Aligning Executive Action in Times of Adversity: The Politics of Crisis Co-Ordination

Boin, Arjen; Hart, Paul ‘t

doi:10.1057/9781137010261_10

Cited by 27 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It involves not only structure but also culture. Distinguishing between crisis coordination as a process and as an outcome may prove helpful—“outcome” relates primarily to crisis cooperation, whereas “process” is more about how to orchestrate and achieve cooperation by connecting the different components (Boin and ‘t Hart ).…”

Section: Governance Capacity: the Challenges Of Coordinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These coordination problems are attributed to a multisectoral and multilevel system. How coordination is handled in crises may be affected by the task structure of the organizations involved—for example, whether that structure is regular or irregular and whether the tasks are new or familiar (Boin and ‘t Hart ).…”

Section: Governance Capacity: the Challenges Of Coordinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because there is no single, optimal way of meeting coordination challenges in a crisis, an important analytical task is to establish the relative importance of various factors in the mix of organizational dimensions and how that mix plays out across various political‐institutional settings. Three options have been suggested (Boin and t’ Hart ): (1) professional coordination based on a template, such as that of the U.S. Incident Command System or an expert‐based crisis center such as the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency; (2) concentrating coordination, achieved by creating and merging stronger crisis management organizations at the central level, such as the Department of Homeland Security in the United States (Hammond ); and (3) facilitating coordination, achieved by enabling coordinated responses to transboundary crises through multilevel organizations, exemplified by multilevel crisis governance in the European Union (Boin, Busuioc, and Groenleer ).…”

Section: Governance Capacity: the Challenges Of Coordinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Organizing for Crisis Management: Building Governance Capacity and Legitimacy

Christensen

Lægreid

Rykkja

2016

Public Administration Review

319

265

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What makes a well‐functioning governmental crisis management system, and how can this be studied using an organization theory–based approach? A core argument is that such a system needs both governance capacity and governance legitimacy. Organizational arrangements as well as the legitimacy of government authorities will affect crisis management performance. A central argument is that both structural features and cultural context matter, as does the nature of the crisis. Is it a transboundary crisis? How unique is it, and how much uncertainty is associated with it? The arguments are substantiated with empirical examples and supported by a literature synthesis, focusing on public administration research. A main conclusion is that there is no optimal formula for harmonizing competing interests and tensions or for overcoming uncertainty and ambiguous government structures. Flexibility and adaptation are key assets, which are constrained by the political, administrative, and situational context. Furthermore, a future research agenda is indicated.

show abstract

Section: Governance Capacity: the Challenges Of Coordinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Governance Capacity: the Challenges Of Coordinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Governance Capacity: the Challenges Of Coordinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Organizing for Crisis Management: Building Governance Capacity and Legitimacy

Christensen

Lægreid

Rykkja

2016

Public Administration Review

319

265

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A crisis or disaster typically requires intense cooperation among a variety of organizations, many of which may have never worked together before (Boin and 't Hart, 2012). Such cooperation across vertical and horizontal borders must be orchestrated to accomplish a state of coordinated behavior.…”

Section: Task #4: Orchestrating Vertical and Horizontal Coordinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leadership in Times of Crisis: A Framework for Assessment

Boin

Kuipers

Overdijk

2013

International Review of Public Administration

Self Cite

220

230

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The deeply rooted belief in the importance of public leadership is accompanied by quick and often shallow assessments of leadership performance. Such assessments never arrive more quickly than in the wake of crises and disasters-these episodes make for instant winners (Giuliani) and losers (Bush). These assessments are necessarily shallow, as the public can only judge leaders by what they see. While symbolic performance is important (if only because it can arouse the public), it is not the only performance dimension by which we should assess crisis leadership. In this article, we reflect on the many tasks that strategic leaders are called to perform, and we offer a comprehensive framework for leadership performance in times of crisis.

show abstract

“…Because of the multi‐actor and multi‐level setting of the EU, this is hard enough under normal circumstances; it typically proves even more difficult under crisis conditions (Rosenthal et al . , ; Grönvall ; Boin & 't Hart ).…”

Section: Transboundary Crisis Management In the European Unionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Building European Union capacity to manage transboundary crises: Network or lead‐agency model?

Boin

Busuioc

Groenleer

2013

Regulation & Governance

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, the European continent has witnessed a substantial number of "transboundary crises" -crises that cross geographical borders and affect multiple policy domains. Nation states find it hard to deal with such crises by themselves. International cooperation, thus, becomes increasingly important, but it is not clear what shape or form that cooperation should take. This article explores the growing role of the European Union (EU) in managing transboundary crises. More specifically, it reflects on the different ways in which the expanding contours of the EU's emerging crisis capacity can be organized. Using three "performative dimensions" -sense-making, coordination, and legitimacy -the article discusses the possible advantages and disadvantages of a decentralized, network model and compares it with a more centralized, lead-agency model. It concludes that the current network model is a logical outcome of the punctuated and fragmentary process through which EU crisis management capacities have been created. It also notes that the shortcomings of this model may necessitate elements of a lead-agency model. Such "agencification" of networks for transboundary crisis management may well lead to a hybrid model that is uniquely suited for the peculiar organizational and political creature that the EU is.

show abstract

Aligning Executive Action in Times of Adversity: The Politics of Crisis Co-Ordination

Cited by 27 publications

References 22 publications

Organizing for Crisis Management: Building Governance Capacity and Legitimacy

Organizing for Crisis Management: Building Governance Capacity and Legitimacy

Leadership in Times of Crisis: A Framework for Assessment

Building European Union capacity to manage transboundary crises: Network or lead‐agency model?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About