@article{SiegelFischerDrathschmidtetal.2020,
  author    = {Siegel, John and Fischer, Caroline and Drathschmidt, Nicolas and Gelep, Adrian and Kralinski, Thomas},
  title     = {Verwaltung im Lockdown},
  series = {Verwaltung \& Management},
  volume    = {26},
  journal   = {Verwaltung \& Management},
  number    = {6},
  publisher = {Nomos},
  address   = {Baden-Baden},
  issn      = {0947-9856},
  doi       = {10.5771/0947-9856-2020-6-279},
  pages     = {279 -- 287},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {Die Corona-Pandemie hat im Fr{\"u}hjahr 2020 auch die {\"o}ffentliche Verwaltung gezwungen, die Arbeit zu einem großen Teil ins Homeoffice zu verlagern. Dieser Beitrag stellt die Ergebnisse einer Studie vor, die mittels qualitativer Interviews und einer Online-Befragung (N=1.189) Besch{\"a}ftigte {\"o}ffentlicher Organisationen zum Umgang mit der Krise und den Erfahrungen mit dem Homeoffice befragt hat.},
  language  = {de}
}
@article{FischerSiegelProelleretal.2022,
  author    = {Fischer, Caroline and Siegel, John and Proeller, Isabella and Drathschmidt, Nicolas},
  title     = {Resilience through digitalisation},
  series = {Public management review},
  volume    = {25},
  journal   = {Public management review},
  number    = {4},
  publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {1471-9037},
  doi       = {10.1080/14719037.2022.2037014},
  pages     = {808 -- 835},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {This article examines public service resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic and studies the switch to telework due to social distancing measures. We argue that the pandemic and related policies led to increasing demands on public organisations and their employees. Following the job demands-resources model, we argue that resilience only can arise in the presence of resources for buffering these demands. Survey data were collected from 1,189 German public employees, 380 participants were included for analysis. The results suggest that the public service was resilient against the crisis and that the shift to telework was not as demanding as expected.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{ProellerSiegel2021,
  author    = {Proeller, Isabella and Siegel, John},
  title     = {Public Management Reforms in Germany},
  series = {Public Administration in Germany},
  journal   = {Public Administration in Germany},
  publisher = {Palgrave Macmillan},
  address   = {Cham},
  isbn      = {978-3-030-53696-1},
  doi       = {10.1007/978-3-030-53697-8_22},
  pages     = {393 -- 410},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {This chapter describes the most prominent public management reform trajectories in German public administration over the past decades since unification. In the 1990s, the New Steering Model emerged as a German variant of the NPM. Since the mid-2000s, local governments in Germany have been subjected to a mandatory reform of their budgeting and accounting system known as the New Municipal Financial Management reforms. Both reforms have led to a substantial change in terms of internal decentralisation, customer orientation, transparency in resource use and the financial situation of administrative bodies. But the emerging reform patterns and their impacts have not replaced the dominance of a strong legalist culture with hierarchical, centralised control. However, in the course of the reforms, a citizen-customer perspective, more participation of citizens and limited application of new management instruments have been accommodated within the persisting bureaucratic system.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{SiegelProeller2021,
  author    = {Siegel, John and Proeller, Isabella},
  title     = {Human Resource Management in German Public Administration},
  series = {Public Administration in Germany},
  journal   = {Public Administration in Germany},
  publisher = {Palgrave Macmillan},
  address   = {Cham},
  isbn      = {978-3-030-53696-1},
  doi       = {10.1007/978-3-030-53697-8_21},
  pages     = {375 -- 391},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Human resource management (HRM) reform has not been the focus of attention in Germany despite its obvious relevance for effective policy implementation. Although there is a general trend worldwide towards convergence between public and private HRM strategies and practices, management of the workforce in German public administration still remains largely traditional and bureaucratic. This chapter describes and analyses German practices regarding the central functions and elements of HRM such as planning, recruitment, training and leadership. Furthermore, it explores the importance and contribution of public service motivation, performance-related pay and diversity management in the context of German practices. The chapter concludes by highlighting some of the major paradoxes of German public HRM in light of current challenges, such as demographic change, digital transformation and organisational development capabilities.},
  language  = {en}
}