Organisatsiooni eesmärkide küsimus vist küll kedagi külmaks ei jäta. Mõtlen ikka neid, kel organisatsioonide või sotsiaalsete süsteemide osas üldse mingid huvid on. Sestap siinviidatud vabalevis olev tekst oma koha leidiski. Lisaks võiks kirjandusülevaade huvi pakkuda nii tudengitele kui uurijatele metoodilisest ja analüütilisest aspektist.

Organisatsioonid avardavad eesmärke:

“An increasing number of organizations have decided to designate a business purpose that goes beyond pure profit maximization and aims to contribute to the common good. Even organizations previously known for their strong shareholder and profit orientation have announced their commitment to renewed organizational purpose in recent years.” (Jasinenko and Steuber, 2022, p. 2)

Mõtestamine ühiskonna kaudu:

“For example, 181 CEOs of the leading and most powerful US companies signed a statement underlining the need to commit to an organizational purpose that benefits society (Business Roundtable, 2019). Furthermore, Blackrock CEO Larry Fink (2018) stated that ‘to prosper over time, every company must not only deliver financial performance but also show how it makes a positive contribution to society’.” (Jasinenko and Steuber, 2022, p. 2)

Autorid püstitavad hüpoteesi (seda selliselt sõnastamata):

“We propose that focusing on the individual perception of organizational purpose, a construct we name perceived organizational purpose, can help overcome the prior definitional challenges of the construct’s breadth and vagueness and thereby enable the development of an appropriate measurement tool.” (Jasinenko and Steuber, 2022, p. 2)

Hetkeolukord:

“According to recent conceptual research, organizational purpose provides a wide variety of positive outcomes, such as financial value (Birkinshaw et al., 2014; Gartenberg et al., 2019), increased stakeholder trust and legitimacy in challenging times (Hamel, 2009; Hollensbe et al., 2014; Henderson and van den Steen, 2015), and a positive contribution to individuals’ wellbeing (Ellsworth, 2002; Mayer, 2021; van Tuin et al., 2020).” (Jasinenko and Steuber, 2022, p. 4)

Eesmärk ei ole midagi objektiivset, vaid subjektiivselt konstrueeritu arusaam:

“In line with this perspective, ‘[p]urpose is not an objective given but defined as a subjectively construed understanding of the most fundamental objectives of the organization’ (van Knippenberg, 2020, p. 8).” (Jasinenko and Steuber, 2022, p. 4)

Mis teeb eesmärgi tugevaks?

“Accordingly, ‘purpose is only as strong as employees and other stakeholders believe in it’ (van Tuin et al., 2020, p. 2).” (Jasinenko and Steuber, 2022, p. 5)

Lugemishuvi suurendamiseks:

“Moreover, taking the subjective perception of individuals into account allows us to better understand its relationship with important individual-level outcomes, such as employees’ job satisfaction or consumers’ willingness to buy.” (Jasinenko and Steuber, 2022, p. 24)

Jasinenko, A., & Steuber, J. (2022). Perceived Organizational Purpose: Systematic Literature Review, Construct Definition, Measurement and Potential Employee Outcomes. Journal of Management Studies, n/a(n/a), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12852

Politseinike koolitusprogrammid on riigiti üsna erinevad, kuid muutuvad n-ö suurtes klubides (nt EL) ikka sarnasemaks jäädes siiski kultuuri ja riigispetsiifiliseks.Küsimus sellest, mis on töötavad praktikad politseikoolituses, võiks huvi pakkuda paljudele.

Kontekstiks:

“Across the globe, police agencies invest an immense amount of time and resources in training their officers. The various training programs are considered the most important tool police agencies have for reaching the ethical and professional standards expected of them in democratic societies (Chan et al., 2003; COPS Office, 2015; Goldstein, 1977; Haberfeld et al., 2011; Manning, 2010; Reiner, 2010), and, accordingly, training has been treated as a key feature in police reforms that seek to make officers more effective and fair (e.g., Edwards, 1993; Reiner, 1992).” (Jonathan-Zamir et al., 2022, p. 2)

Fookuse täpsustamine:

“Over the last decade, more and more rigorous studies examining the outcomes of various police training interventions have been published (Bennett et al., 2020; Nagin & Telep, 2020). At the same time, they have not developed from a consistent theoretical framework that allows us to consider them jointly as a coherent body of knowledge. Without such a framework in the background, it is difficult to understand why specific programs worked (or did not work), or what specific elements of the program made it more (or less) effective (Fraser et al., 2009; Weisburd et al., 2015).” (Jonathan-Zamir et al., 2022, p. 2)

