@book{OPUS4-43950,
  title     = {Handbuch zur Verwaltungsreform},
  editor    = {Veit, Sylvia and Reichard, Christoph and Wewer, G{\"o}ttrik},
  edition   = {5., vollst{\"a}ndig {\"u}berarb. Aufl.},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address   = {Wiesbaden},
  isbn      = {978-3-658-21562-0},
  pages     = {747},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {Das Thema Verwaltungsreform besch{\"a}ftigt nach wie vor Bund, L{\"a}nder und Gemeinden gleichermaßen. Konzeptionell sind die diskutierten Ans{\"a}tze und Instrumente einem st{\"a}ndigen Wandel unterworfen und bei der Umsetzung von Maßnahmen besteht in großem Maße Unsicherheit und Orientierungsbedarf. Das Handbuch liefert einen Beitrag zur Einordnung unterschiedlicher Konzepte und Orientierung f{\"u}r die Umsetzung der Verwaltungsreform. In 66 Beitr{\"a}gen werden vielf{\"a}ltige Ans{\"a}tze der Verwaltungsreform vorgestellt, ihr Entstehungszusammenhang erl{\"a}utert, praktische Anwendungsfelder beschrieben und Entwicklungsperspektiven untersucht. Die Beitr{\"a}ge stammen von renommierten WissenschaftlerInnen und erfahrenen PraktikerInnen. Themenbl{\"o}cke: Staat und Verwaltung, Reform- und Managementkonzepte, Steuerung und Organisation, Personal, Finanzen, Ergebnisse und Wirkungen, Erfahrungen und Perspektiven. Die H{\"a}lfte der Beitr{\"a}ge dieser Auflage wurde komplett neu geschrieben und die restlichen Beitr{\"a}ge wurden gr{\"u}ndlich {\"u}berarbeitet.},
  language  = {de}
}
@article{KuhlmannWayenberg2016,
  author    = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Wayenberg, Ellen},
  title     = {Institutional impact assessment in multi-level systems: conceptualizing decentralization effects from a comparative perspective},
  series = {International review of administrative sciences : an international journal of comparative public administration},
  volume    = {82},
  journal   = {International review of administrative sciences : an international journal of comparative public administration},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {Sage},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {0020-8523},
  doi       = {10.1177/0020852315583194},
  pages     = {233 -- 272},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Comparative literature on institutional reforms in multi-level systems proceeds from a global trend towards the decentralization of state functions. However, there is only scarce knowledge about the impact that decentralization has had, in particular, upon the sub-central governments involved. How does it affect regional and local governments? Do these reforms also have unintended outcomes on the sub-central level and how can this be explained? This article aims to develop a conceptual framework to assess the impacts of decentralization on the sub-central level from a comparative and policy-oriented perspective. This framework is intended to outline the major patterns and models of decentralization and the theoretical assumptions regarding de-/re-centralization impacts, as well as pertinent cross-country approaches meant to evaluate and compare institutional reforms. It will also serve as an analytical guideline and a structural basis for all the country-related articles in this Special Issue. Points for practitioners Decentralization reforms are approved as having a key role to play in the attainment of 'good governance'. Yet, there is also the enticement on the part of state governments to offload an ever-increasing amount of responsibilities to, and overtask, local levels of government, which can lead to increasing performance disparities within local sub-state jurisdictions. Against this background, the article provides a conceptual framework to assess reform impacts from a comparative perspective. The analytical framework can be used by practitioners to support their decisions about new decentralization strategies or necessary adjustments regarding ongoing reform measures.},
  language  = {en}
}
@book{SchedlerProeller2011,
  author    = {Schedler, Kuno and Proeller, Isabella},
  title     = {New Public Management},
  series = {UTB ; 2132},
  journal   = {UTB ; 2132},
  edition   = {5., korrigierte Aufl.},
  publisher = {Haupt Verlag},
  address   = {Bern},
  isbn      = {978-3-8252-3638-0},
  pages     = {XXIV, 353},
  year      = {2011},
  abstract  = {New Public Management hat in den vergangenen Jahren die Ans{\"a}tze und das Verst{\"a}ndnis moderner Verwaltungsf{\"u}hrung maßgebend beeinflusst. Stossrichtungen und Grundanliegen dieses Modells wurden zum Teil in die F{\"u}hrungspraxis {\"u}bernommen und stellen in vielerlei Hinsicht nach wie vor Entwicklungsziele und Leitlinien f{\"u}r die Steuerung und F{\"u}hrung der {\"o}ffentlichen Verwaltung dar. NPM soll die {\"o}ffentliche Verwaltung an geforderte Neuausrichtungen anpassen und effizienter gestalten. Ziele und Gestaltung der {\"o}ffentlichen Verwaltung unter NPM und die dazu notwendigen Instrumente werden in diesem Lehrbuch umfassend und strukturiert erl{\"a}utert. Besonderes Augenmerk wird dabei auf die Ver{\"a}nderungslinien und -ans{\"a}tze f{\"u}r die Verwaltungsf{\"u}hrung gelegt.},
  language  = {en}
}
@phdthesis{Radtke2020,
  author    = {Radtke, Ina},
  title     = {Organizing immigration},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  pages     = {174},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {Immigration constitutes a dynamic policy field with - often quite unpredictable - dynamics. This is based on immigration constituting a 'wicked problem' meaning that it is characterized by uncertainty, ambiguity and complexity. Due to the dynamics in the policy field, expectations towards public administrations often change. Following neo-institutionalist theory, public administrations depend on meeting the expectations in the organizational field in order to maintain legitimacy as the basis for, e.g., resources and compliance of stakeholders. With the dynamics in the policy field, expectations might change and public administrations consequently need to adapt in order to maintain or repair the then threatened legitimacy. If their organizational legitimacy is threatened by a perception of structures and processes being inadequate for changed expectations, an 'institutional crisis' unfolds. However, we know little about ministerial bureaucracies' structural reactions to such crucial momentums and how this effects the quest for coordination within policy-making. Overall, the dissertation thus links to both policy analysis and public administration research and consists of five publications. It asks: How do structures in ministerial bureaucracies change in the context of institutional crises? And what effect do these changes have on ministerial coordination? The dissertation hereby focusses on the above described dynamic policy field of immigration in Germany in the period from 2005 to 2017 and pursues three objectives: 1) to identify the context and impulse for changes in the structures of ministerial bureaucracies, 2) to describe respective changes with regard to their organizational structures, and 3) to identify their effect on coordination. It hereby compares and contrasts institutional crises by incremental change and shock as well as changes and effects at federal and L{\"a}nder level which allows a comprehensive answer to both of the research questions. Theoretically, the dissertation follows neo-institutionalist theory with a particular focus on changes in organizational structures, coordination and crisis management. Methodologically, it follows a comparative design. Each article (except for the literature review), focusses on ministerial bureaucracies at one governmental level (federal or L{\"a}nder) and on an institutional crisis induced by either an incremental process or a shock. Thus, responses and effects can be compared and contrasted across impulses for institutional crises and governmental levels. Overall, the dissertation follows a mixed methods approach with a majority of qualitative single and small-n case studies based on document analysis and semi-structured interviews. Additionally, two articles use quantitative methods as they best suited the respective research question. The rather explorative nature of these two articles however fits to the overall interpretivist approach of the dissertation. Overall, the dissertation's core argument is: Within the investigation period, varying dynamics and thus impulses for institutional crises took place in the German policy field of immigration. Respectively, expectations by stakeholders on how the politico-administrative system should address the policy problem changed. Ministerial administrations at both the federal and L{\"a}nder level adapted to these expectations in order to maintain, or regain respectively, organizational legitimacy. The administration hereby referred to well-known recipes of structural changes. Institutional crises do not constitute fields of experimentation. The new structures had an immediate effect on ministerial coordination, with respect to both the horizontal and vertical dimension. Yet, they did not mean a comprehensive change of the system in place. The dissertation thus challenges the idea of the toppling effect of crises and rather shows that adaptability and persistence of public administrations constitute two sides of the same coin.},
