edited by S. S. Nagel, 103-119. New York: Greenwood Press. Colin Scott. (2006) ‘Privatization and Regulatory Regimes’, in Michael Moran, Martin Rein and Robert Goodin (eds) Handbook of Public Policy, Oxford, OUP, ch 32.

Trebilcock, M., and D. G. Hartle. (1982) “The Choice of Governing Instrument.” International Review of Law and Economics 2: 29-46. Janet A Weiss and Mary Tschirhart (1994) "Public Information Campaigns as Policy Instruments" in Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 13(1): 82-119 Chris Yiu (2012) A Right to Data: Fulfilling the Promise to Open Public Data in the UK. London: Policy Exchange: http://policyexchange.org.uk/images/publications/a%20right%20to%20data%20-%20mar%2012.pdf. Web-site Best-In-Class Regulator: https://www.law.upenn.edu/institutes/ppr/bestinclassregulator/

Evidence for Policy Design (Harvard): http://www.hks.harvard.edu/centers/cid/programs/evidence-for-policy-design

Financial Management Policy Instruments (Canada): http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/fm-gf/pol/menu-eng.asp Mark Horton and Asmaa El-Ganainy, IMF (2012) Fiscal Policy: Taxing and Giving Away’, http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/basics/fiscpol.htm

Week 12. Design Mixes for Wicked Problems, Innovation and Policy Termination

• Instrument mixes • Sequencing, patching and innovating • Designing the end (termination)

Adam, C., Bauer, M. W., Knill, C., & Studinger, P. (2007). The termination of public organizations: Theoretical perspectives to revitalize a promising research area. Public Organization Review, 7(3), 221-236.

22

Howlett, M., Mukherjee, I., & Woo, J. J. (2015). From tools to toolkits in policy design studies: the new design orientation towards policy formulation research. Policy & Politics, 43(2), 291-311. Kieron Flanagan, Elvira Uyarra, and Manuel Laranja. (2011) “Reconceptualising the ‘policy mix’ for innovation.” Research Policy 40, (5): 702-713. Further Reading: Batty, M. (2013). Great Planning Disasters?. The Planning Imagination: Peter Hall and the Study of Urban and Regional Planning, 28. Bennear, L. S. & Stavins, R. N. (2007). Second-best theory and the use of multiple policy instruments. Environmental and Resource Economics, 37(1), 111-129. Bode, I (2006) “Disorganized Welfare Mixes: Voluntary Agencies and New Governance Regimes in Western Europe.” Journal of European Social Policy 16 (4): 346-359 Carley, Sanya (2011) “The Era of State Energy Policy Innovation: A Review of Policy Instruments.”Review of Policy Research 28, (3): 265-294. Cunningham, Paul ., Jakob Edler., Kieron Flanagan and Philippe Laredo (2013) Innovation policy mix and instrument interaction: a review, Nesta Working Paper 13/2: http://www.nesta.org.uk/publications/innovation-policy-mix-and-instrument-interaction-review#sthash.H6dhOkV7.dpuf Dunleavy, Patrick. (1995). Policy disasters: explaining the UK's record. Public Policy and Administration, 10(2), 52-70. Flyvbjerg, Bent ., Cantarelli, C., Molin, E. J., & van Wee, B. (2010). Cost overruns in large-scale tranportation infrastructure projects: Explanations and their theoretical embeddedness. European Journal of Transport Infrastructure Research, 10(1), 5-18. Graddy, E. A. & Ye, K. (2008) “When do we ‘Just Say No’? Policy Termination Decisions in Local Hospital Services, Policy Studies Journal, 36(2): 219-42. Hall, C. M. (2011). Policy learning and policy failure in sustainable tourism governance: from first-and second-order to third-order change?. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(4-5), 649-671. Howlett, Michael and Jeremy Rayner. (2007) “Design Principles for Policy Mixes: Cohesion and Coherence in ‘New Governance Arrangements’.” Policy and Society 26 (4): 1-18. Jordan, A., Bauer, M. W., & Green-Pedersen, C. (2013). Policy dismantling. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(5), 795-805.

23

Mosse, David. (2004), Is Good Policy Unimplementable? Reflections on the Ethnography of Aid Policy and Practice. Development and Change, 35: 639–671. doi: 10.1111/j.0012-155X.2004.00374.x O’Leary, C. (2015). Agency Termination in the UK: What Explains the ‘Bonfire of the Quangos’?. West European Politics, 38(6), 1327-1344. Weaver, Kent (2010). Paths and Forks or Chutes and Ladders?: Negative Feedbacks and Policy Regime Change. Journal of Public Policy, 30, pp 137-162. doi:10.1017/S0143814X10000061.

24