@article{SeyfriedAnsmann2018, author = {Seyfried, Markus and Ansmann, Moritz}, title = {Unfreezing higher education institutions?}, series = {Higher Education}, volume = {75}, journal = {Higher Education}, number = {6}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Dordrecht}, issn = {0018-1560}, doi = {10.1007/s10734-017-0185-2}, pages = {1061 -- 1076}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Quality management (QM) in teaching and learning has strongly "infected" the higher education sector and spread around the world. It has almost everywhere become an integral part of higher education reforms. While existing research on QM mainly focuses on the national level from a macro-perspective, its introduction at the institutional level is only rarely analyzed. The present article addresses this research gap. Coming from the perspective of organization studies, it examines the factors that were crucial for the introduction of QM at higher education institutions in Germany. As the introduction of QM can be considered to be a process of organizational change, the article refers to Kurt Lewin's seminal concept of "unfreezing" organizations as a theoretical starting point. Methodologically, a mixed methods approach is applied by combining qualitative data derived from interviews with institutional quality managers and quantitative data gathered from a nationwide survey. The results show that the introduction of QM is initiated by either internal or external processes. Furthermore, some institutions follow a rather voluntary approach of unfreezing, while others show modes of forced unfreezing. Consequently, the way how QM was introduced has important implications for its implementation.}, language = {en} } @article{GanghofEppnerPoerschke2018, author = {Ganghof, Steffen and Eppner, Sebastian and P{\"o}rschke, Alexander}, title = {Semi-parliamentary government in perspective}, series = {Australian Journal of Political Science}, volume = {53}, journal = {Australian Journal of Political Science}, number = {2}, publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group}, address = {Abingdon}, issn = {1036-1146}, doi = {10.1080/10361146.2018.1451488}, pages = {264 -- 269}, year = {2018}, abstract = {The article responds to four commentaries on the concept of semi-parliamentary government and its application to Australian bicameralism. It highlights four main points: (1) Our preferred typology is not more 'normative' than existing approaches, but applies the criterion of 'direct election' equally to executive and legislature; (2) While the evolution of semi-parliamentary government had contingent elements, it plausibly also reflects the 'equilibrium' nature of certain institutional configurations; (3) The idea that a pure parliamentary system with pure proportional representation has absolute normative priority over 'instrumentalist' concerns about cabinet stability, identifiability and responsibility is questionable; and (4) The reforms we discuss may be unlikely to occur in Australia, but deserve consideration by scholars and institutional reformers in other democratic systems.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Lange2018, author = {Lange, Anne}, title = {On a small scale}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {337}, year = {2018}, abstract = {This study argues that micro relations matter in peacekeeping. Asking what makes the implementation of peacekeeping interventions complex and how complexity is resolved, I find that formal, contractual mechanisms only rarely effectively reduce complexity - and that micro relations fill this gap. Micro relations are personal relationships resulting from frequent face-to-face interaction in professional and - equally importantly - social contexts. This study offers an explanation as to why micro relations are important for coping with complexity, in the form of a causal mechanism. For this purpose, I bring together theoretical and empirical knowledge: I draw upon the current debate on 'institutional complexity' (Greenwood et al. 2011) in organizational institutionalism as well as original empirical evidence from a within-case study of the peacekeeping intervention in Haiti, gained in ten weeks of field research. In this study, scholarship on institutional complexity serves to identify theoretical causal channels which guide empirical analysis. An additional, secondary aim is pursued with this mechanism-centered approach: testing the utility of Beach and Pedersen's (2013) theory-testing process tracing. Regarding the first research question - what makes the implementation of peacekeeping interventions complex -, the central finding is that complexity manifests itself in the dual role of organizations as cooperation partners and competitors for (scarce) resources, turf and influence. UN organizations, donor agencies and international NGOs implementing peacekeeping activities in post-conflict environments have chronic difficulty mastering both roles because they entail contradictory demands: effective cooperation requires information exchange, resource and responsibility-sharing as well as external scrutiny, whereas prevailing over competitors demands that organizations