Autorid seavad eesmärgi:

“Our goal is to provide a succinct description of the GET model and the process by which it was developed [a detailed description can be found in Litmanovitz (2016)], and examine the outcomes of a training intervention designed based on the model — a procedural justice (PJ) training module in the National Police College (NPC) in Israel.” (Jonathan-Zamir et al., 2022, p. 3)

Vihje metoodikale:

“As an “ecological” model (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 1998), it recognizes that the success (or failure) of training interventions are intertwined with the different realms in which police officers work and learn. The GET model (Litmanovitz, 2016) is made up of seven mechanisms nested within three domains (detailed below).” (Jonathan-Zamir et al., 2022, p. 5)

Kasutatavast mudelist:

“As suggested by the above review, the GET model provides a unique, comprehensive, evidence-informed “recipe” for what effective police training interventions should look like.” (Jonathan-Zamir et al., 2022, p. 8)

Lugemishuvi suurendamiseks:

“In turn, training interventions should be developed based on the best available scientific evidence on what works in police training. […] The findings of the present study suggest that the application of the GET model proposed by Litmanovitz (2016) for what should work in police training shows promise, and we expect that the model would prove highly useful to police researchers and practitioners in developing training interventions and testing their outcomes.” (Jonathan-Zamir et al., 2022, p. 19)

Jonathan-Zamir, T., Litmanovitz, Y., & Haviv, N. (2022). What Works in Police Training? Applying an Evidence-Informed, General, Ecological Model of Police Training. Police Quarterly, 10986111221113976. https://doi.org/10.1177/10986111221113975

Eesti kõrgharidusmaastik on üsna korrastunud, kui mõelda nt 3+2 õppetööle, akrediteerimistele, kvaliteedikontrollile, teaduse üldisele tasemele, jne. Üks valdkond, kus kujutlused, nõuded, ootused jms on teisenemises, on lõputööde stiil, mis lisaks valdkondlikele erisustele, erineb ka muuhulgas selles, kuidas tudengid ennast väljendavad ja miks nad just nii teevad. Siinviidatu on üks harvaesinev eestikeelne kirjatöö selles valdkonnas. Lugemishuvilisi võiks olla hulgaliselt, alates tudengitest kuni lastevanemate ja üldhariduskooli õpetajateni. Ja veel. Mõnevõrra üllatav, et allikaloend koosnes üsna vanadest allikatest. Tõsi, see on autori otsus, mida siinsjuures ei arvustata. Kuna töös ei ole märgitud, mis on teadustöö, siis jääb mulje, et tudengitöö ongi teadustöö. See on üks võimalik tähendus, kuid … ainult üks.

Kontekstiks:

“Ühelt poolt juhendatakse, et teadustekst peab olema objektiivne ja neutraalne ning autori isik ei tohiks selles esile tõusta (kasik jt 2011: 27–28). Teisalt mööndakse, et teadusteksti jaoks nähakse muu hulgas ette autorile osutamise viisid ning autori enesele osutamist eeldab teadusteksti argumenteeriv iseloom, mis laseb kuuldavale tulla autori arvamusel ja seisukohtadel (kniivilä jt 2007: 14, 95)” (Lemendik, 2022, p. 49)

Juhendid on erinevad. Sisekaitseakadeemia juhend oleks siin võinud olla selles küsimuses isegi eeskujuks.

“Üliõpilastööde vormistamise juhendites eelistatakse umbisikulist tegumoodi, kuid mõnel pool aktsepteeritakse ka esimest ja kolmandat isikut (nt Jürine jt 2013: 13; Tallinna Ülikool 2020: 3; Uuspõld 2011: 14). Teisal soovitatakse mina­vormi siiski vältida (nt Tallinna Ülikool 2019: 12; Tartu Ülikool 2020: 10).” (Lemendik, 2022, p. 49)

Vihje andmestikust ja metoodikast:

“Uuritava materjali kogumaht oli 215 784 sõnet. mahu hulka arvestati üksnes magistritööde põhiosa, välja jäid vormiosa elemendid (sisukord, lisad, resümee, tänusõnad), samuti põhiosas olevad tekstinäited, tsitaadid ja tabelite sisu. Uurimismaterjal kodeeriti käsitsi. esmalt tuvastati kõik asjakohased keelevahendid, seejärel kanti need mS exceli tabelisse, kus kodeeriti iga vahendit iseloomustavad tunnused.” (Lemendik, 2022, p. 52)

Veidi üllatav, kui arvestada ülal esitatud kommentaare juhendites esitatust:

“absoluutarvudes enim (1459) leidus uurimisandmestikus eks­ plitsiitseimat, s.o mina­vormi. Stiilikaalutlustel on autoritel soovitatud mitte kasutada mina­vormi ja sellega vastanduvat umbisikut läbisegi (Reinsalu 2015: 73).” (Lemendik, 2022, p. 53)

Mina-vormist …

“Mina-vormi kasutas 75% autoritest. Seejuures üle­ tasid mina­vormi esinemiskorrad ühes tekstis 200 korra piiri neljal juhul (enim oli see 254), vähim loendatud juhtude arv töö kohta oli 4. ainsagi mina­vormita vormistasid oma töö neli autorit.” (Lemendik, 2022, p. 56)

Lugemishuvi suurendamiseks:

“Teadustekst on konventsionaalne ning väljakujunenud nõuded kehtivad ka selle keelekasutusele. Üks peamisi nõudeid on neutraalsus, millega sageli seostatakse impersonaalsust. Olenemata levinud seisukohast, et mina­vormi kasutamisega tuleks teadustekstides olla ettevaatlik, räägib siinse uurimistöö andmestik keelekasutajate valikute kohta muud.” (Lemendik, 2022, p. 66)

Põhjapanevateks järeldusteks on siiski vara.

“Siinne uurimistöö tõi lisaselgust eestikeelsete teadustekstide autori­ küsimusse puutuva kohta. kuna aga analüüs põhines väikesel käsitsi koostatud korpusel, ei saa tulemuste põhjal teha üldistavaid järeldusi eesti­ keelse teadusteksti kui terviku kohta – selleks tuleb analüüsida suuremaid märgendatud tekstikorpusi.” (Lemendik, 2022, p. 67)

Lemendik, H. (2022). Siinne töö uurib ehk Kuivõrd ja kuidas näitab end eesti teadusteksti autor. In Emakeele Seltsi aastaraamat (Vol. 67, pp. 48–71). Eesti Teaduste Akadeemia Kirjastus. https://kirj.ee/wp-content/plugins/kirj/pub/esa67_2021_48-71_20220628072353.pdf?v=a57b8491d1d8

Õpivõime on iga organisatsiooni arengu ja ellujäämise üks võtmekriteeriumitest. Tõsi, avalikes ja eraorganisatsioonides võivad tagajärjed – nii heas kui halvas – ilmneda ajateljel erinevates punktides ning väljenduda üsna erinevalt. Siinviidatu võiks kandideerida paljude kursuste seminaritekstideks ja olla viljakaks lugemisvaraks kõikidele organisatsioonidega puutumuses olijatele.

Kontekstiks:

While Levitt and March’s observations were made long ago, the assumption that organizational learning (OL) enhances the performance of the organization and its members (Schilling and Kluge, 2009) has remained largely unquestioned.

Üksikisik on õppimise lähtepunkt:

To help resolve the OL-performance and individual dilemmas, we look to the role of the individual in the various levels of OL, since the foundation of OL is the individual learner (Crossan et al., 1999; Kim, 1993; March, 1991). In particular, we examine the type of judgment needed by individuals to not only discern effective from ineffective learning, but also know when challenging the status quo is needed.

Uurimisküsimus:

How does character influence OL processes and their effectiveness?

Õppimise kasu praktikale?

Under the strain of differing viewpoints about learning and performance, two perspectives have emerged: OL with a descriptive focus recognizes that learning does not necessarily lead to performance benefits, and the learning organization (LO) with its prescriptive and practice focus, which assumes learning leads to better performance.

See tsitaat (Tsang (1997: 73)) võiks erilist huvi pakkuda parimate praktikate pooldajatele:

There is a clear distinction between the descriptive and prescriptive approaches. In the former judgment and evaluation are suspended while in the latter not only are they undertaken but the “best practices” are put forward to the reader.

Iseloom siinse teksti tähenduses:

In sum, character can be contrasted from other types of individual differences because the character dimensions (1) offer a comprehensive and nuanced view of the individual; (2) are behavior-based so that development, or learning, is possible in each dimension; and (3) link to the focal construct of judgment, which affords individuals with the agency to choose how to respond to stimuli.

Lugemishuvi suurendamiseks:

We contribute to OL research in three important ways. First, introducing character into OL deepens OL theory by focusing on the exercise of character-based judgment and how it influences OL processes, thus addressing the dilemmas surrounding performance outcomes of OL and the role individuals play in them. “Practical wisdom” or “character-based judgment” has rarely been discussed in OL, even though they are key to understanding agency in decision making (Nguyen and Crossan, 2021). Weak character may lead to the context determining one’s actions, while the ability to choose an action is catalyzed by one’s strength of character.

Crossan, M. M., Nguyen, B., Sturm, R. E., Vera, D., Ruiz Pardo, A., & Maurer, C. C. (2022). Organizational learning through character-based judgment. Management Learning. https://doi.org/10.1177/13505076221100918

Siinviidatud vabalevis olev kommentaar leidis oma koha peamiselt kahel põhjusel. Esiteks on tegevusõppe praktikatel mitmekülgne võimekus nii probleemidega tegelemisel kui kollektiivse teadmuse arendamisel ning relatsioonilisuse perspektiiv lisab siia mitmeid konteksti ja sisu mõistmiseks olulisi aspekte. Teiseks on tegevusõpe (action learning) ja aktiivõpe (active learning) nii sisult kui vormilt üsna erinevad, kuid teadmiste omandamise seisukohast väga asjakohased vahendid, mida sageli kas lihtsalt segi aetakse või siis ei olda neist midagi suurt kuulnud. Siit artiklist võib leida siinviidatud teksti n-ö kandvaid mõttekäike ning tekst on samuti vabalevis kättesaadav ja võiks huvi pakkuda avarale lugejaskonnale alates lapsevanematest kuni hariduskäsutajateni.

Kontekstiks:

In my experience, currently Action Learning groups or sets are made up of a number of individuals who are ‘strangers’ in that they come from different work sites, teams, communities or organisations. Each brings their own problem or issue with regard to which they receive support and challenge from the other set members.

Varasemate praktikate piiratusest:

It seems to me that this approach might work well for what have been called ‘simple’ or ‘tame’ problems, but it is inappropriate for complex or ‘wicked’ problems.

Relatsiooniline perspektiiv nõuab erinevaid praktikaid:

Thus in a Relational Action Learning set all the members are connected with a common issue, albeit in different ways and with different roles and tasks.

Vajalikud oskused:

  • recognising and respecting difference
  • dialoguing rather than arguing or trying to ‘sell’ my/our views . listening rather than dominating
  • empathising with others and their perspectives
  • being open to diversity rather than insisting that I/we are right
  • seeking ways of moving forward rather than dwelling on past disagreements and differences
  • finding things we can do together and/or support each other in doing rather than seeking total consensus

Boydell, T. (2022). Relational Action LearningAction Learning: Research and Practice, 1-3.

Järjest enam võib kuulda mõttekodadest, taskuhäälingutest, teadlaste intervjuudest jpm, et järgmine kvalitatiivne hüpe organisatsioonides tugineb peamiselt juhtidel oleva organisatsioone puudutava teadmiste kvaliteedi tõusul. Sestap siinviidatud avaliku juhtimise kursuse erinumbrit tutvustav tekst oma koha leidiski. Praegu võib Eestis tuua mitmeid näiteid, kus erinevatel õppekavadel leidub aineid, mille eeldusained on juhtimise alused vms, kuid tudengid tegelikult eeldusaineid läbinud ei ole. Nii on vähe lootust, et neil veidigi sügavam teadmus tekib. Õppejõu käed on siin lühikesed, sestap on õppekava ja ainekursuse ülesehitus olulised.

Kontekstiks:

Though there are several definitions of curriculum in the literature about higher education (Dillion, 2009; Hurlimann et al., 2013; O’Neill, 2015; Petkut´e, 2016; Whelahan, 2015), most agree that it consists of the organization and structuring of disciplinary knowledge to enable learning. Curriculum is also about pedagogy and how best to adapt the methods of teaching and learning to convey disciplinary knowledge. Finally, curriculum is also about enabling students to acquire skills, competencies, and behaviours that are relevant to their disciplinary practice. The element of practice is particularly important as most MPA and MPP programmes have a professional orientation toward careers in government and the public sector.

Rahvusvahelisus:

In curating this special issue particular attention was paid to including an international array of perspectives about curriculum practices and approaches. To this end, this issue features articles by colleagues from the United States, Turkey, Germany, and Canada.

