Siinviidatu leidis oma koha peamiselt ühel põhjusel: koordineerimismehhanismid on minuni jõudvates organisatsiooni- ja valitsemispraktikates … alahinnatud. Vähemalt ei oska ma head näidet tuua, et keegi oleks mõnes situatsioonis märkinud koordineerimismehhanisme. Organisatsiooni ja valitsemise struktuuridega tegeletakse küll, kuigi see on aeganõudvam ja kohmakam. Kas uues olukorras on kätte sattunud vanad vahendid?
Since the 1960s, it has become evident that increasing global institutional fragmentation and more complex governance require coordination among multiple jurisdictions and organizations to develop a consensus and establish effective strategies to achieve their goals (Pollitt and Bouckaert 2017). […] Coordination among different actors, organizations, and levels is often seen as a key precondition for governments to address complex governance challenges and hence as a way forward (Lodge and Wegrich 2014).
Autorid seavad fookust:
The focus in this article is on coordination strategies and types in China during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Since the early 1980s, when China adopted its reform and opening-up policies and transformed itself from a highly centralized authoritarian regime to a new, hybrid political system with somewhat softer hierarchical features, crisis management coordination has become a challenge, featuring a growing trend toward local autonomy and fragmented authoritarianism (Liu and Christensen 2021). […] The Chinese central government countered the crisis with strong coordination capacity as a critical component of crisis management among sectors, regions, levels, and organizations to support the coercive implementation of its anti-virus policy (Hu et al. 2020).
The vertical coordination perspective is a traditional hierarchical approach (Bardach 2001). It assumes that organizations and work are divided by function and that functions are devised based on the tasks of government (Kettl 2003, 258). […] The classical hierarchical model is strong in terms of accountability and role definition, and it excels in the performance of routines and repetitive tasks within specific sectors. However, such organizational or institutional arrangements with strong functional sectors may be highly inflexible.
The horizontal coordination perspective concerns the interaction among interdependent organizations or units at the same hierarchical level (Egeberg 2012). Contrary to the hierarchical approach, horizontal coordination among organizations is based on a mutual need to share resources, authority, knowledge, and technology, using negotiation and mutual adjustment instruments (Morris et al. 2007, 95).
Uues olukorras võivad pihku sattuda vanad vahendid:
The basic underlying principle is simple: when people face an unforeseen problem that is hard to solve, they will be inclined to seek collaboration to come up with solutions (Okhuysen and Bechky 2009). Improving coordination among organizations is more effective than structural reorganization since the latter is typically too slow to adapt to sudden change (Brattberg 2012).
Praktilised oskused, mitte neist rääkimine:
Under both hierarchical and horizontal forms of authority, coordination requires more overt strategic thinking to align, organize, and differentiate participating organizations’ activities between beneficiaries, tasks, regions, and tactics.
However, China’s success in stopping or slowing COVID-19 within its borders, that was supported with the help of four coordination mechanisms in the centralized regime, does not prove that centralization regimes are generally the best coordinated. For example, Canada’s decentralized federal structure governments quickly formulated and implemented a pandemic policy response with a different set of measures in the government and among the public (Fafard et al. 2021).
Zhong, K., Liu, Y., & Christensen, T. (2022). Crisis coordination in centralized regimes: Explaining china’s strategy for combatting the COVID-19 pandemic. International Public Management Journal, 1-20.