@article{Jann2007,
  author    = {Jann, Werner},
  title     = {Public administration under pressure : the search for new forms of public governance},
  isbn      = {978-92-1-123175-5},
  year      = {2007},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{JannLaegreidVerhoest2007,
  author    = {Jann, Werner and Laegreid, Per and Verhoest, Koen},
  title     = {Introduction},
  issn      = {0020-8523},
  doi       = {10.1177/0020852307081143},
  year      = {2007},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Jann2003,
  author    = {Jann, Werner},
  title     = {State, administration and governance in Germany: competing traditions and dominant narratives},
  year      = {2003},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{JannDoehler2002,
  author    = {Jann, Werner and D{\"o}hler, Marian},
  title     = {Germany},
  year      = {2002},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{JannWegrich2019,
  author    = {Jann, Werner and Wegrich, Kai},
  title     = {Generalists and specialists in executive politics: Why ambitious meta-policies so often fail},
  series = {Public administration},
  volume    = {97},
  journal   = {Public administration},
  number    = {4},
  publisher = {Wiley},
  address   = {Hoboken},
  issn      = {0033-3298},
  doi       = {10.1111/padm.12614},
  pages     = {845 -- 860},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {This article contributes to the politics of policy-making in executive government. It introduces the analytical distinction between generalists and specialists as antagonistic players in executive politics and develops the claim that policy specialists are in a structurally advantaged position to succeed in executive politics and to fend off attempts by generalists to influence policy choices through cross-cutting reform measures. Contrary to traditional textbook public administration, we explain the views of generalists and specialists not through their training but their positions within an organization. We combine established approaches from public policy and organization theory to substantiate this claim and to define the dilemma that generalists face when developing government-wide reform policies ('meta-policies') as well as strategies to address this problem. The article suggests that the conceptual distinction between generalists and specialists allows for a more precise analysis of the challenges for policy-making across government organizations than established approaches.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{JannJantzKuehneetal.2018,
  author    = {Jann, Werner and Jantz, Bastian and Kuehne, Alexander and Schulze-Gabrechten, Lena},
  title     = {The Flood Crisis in Germany 2013},
  series = {Societal Security and Crisis Management},
  journal   = {Societal Security and Crisis Management},
  publisher = {Palgrave Macmillan},
  address   = {Cham},
  isbn      = {978-3-319-92303-1},
  doi       = {10.1007/978-3-319-92303-1_4},
  pages     = {75 -- 93},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {In 2013, large floods affected Germany heavily. The natural disaster transcended jurisdictional and organisational boundaries, necessitating a coordinative effort by disaster relief forces and their administrative and political leadership. In the aftermath, politicians and experts praised the improvement of the German system of crisis management, also in direct comparison with the response to the last German "flood of the century" of 2002. This chapter takes a public policy and organisational perspective to analyse the German disaster relief governance throughout all four crisis management phases. By highlighting the central features of the German governance arrangements and the main organisational changes implemented in reaction to the previous flood in 2002, we find that Whole-of-Government approaches are increasingly used by the federal and L{\"a}nder government.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{JannFleischer2011,
  author    = {Jann, Werner and Fleischer, Julia},
  title     = {Shefting discourses, steady learning and sedimentation : the German reform trajectory in the long run},
  isbn      = {978-0-415-55721-4},
  year      = {2011},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Jann1994,
  author    = {Jann, Werner},
  title     = {Common security in the Baltic Sea region : the view from the German L{\"a}nder},
  year      = {1994},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Jann1994,
  author    = {Jann, Werner},
  title     = {Cooperation in nothern Europe for an active society},
  year      = {1994},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{JannSeyfried2009,
  author    = {Jann, Werner and Seyfried, Markus},
  title     = {Does executive governance matter? executives an policy performance},
  isbn      = {978-3-86793-013-0},
  year      = {2009},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{JannBach2009,
  author    = {Jann, Werner and Bach, Tobias},
  title     = {Structure and governance of agencies in Germany : a lot of continuity and little change},
  isbn      = {978-82-450-0754-1},
  year      = {2009},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{JannJantz2008,
  author    = {Jann, Werner and Jantz, Bastian},
  title     = {A better performance and performance management?},
  year      = {2008},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{JannJantz2013,
  author    = {Jann, Werner and Jantz, Bastian},
  title     = {Mapping accountability changes in labour market administration : from concentrated to shared accountability?},
  year      = {2013},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{JantzJann2013,
  author    = {Jantz, Bastian and Jann, Werner},
  title     = {Mapping accountability changes in labour market administrations from concentrated to shared accountability?},
  series = {International review of administrative sciences : an international journal of comparative public administration},
  volume    = {79},
  journal   = {International review of administrative sciences : an international journal of comparative public administration},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {Sage Publ.},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {0020-8523},
  doi       = {10.1177/0020852313477764},
  pages     = {227 -- 248},
  year      = {2013},
  abstract  = {The article explores how recent changes in the governance of employment services in three European countries (Denmark, Germany and Norway) have influenced accountability relationships. The overall assumption in the growing literature about accountability is that the number of actors involved in accountability arrangements is rising, that accountability relationships are becoming more numerous and complex, and that these changes may lead to contradictory accountability relationships, and finally to multi accountability disorder'. The article tries to explore these assumptions by analysing the different actors involved and the information requested in the new governance arrangements in all three countries. It concludes that the considerable changes in organizational arrangements and more managerial information demanded and provided have led to more shared forms of accountability. Nevertheless, a clear development towards less political or administrative accountability could not be observed.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Jann1996,
  author    = {Jann, Werner},
  title     = {Public management in Germany : a revolution without a theory?},
  year      = {1996},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Jann1998,
  author    = {Jann, Werner},
  title     = {Report of the working group on transparency, openness and service to the public},
  year      = {1998},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Jann1997,
  author    = {Jann, Werner},
  title     = {Public management reform in Germany : a revolution without a theory?},
  year      = {1997},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{BachJann2010,
  author    = {Bach, Tobias and Jann, Werner},
  title     = {Animals in the administrative zoo : organizational change and agency autonomy in Germany},
  issn      = {0020-8523},
  doi       = {10.1177/0020852310372448},
  year      = {2010},
  abstract  = {Although Germany does not figure among the 'forerunners' of managerial reforms of the public sector, it has a long tradition of agencies and non-departmental bodies at the federal level. Over time, the federal administration has developed into a highly differentiated 'administrative zoo' with a large number of species, questioning the image of a well-ordered German bureaucracy. The article addresses organizational changes among non-ministerial agencies during the past 20 years and ministry-agency relations, drawing on data from a comprehensive survey of the federal administration. The structural changes we observe are neither comprehensive nor planned; they are much more evolutionary than revolutionary, driven by sectoral policies and not by any overall agency policy, supported more by regulatory than by managerial reforms, and most of the changes are horizontal mergers or successions of existing organizations, while we find almost no evidence for hiving-off from ministries to agencies. At the same time, federal agencies report a lot of bureaucratic discretion, whereas they perceive substantial levels of 'red tape' due to administrative regulations. We also find that traditional, hierarchical modes of ministerial oversight are still dominating; only few agencies have performance agreements with measurable goals.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{JannJantz2013,
  author    = {Jann, Werner and Jantz, Bastian},
  title     = {The development of policy analysis in Germany : practical problems and theoretical concepts},
  isbn      = {978-1- 44730-625-2},
  year      = {2013},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Jann2001,
  author    = {Jann, Werner},
  title     = {Managing parliaments in the 21st Century : from Policy-Making and Public Management to Governance},
  year      = {2001},
  language  = {en}
}