Mitte ainult avalik sektor:

The inclusion of entrepreneurship within the curriculum of public administration is also the focus of Grimm and Bock’s article which explores the criticality of including the different dimensions of entrepreneurship as an asset and feature of public administration and public policy curriculum.

Praktikate teisenemine:

The transformation in the practice of public administration spurred by the accelerating adoption of information technology is the topic of Overton and Kleinschmit’s article.

Uued oskused:

The challenge of providing public administration students with the new skills required by the changing nature of the public sector is also discussed by Karkin and Gurses.

Kui hästi on lõpetaja valmis:

Finally, like Karkin and Gurses, my contribution to the special issue also examines how well public administration programmes prepare their graduates for a changing public sector.

O’Neill, M. A. (2022). Introduction: Special issue on curriculum design in public administration education: Challenges and perspectives. Teaching Public Administration. https://doi.org/10.1177/01447394221103954

Siinviidatud vabalevis olev tekst saab ilmselt ühe lühima kommentaari osaliseks, sest seda on vaja lihtsalt lugeda. Tekst on lühike ja lööv, emotsionaalne. Kuna ka Eestis on avalikus ruumis ilmunud tekste kõrghariduse küsimustes (eeskätt küll rahastamise aspektist), siis võiks siinviidatu huvi pakkuda kõikidele. Tõsi, tegemist on UK näitega, mis ei pruugi midagi rääkida Eestis toimuva kohta, kuid … mine tea.

Kolm vihjet kontekstiks ja lugemishuvi suurendamiseks:

In the UK, where I work and on which this essay is focused, a 2021 Education Support report surveyed 2,046 university staff: 53% showed signs of probable depression, 62% regularly worked more than 40 hours per week and 59% hesitated to get support for fear of appearing ‘weak’. While some had it better – 3% said they never had to do unreasonable tasks – the overall picture is of considerable overwork and poor mental health and support. […] More recently, when I asked on Twitter if colleagues had experienced bad behaviours, harassment or bullying, one person’s response was ‘might be simpler to ask if you’ve ever had an academic or research job in the UK and not experienced’ it. […] I’ve cried in a bathroom stall on seeing early evidence of miscarriage drip out of me, then returned to a meeting because it would be unprofessional to leave. I spent a year punishing myself for losing a baby because I let work drown out all other primacies, my anxiety-riddled body included. No one at work knew, the first time or the second.

Korica, M. (2022). A Hopeful Manifesto for a More Humane Academia. Organization Studies. https://doi.org/10.1177/01708406221106316

Juhtimine on tõsine väljakutse kõikides organisatsioonides, kuid hariduse valdkonnas tundub see veel eriti oluline ainuüksi põhjusel, et hariduse mõju ulatub iga osalise kaudu väga kaugele ning võimalused nii sütitamiseks kui kustutamiseks on suured. Siinviidatu on vabalevis olev doktoritöö, mis võiks huvi pakkuda kõikidele hariduse valdkonnas juhtimise eest töötasu vastu võtvatele aga ka nii õppijatele kui õpetajatele, sest haarab nii juhtimist, õpetamist kui õppimist.

Kontekstiks:

Individualization and specialization are key components of the culture in the United States, where everyone has a hand in developing who they are as individuals (Hoover & Nash, 2016). […] John Dewey espoused, however, there is a place for democracy within our educational system; students need choice and individualized instruction as best benefits them (Dewey, 1916).

Doktoritöö ulatus:

This dissertation, then, takes a closer look at school systems’ application of democracy through their design and implementation of professional learning for teachers.

Lugemishuvi suurendamiseks:

Professional learning needs to be applicable and relevant to learners. It needs to be centered on tenets of democracy: that is, it should include opportunities for teachers to make choices or participate in differentiated professional learning. […] My biggest take-away from this study centers on the need for leaders in positions that allow them to design professional learning for teachers to be andragogically minded in their intent.

Evans, J. E. (2022). Democracy in Educational Leadership: Linking Andragogy to Professional Learning (Doctoral dissertation, California State University, Fresno).

Siinviidatu leidis oma koha peamiselt põhjusel, et raadio võimalusi pedagoogika eesmärkidel teadlik kasutamine ning analüütiline mõtestamine on midagi, mis võiks huvi pakkuda väga laiale lugejaskonnale kuna võib pakkuda kasulikke-vajalikke perspektiive või ideid.

