SAGE Journal Articles
Abstract: Twenty-first century policing operates in a highly mediated environment that places an onus to communicate effectively on police personnel throughout ranks and grades and across roles, but especially on the staff of police force `press offices'. This article uses survey-based research to map out the current policy and practice of police–media relations. Drawing on the research data, I argue that threads of continuity run through police–media relations including police forces' stated intentions to work with media organizations as a means of demonstrating accountability and informing various publics. At the same time a concern with controlling the flow and content of information, and with promoting favourable images of policing is evident. Following consideration of diverging and converging aspects of police–media relations I highlight current trends that suggest future policy and practice will follow a trajectory which utilizes the service of specialist civilian communicators. I conclude that this trajectory will not necessarily support democratically accountable policing and, finally, I outline a possible trajectory which could.
Journal Article 2 Rosenbaum, A. (2006). Cooperative service delivery: The dynamics of public sector-private sector-civil society collaboration. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 72(1), 43-56.
Abstract: Cooperative service delivery--the utilization by the public sector of civil society and/or the private sector for the delivery of public goods and services--is a growing phenomenon. In this article, the author examines three important aspects of these emerging relationships. These include the reason for this growing phenomenon; the forms which these relationships take; and the structural arrangements necessary to ensure the effectiveness of such efforts. It is noted that while philosophical and managerial beliefs are frequently cited reasons for such developments, political factors are equally important. The various approaches which government takes in the delivering of public goods and services are reviewed and it is seen that all of them lend themselves to cooperative initiatives. A number of necessary preconditions for effective cooperative service delivery are specified.
Abstract: Civic engagement refers to the ways in which citizens participate in the life of a community in order to improve conditions for others or to help shape the community’s future. This term has been used to date primarily in the context of younger people. But in the past few years, a new movement has emerged to promote greater civic engagement by older adults. This article begins by reviewing existing definitions of civic engagement and concludes that there is no single, widely agreed-upon meaning for the term. The second part of the article looks at attempts to measure how civic engagement is being practiced by Americans of different ages and finds that patterns of civic engagement differ dramatically between younger and older generations. The final part of the article describes some recent initiatives aimed at expanding the civic engagement of older adults.
Journal Article 4 Lewis, B. J., & Ellefson, P. V. (1996). Evaluating Information Flows to Policy Committees in State Legislatures: Forest and Natural Resources as a Case. Evaluation Review, 20(1), 29-48.
Abstract: Using forest and natural resources as a case example, the information needs of 47 policy committee staff from 35 state legislatures were evaluated. Staff communicate with various groups on a regular-routine basis, an incident-related basis, and on a confidential basis. A state's lead forest resource agency and environmental groups were viewed as especially important formulators of policies and programs. To maintain the integrity of information provided, four fifths of the surveyed staff fairly or very often check with alternative sources. Legislative staff play especially important roles in focusing information, providing access to multiple sources, integrating information, establishing trustworthy networks, structuring legislator requests, and differentiating among groups' ability to provide information appropriate to specific policy development stages.
Abstract: The public brand is a relative newcomer to the public sphere. It is an expression of public marketing and an outcome of New Public Management (NPM). It is a lever that allows public organizations to get across their identity, assert their legitimacy and provide markers for the evaluation of their actions, but little research has been conducted into what it actually covers. The analytical framework of the social representation and, more specifically, that of the central core theory, makes it possible to identify, on the basis of a sample of 20 public brands, the values it carries, the influence of context on the configuration of the values and, more broadly, the use made of the public brand.
Points for practitioners
In a context of growing competition, a legitimacy crisis, fiscal pressures, technological revolutions that change relations with the user-client and staff, the place and operation of public organizations are being turned upside down. The brand is an important but under-exploited lever to restore legibility and legitimacy to public organizations, and also to assert its difference, express its skills and mobilize its officials. It is a way of combining traditional values and new practices dictated by performance requirements. Too many public brands are registered without coming into any real use. The establishment of the brand first calls for thought to be given to its anchoring, by defining pillar values that allow practices (that are sometimes misunderstood or poorly accepted) to be converged with the historical values associated with public services. Values are the basis of the discourse, they build the representation and are the key to the identity of public organizations. Furthermore, the field of public action is characterized by several branding levels that need to be considered according to the potential for legitimation presented by each.
Abstract: State and local governments across the United States have increasingly utilized collaborative, interorganizational approaches to the delivery of public services. This shift in governance structure often necessitates that public managers not only lead the agency in which they are employed, but also work within, and often lead, a network. These two different contexts in which public managers operate require different managerial and leadership approaches. This article discusses some of the differences between hierarchical leadership and network leadership, important aspects of collaborative leadership, and the leadership behaviors that are considered effective within collaborative governance structures. The article concludes with a discussion of some best practices for collaborative leadership, including the formation of joint commitment, the identification of resources, the creation of a shared understanding, the achievement of stakeholder support, and the establishment of trust.