conceal information, guard resources, increase relative turf and influence, as well as shield themselves from scrutiny. Competition fuels organizational distrust and friction - and impedes cooperation. How is this complexity resolved? The answer to this second research question is that deep-seated organizational competition is routinely mediated - and cooperation motivated - in micro relations and micro interaction. Regular, frequent face-to-face interaction between individual organizational members generates social resources that help to transcend organizational distrust and conflict, most importantly familiarity with each other, personal trust and belief in reciprocity. Furthermore, informal conflict mediation and control mechanisms - namely, open discussion, mutual monitoring in direct interaction and social exclusion - enhance solidarity and mutual support.}, language = {en} } @misc{vanHeldenReichard2018, author = {van Helden, Jan and Reichard, Christoph}, title = {Management control and public sector performance management}, series = {Baltic Journal of Management}, volume = {14}, journal = {Baltic Journal of Management}, number = {1}, publisher = {Emerald Group Publishing Limited}, address = {Bingley}, issn = {1746-5265}, doi = {10.1108/BJM-01-2018-0021}, pages = {158 -- 176}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether and how evolving ideas about management control (MC) emerge in research about public sector performance management (PSPM). Design/methodology/approach This is a literature review on PSPM research through using a set of key terms derived from a review of recent developments in MC. Findings MC research, originating in the management accounting discipline, is largely disconnected from PSPM research as part of public administration and public management disciplines. Overlaps between MC and PSPM research are visible in a cybernetic control approach, control variety and contingency-based reasoning. Both academic communities share an understanding of certain issues, although under diverging labels, especially enabling controls or, in a more general sense, usable performance controls, horizontal controls and control packaging. Specific MC concepts are valuable for future PSPM research, i.e. trust as a complement of performance-based controls in complex settings, and strategy as a variable in contingency-based studies. Research limitations/implications Breaking the boundaries between two currently remote research disciplines, on the one hand, might dismantle "would-be" innovations in one of these disciplines, and, on the other hand, may provide a fertile soil for mutual transfer of knowledge. A limitation of the authors' review of PSPM research is that it may insufficiently cover research published in the public sector accounting journals, which could be an outlet for MC-inspired PSPM research. Originality/value The paper unravels the "apparent" and "real" differences between MC and PSPM research, and, in doing so, takes the detected "real" differences as a starting point for discussing in what ways PSPM research can benefit from MC achievements.}, language = {en} } @article{BradyGiesselmannKohleretal.2018, author = {Brady, David and Giesselmann, Marco and Kohler, Ulrich and Radenacker, Anke}, title = {How to measure and proxy permanent income}, series = {The Journal of Economic Inequality}, volume = {16}, journal = {The Journal of Economic Inequality}, number = {3}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Dordrecht}, issn = {1569-1721}, doi = {10.1007/s10888-017-9363-9}, pages = {321 -- 345}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Permanent income (PI) is an enduring concept in the social sciences and is highly relevant to the study of inequality. Nevertheless, there has been insufficient progress in measuring PI. We calculate a novel measure of PI with the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP) and U.S. Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID). Advancing beyond prior approaches, we define PI as the logged average of 20+ years of post-tax and post-transfer ("post-fisc") real equivalized household income. We then assess how well various household- and individual-based measures of economic resources proxy PI. In both datasets, post-fisc household income is the best proxy. One random year of post-fisc household income explains about half of the variation in PI, and 2-5 years explain the vast majority of the variation. One year of post-fisc HH income even predicts PI better than 20+ years of individual labor market earnings or long-term net worth. By contrast, earnings, wealth, occupation, and class are weaker and less cross-nationally reliable proxies for PI. We also present strategies for proxying PI when HH post-fisc income data are unavailable, and show how post-fisc HH income proxies PI over the life cycle. In sum, we develop a novel approach to PI, systematically assess proxies for PI, and inform the measurement of economic resources more generally.