Autorid seavad lubavad:

In this article, we analyse Radio Almaina as an important media practice of resistance which, in a daily reality controlled by neoliberal logics, offers us a critical space for alternative debate in the midst of the private and institutional news monopolies.

Avaliku pedagoogika:

One of the most comprehensive works on public pedagogy is that of (Sandlin, O’Malley, and Burdick, 2011) ‘Mapping the Complexity of Public Pedagogy Scholarship’. […] According to (Burdick, Sandlin, and O’Malley, 2014: 2), ‘‘Public pedagogy’ is generally understood as ‘various forms, processes, and sites of education and learning beyond or outside formal schooling’.

Hariduse ja pedagoogika eristus siin artiklis:

Education is a practice, a social activity, an action, while pedagogy is a reflection, a theorisation and a knowledge.

Mis muudab ruumi avalikuks?

Since interactions also occur in the private sphere, what makes a space public is its political use.

Avalik pedagoogika on reflektsioon:

That said, public pedagogy will always be a reflection, a source of knowledge about what is happening, from the educational perspective, in those public spaces redefined by political action.

Lugemishuvi suurendamiseks:

Public pedagogy, as a reflection, should open itself up to using those intellectual tools that are considered powerful in revealing, in depth, the neoliberal business ethos, which is inscribed, normalised and institutionalised in individuals today. […] Concepts like autonomy, freedom, creativity and taking responsibility for oneself are qualities which have also been colonised by neoliberalism.

Martínez-Rodríguez, F. M., López-López, M. C., & Fernández-Herrería, A. (2022). ‘Hitting from the waves’: Public pedagogy and free radio as a counter-narrative to neoliberalism. European Journal of Cultural Studies. https://doi.org/10.1177/13675494221089348

Kui siinviidatud vabalevis oleva artikli autorid võtavad nõuks midagi koos avaldada, siis tasub lugeda. Avaliku juhtimise ja poliitikateaduste seosed on raskesti vaidlustatavad, nii nagu ka nende distsipliinide eraldumine viimastel kümnenditel. Siinviidatu võiks huvi pakkuda kõikidele organisatsioonidega ja poliitikakujundusega puutumuses olijatele ning kuuluda paljude kursuste seminaritekstide hulka.

Kontekstiks:

While in reality, political and administrative logics are intertwined and almost inseparable, there is an unfortunate bifurcation between political science (PS) and public administration (PA) research and teaching that hampers the quality and relevance of much PA research that frequently fails to address questions about the political foundation of administrative practices, the power struggles within and around public administration, and the administrative efforts to protect democracy and democratize public governance. […] We also need to bring PA insights back into PS. Political Science now largely ignores the largest part of government, and the very political actions taken during administration, but this is something we shall return to discuss in a subsequent paper.

Vihje kahe valdkonna seostest:

Political factors play a significant if not critical role in setting the administrative agenda, shaping the modus operandi of administrative institutions and determining administrative decisions and outcomes. The purpose of the article is to identify and describe the current compartmentalization of politics and administration research and to outline ways toward more encompassing analyses of public governance and administration.

Ühised huvid, erinevad lähenemised ja järeldused:

At times, PS and PA examine the same phenomena but do so in different ways, and with different conclusions. For example, both disciplines have concerns with corruption, but have done so in very different ways. Political science tends to focus on large scale corruption and the effects on political trust, and other political variables. Public administration, on the other hand, tends to focus on petty corruption, and its effects on the effectiveness of the bureaucracy. Likewise, political science and public administration both deal with clientelism and patronage, but again in very different ways (Panizza et al., 2022).

Autorid väidavad:

By contrast, we claim that all the links in the chain of governance connecting elected politicians with public managers, frontline staff, service users and societal stakeholders are infused with both political and administrative logics and therefore must recognize both political questions and administrative concerns.

Lugemishuvi suurendamiseks:

We have listed no less than six recent developments and insights that emphasize the need for bringing PS back into PA research. We have also provided a number of illustrative examples of the positive implications of embracing a PS focus on politics, power and democracy for PA research. Finally, we have discussed the barriers and potential drivers for crossing the divide to the benefit of both political science and PA. […] A systematic strengthening of the PS perspective on PA prompts us to rethink the key concepts of politics, power and democracy in order to further unpack them and bring them into play in PA research.

Peters, B. G., Pierre, J., Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2022). Bringing political science back into public administration researchGovernance.