UK Security Strategy: Clarity or Compromise?

Savill, Matthew

doi:10.1080/14702436.2011.630181

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For more specialized players (i.e., high‐level active military, retired personnel, journalists, practitioners, and academics), the coalition government faced limited policy choices as the radical processes of prescriptive and recipe‐driven changes were enforced. Gearson and Gow (2010) believe that the SDSR was a blank canvas on which the executive could reconfigure relationships within government, across departments, and with Parliament (see also Phillips 2012; Savill 2011). It, thus, became essential for cross‐sector accountability and responsibility to lead the changes proposed.…”

Section: A “Break Of Mindset”mentioning

confidence: 99%

Introducing Change in Public Service Organizations under Austerity: The Complex Case of the Governance of the Defence in the United Kingdom

Solar

2020

Politics & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introducing, managing, and sustaining change in public service organizations is challenging for policy makers to implement and for scholars to theorize. In 2010, the U.K. Government introduced policy changes to help bring down the national deficit. The executive's planned reforms aimed to deliver a so‐called battle‐winning military force, a smaller and more professional Ministry of Defence, and an affordable overall defence organization. The article borrows from theories of management and public policy to help enlighten our understanding of change under New Public Management and governance approaches. The article's central claim is that the U.K. Government sought to correct cost‐efficiency processes in public service organizations trying to reshape organizational and managerial structures dependent on many internal and external pressures. The article examines the executive's purpose in developing a need for change and the ways to implement it. I question whether the U.K. Government's prescriptive and hierarchical approach to organizational change in public administration is sustainable in the long term. Related Articles Ariely, Gal. 2011. “Why People (Dis)Like the Public Service: Citizen Perception of the Public Service and the NPM Doctrine.” Politics & Policy 39 (6): 997‐1019. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2011.00329.x Burau, Viola, and Carole Clavier. 2018. “Understanding Gaps in the Coexistence between Different Modes of Governance: A Case Study of Public Health in Schools in a Multilevel System.” Politics & Policy 46 (4): 604‐629. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12269 Monza, Sabina, and Eva Anduiza. 2016. “The Visibility of the EU in the National Public Spheres in Times of Crisis and Austerity.” Politics & Policy 44 (3): 499‐524. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12163

show abstract

Section: A “Break Of Mindset”mentioning

confidence: 99%

Introducing Change in Public Service Organizations under Austerity: The Complex Case of the Governance of the Defence in the United Kingdom

Solar

2020

Politics & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“… 3. Strachan (2005, 2009, 2013); Cornish and Dorman (2008, 2011); Blagden (2009); Porter (2010); King (2011); Prins (2011); Savill (2011); Edmunds et al (2014); Gaskarth (2014). For critique in Parliament, see House of Commons Public Administration Select Committee (2010, 2011, 2012).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Very British National Security State: Formal and informal institutions in the design of UK security policy

Thomson

Blagden

2018

The British Journal of Politics and International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What are the roles of government institutions in the design and implementation of effective national security policy? Using the case of post-2010 reform to Britain's central government security policy machinery, we find that formal institutions can help the informal strategy-making institutions on their periphery to function better. Through interviews with 25 senior officials, we find that Britain's National Security Council and quinquennial Strategic Defence and Security Reviews-both instituted in 2010 with the intention of improving UK security policymaking-remain limited as formal makers of national strategy. But the networks of individuals and ideas they support, by absolving some decision-makers of audience costs while immersing others in creative yet coherent strategydevelopment communities, have improved the overall quality of UK security policymaking compared to its pre-2010 condition. This finding also carries implications for other contexts and thus represents a promising avenue for future research.

show abstract

UK defence policy 1957–2015: the illusion of choice

Blackburn

2015

Defence Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

UK Security Strategy: Clarity or Compromise?

Cited by 3 publications

References 9 publications

Introducing Change in Public Service Organizations under Austerity: The Complex Case of the Governance of the Defence in the United Kingdom

Introducing Change in Public Service Organizations under Austerity: The Complex Case of the Governance of the Defence in the United Kingdom

A Very British National Security State: Formal and informal institutions in the design of UK security policy

UK defence policy 1957–2015: the illusion of choice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About