  language  = {en}
}
@book{KuhlmannDumasHeuberger2022,
  author    = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Dumas, Beno{\^i}t Paul and Heuberger, Moritz},
  title     = {The capacity of local governments in Europe},
  publisher = {Palgrave Macmillan},
  address   = {Cham},
  isbn      = {978-3-031-07961-0},
  doi       = {10.1007/978-3-031-07962-7},
  pages     = {7 -- 55},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {This book compares local self-government in Europe. It examines local institutional structures, autonomy, and capacities in six selected countries - France, Italy, Sweden, Hungary, Poland, and the United Kingdom - each of which represents a typical model of European local government. Within Europe, an overall trend towards more local government capacities and autonomy can be identified, but there are also some counter tendencies to this trend and major differences regarding local politico-administrative settings, functional responsibilities, and resources. The book demonstrates that a certain degree of local financial autonomy and fiscal discretion is necessary for effective service provision. Furthermore, a robust local organization, viable territorial structures, a professional public service, strong local leadership, and well-functioning tools of democratic participation are key aspects for local governments to effectively fulfill their tasks and ensure political accountability. The book will appeal to students and scholars of Public Administration and Public Management, as well as practitioners and policy-makers at different levels of government, in public enterprises, and in NGOs.},
  language  = {en}
}
@phdthesis{Niroomand2021,
  author    = {Niroomand, Kian},
  title     = {Wandlungsf{\"a}hige Verwaltungen},
  publisher = {gito},
  address   = {Berlin},
  isbn      = {978-3-95545-400-5},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  pages     = {660},
  year      = {2021},
  language  = {de}
}
@article{KrollKrauseVogeletal.2012,
  author    = {Kroll, Alexander and Krause, Tobias and Vogel, Dominik and Proeller, Isabella},
  title     = {Was bestimmt die Reformbereitschaft von F{\"u}hrungskr{\"a}ften in der Ministerialverwaltung?},
  series = {Verwaltung \& Management : VM ; Zeitschrift f{\"u}r moderne Verwaltung},
  volume    = {18},
  journal   = {Verwaltung \& Management : VM ; Zeitschrift f{\"u}r moderne Verwaltung},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {Nomos},
  address   = {Baden-Baden},
  issn      = {0947-9856 (print \& online)},
  doi       = {10.5771/0947-9856-2012-2-75},
  pages     = {75 -- 80},
  year      = {2012},
  abstract  = {Bestehende Forschung hat gezeigt, dass die Reformbereitschaft von F{\"u}hrungskr{\"a}ften eine wichtige Voraussetzung f{\"u}r die erfolgreiche Umsetzung von Ver{\"a}nderungsprojekten ist. Dieser Artikel geht der Frage nach, wie erkl{\"a}rt werden kann, warum einige F{\"u}hrungskr{\"a}fte in der {\"o}ffentlichen Verwaltung reformbereiter sind als andere. Er greift dabei auf eine F{\"u}hrungskr{\"a}ftebefragung aus dem Jahr 2010 zur{\"u}ck, die auf den Einsch{\"a}tzungen von 351 Verwaltungsmanagern aus der Ministerialverwaltung von Bund und L{\"a}ndern basiert. Eine statistische Analyse dieser Daten kommt zu dem Ergebnis, dass die typische reformbereite F{\"u}hrungskraft intrinsisch motiviert ist, auf eine aufgabenorientierte F{\"u}hrung setzt sowie Arbeitserfahrung außerhalb der {\"o}ffentlichen Verwaltung und keine juristische Ausbildung besitzt. Sie arbeitet auf oberer Hierarchieebene, ist jedoch eher mit Fach- als mit F{\"u}hrungsaufgaben besch{\"a}ftigt. Der Artikel vertieft und erl{\"a}utert diese Befunde sowie deren Implikationen f{\"u}r die Verwaltungspraxis.},
  language  = {de}
}