}, language = {en} } @article{GirnusNeuhof2018, author = {Girnus, Luisa and Neuhof, Julia}, title = {Der Wandel von Staatlichkeit als Ziel- und Ausgangspunkt politischen Lernens in der Praxis}, series = {Gesellschaft im Wandel : neue Aufgaben f{\"u}r die politische Bildung und ihre Didaktik}, journal = {Gesellschaft im Wandel : neue Aufgaben f{\"u}r die politische Bildung und ihre Didaktik}, publisher = {Wochenschau Verlag}, address = {Frankfurt}, isbn = {978-3-7344-0827-4}, pages = {69 -- 76}, year = {2018}, language = {de} } @phdthesis{Kilgus2018, author = {Kilgus, Tobias}, title = {Der Integrationsprozess Kosovos in die Europ{\"a}ische Union}, series = {Region - Nation - Europa}, journal = {Region - Nation - Europa}, number = {84}, publisher = {LIT}, address = {M{\"u}nster}, isbn = {978-3-643-14079-1}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {558}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Die Republik Kosovo stellt einen Beitrittskandidaten sui generis in der Erweiterungsgeschichte der Europ{\"a}ischen Union dar. Die besonderen Beziehungen zwischen der EU und dem "potenziellen" Kandidaten resultieren aus dem ungel{\"o}sten Territorialkonflikt mit Serbien, dem unvollendeten Staatsaufbau sowie der eingeschr{\"a}nkten Souver{\"a}nit{\"a}t Kosovos. Diese Einzelfallstudie untersucht Kosovos Integrationsprozess in den Staatenverbund im Kontext der Spezifika des Beitrittsaspiranten, der stockenden EU-S{\"u}dosterweiterung und der multiplen EU-Krise. Davon ausgehend werden vier Zukunftsszenarien f{\"u}r Kosovos Integrationsverlauf, auch mit Blick auf differenzierte Integrationsoptionen, entwickelt.}, language = {de} } @phdthesis{Winkler2018, author = {Winkler, Katrin}, title = {Demokratische Praxis und Pragmatismus}, series = {B{\"u}rgergesellschaft und Demokratie}, volume = {2018}, journal = {B{\"u}rgergesellschaft und Demokratie}, number = {1}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Wiesbaden}, isbn = {978-3-658-20667-3}, pages = {XIII, 405}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Dass sich die repr{\"a}sentative Demokratie in Deutschland im Wandel befindet, ist nicht neu und kaum umstritten. Herausforderungen im Kontext der Partizipation und Repr{\"a}sentation rufen ihrerseits Probleme auf Seiten der Input-Legitimation hervor. Demgem{\"a}ß ist das grundlegende demokratiepolitische Anliegen dieser Arbeit, am Beispiel der Bundes- und Berliner Landesebene darzustellen, wie der repr{\"a}sentative Politikprozess partizipativer und dennoch effektiv gestaltet werden kann. Basierend auf der philosophischen Str{\"o}mung des Pragmatismus verfolgt und diskutiert die Arbeit die Synthese aus der pragmatistischen Demokratiekonzeption von Archon Fung und dem empirischen Forschungsprogramm der kriterienbasierten Evaluation demokratischer Innovationen. Dabei wird das analytische Vorgehen Archon Fungs kritisch erweitert, um dem dieser Arbeit zugrunde liegenden Konzept einer komplexen B{\"u}rgergesellschaft - als normativer und praktischer Bezugspunkt - gerecht zu werden. Fungs Konzept wird demnach um die liberale Sph{\"a}re der {\"O}ffentlichkeit, mithin um die zivilgesellschaftlichen Handlungszusammenh{\"a}nge erg{\"a}nzt. Auf Grundlage der Diskussion von demokratischen Innovationen werden schließlich demokratie- und engagementpolitische Handlungsempfehlungen in der Dimension der Partizipation und in der Dimension der Repr{\"a}sentation formuliert. Mithin verfolgt die Arbeit eine problem- und l{\"o}sungsorientierte Erg{\"a}nzung der repr{\"a}sentativen Demokratie. Gleichwohl ist die Arbeit als eine pragmatistisch angeleitete Konzeptstudie f{\"u}r die Entwicklung einer beteiligungsorientierten Praxis in der repr{\"a}sentativen Demokratie zu verstehen, die trotz ihres theoretischen Charakters ganz im Sinne des Pragmatismus die notwendige empirische Orientierung aufweist. Damit wird das zuweilen problematische Verh{\"a}ltnis zwischen Politischer Theorie und empirischer Demokratieforschung {\"u}berwunden.}, language = {de} } @article{GanghofEppnerPoerschke2018, author = {Ganghof, Steffen and Eppner, Sebastian and P{\"o}rschke, Alexander}, title = {Australian bicameralism as semi-parliamentarism}, series = {Australian Journal of Political Science}, volume = {53}, journal = {Australian Journal of Political Science}, number = {2}, publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group}, address = {Abingdon}, issn = {1036-1146}, doi = {10.1080/10361146.2018.1451487}, pages = {211 -- 233}, year = {2018}, abstract = {The article analyses the type of bicameralism we find in Australia as a distinct executive-legislative system - a hybrid between parliamentary and presidential government - which we call 'semi-parliamentary government'. We argue that this hybrid presents an important and underappreciated alternative to pure parliamentary government as well as presidential forms of the power-separation, and that it can achieve a certain balance between competing models or visions of democracy. We specify theoretically how the semi-parliamentary separation of powers contributes to the balancing of democratic visions and propose a conceptual framework for comparing democratic visions. We use this framework to locate the Australian Commonwealth, all Australian states and 22 advanced democratic nation-states on a two-dimensional empirical map of democratic patterns for the period from 1995 to 2015.}, language = {en} }