Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Professional Integrity and Leadership in Public Administration

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Blind Spots of Public Bureaucracy and the Politics of Non-Coordination

Part of the book series: Executive Politics and Governance ((EXPOLGOV))

  • 753 Accesses

Abstract

Seibel addresses the question of what makes public officials neglect professional standards when facing conflictive decision-making. The chapter explores the failure of German police authorities to investigate the nature of a series of killings committed in the early 2000s. Using a parliamentary committee report, the chapter re-analyses a key episode of decision-making when an attempt to streamline the organization and management of relevant police authorities and to re-evaluate the investigation’s core hypotheses failed to materialize. In doing so, Seibel reveals a tension between the logic of professional integrity or ‘goal attainment’ and the logic of ‘system maintenance’, also emphasizing the necessity to re-consider the notion of professional integrity and its protection through considerate leadership.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The factual information given here and in the subsequent paragraphs of this chapter is based on Deutscher Bundestag (2013).

References

  • Alford, J., & Hughes, O. (2008). Public value pragmatism as the next phase of public management. The American Review of Public Administration, 38(2), 130–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benz, A. (1994). Kooperative Verwaltung: Funktionen, Voraussetzungen und Folgen. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benz, A. (2000). Two types of multi-level governance: Intergovernmental relations in German and EU regional policy. Regional & Federal Studies, 10(3), 21–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berlin, I. (1997). Political judgement. In H. Hardy (Ed.), The sense of reality: Studies in ideas and their history (pp. 40–53). New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bovens, M. (1998). The quest for responsibility: Accountability and citizenship in complex organisations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruttel, L., & Fischbacher, U. (2013). Taking the initiative: What characterizes leaders? European Economic Review, 64, 147–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Bloomberg, L. (2014). Public value governance: Moving beyond traditional public administration and the New Public Management. Public Administration Review, 74(4), 445–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denhardt, J. V., & Denhardt, R. B. (2011). The new public service: Serving, not steering (3rd ed.). Armonk: M. E. Sharpe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, K. W. (1963). The nerves of government: Models of political communication and control. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutscher Bundestag. (2013). 17. Wahlperiode, Beschlussempfehlung und Bericht des 2. Untersuchungsausschusses nach Artikel 44 des Grundgesetztes (Drucksache 17/14600, August 22, 2013). Berlin: Deutscher Bundestag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Enderlein, H., Wälti, S., & Zürn, M. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook on multi-level governance. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • ’t Hart, P. (2014). Understanding public leadership. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hildebrand, D. L. (2005). Pragmatism, neopragmatism, and public administration. Administration & Society, 37(3), 345–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hildebrand, D. L. (2008). Public administration as pragmatic, democratic, and objective. Public Administration Review, 68(2), 222–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hood, C. (2011). The blame game: Spin, bureaucracy, and self-preservation in government. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman, H. (1960). The forest ranger: A study in administrative behavior. Hopkins: Baltimore.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipsky, M. (2010 [1980]). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services (30th anniversary expanded ed.). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1989). Rediscovering institutions: The organizational basis of politics. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, H. T. (2004). Why old pragmatism needs an upgrade. Administration & Society, 36(2), 243–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, M. H. (1995). Creating public value: Strategic management in government. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, M. H. (2014). Public value accounting: Establishing the philosophical basis. Public Administration Review, 74(4), 465–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, J. P. (2008). The logic of appropriateness. In R. E. Goodin, M. Moran, & M. Ren (Eds.), Oxford handbook of public policy (pp. 690–704). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, T. (1951). The social system. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seibel, W. (2010). Beyond bureaucracy: Public administration as political integrator and non-Weberian thought in Germany. Public Administration Review, 70(5), 719–730.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seibel, W. (2014). Kausale Mechanismen des Behördenversagens: Eine Prozessanalyse des Fahndungsfehlschlags bei der Aufklärung der NSU-Morde. der moderne staat, (2014/02), 375–413.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seibel, W. (2016). Hybridity and responsible leadership in public administration. In G. Abels (Ed.), Vorsicht Sicherheit! Legitimationsprobleme der Ordnung von Freiheit (pp. 311–333). Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selznick, P. (1949). TVA and the grass roots. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selznick, P. (1957). Leadership in administration. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shields, P. M. (2003). The community of inquiry: Classical pragmatism and public administration. Administration & Society, 35(5), 510–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shields, P. M. (2008). Rediscovering the Taproot: Is classical pragmatism the route to renew public administration? Public Administration Review, 68(2), 205–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stoker, G. (2006). Public value management: A new narrative for networked governance? American Review of Public Administration, 36(1), 41–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornton, P. H., Ocasio, W., & Lounsbury, M. (2012). The institutional logics perspective: A new approach to culture, structure and process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • West, K., & Davis, P. (2011). What is the public value of government action? Towards a (new) pragmatic approach to values questions in public endeavours. Public Administration, 89(2), 226–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, I., & Shearer, H. (2011). Appraising public value: Past, present and futures. Public Administration, 89(4), 1367–1384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Political and Administrative Sciences, University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany

    Wolfgang Seibel

Authors
  1. Wolfgang Seibel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wolfgang Seibel .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Political Science, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway

    Tobias Bach

  2. Hertie School of Governance, Berlin, Germany

    Kai Wegrich

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Seibel, W. (2019). Professional Integrity and Leadership in Public Administration. In: Bach, T., Wegrich, K. (eds) The Blind Spots of Public Bureaucracy and the Politics of Non-Coordination. Executive Politics and Governance. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76672-0_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation