Advertisement

The Permanent Commission Bureaucrat

  • Sara Connolly
  • Hussein Kassim
Part of the European Administrative Governance book series (EAGOV)

Abstract

Although international organizations command considerable scholarly interest, surprisingly little attention has been paid to the people who work for them. Studies typically describe the functions that these organizations perform (for example, Barnett and Finnemore, 2004; Cox et al., 1973). They summarise the internal structures and procedures of international institutions, assess how effectively they carry out their responsibilities, and (sometimes) attempt to measure their influence. Commentary on personnel matters, such as recruitment, promotion, pay, and working conditions, sometimes also feature (for example, Davies, 2002), but the literature rarely has much to say about the backgrounds of employees, and — the socialization literature aside (for example, Checkel, 2007) — still less about their beliefs.1 Only recently have scholars begun systematically to investigate the motivation and values of international civil servants (Anderfuhren-Biget et al., 2013; Fresia, 2009; Häfliger and Hug, 2012).

Keywords

Member State European Commission Civil Servant Middle Manager Staff Regulation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anderfuhren-Biget, S., Häfliger, U. and Hug, S. (2013) ‘Values in International Organizations’, in Reinalda, B. (ed.) Routledge Handbook of International Organizations (London: Routledge), 270–283.Google Scholar
  2. Balint, T., Bauer, M. W. and Knill, C. (2008) ‘Bureaucratic Change in the European Administrative Space: The Case of the European Commission’, West European Politics, 31, 677–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ban, C. (2013) Management and Culture in an Enlarged European Commission: From Diversity to Unity? (Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barnett, M. and Finnemore, F. (2004) Rules for the World: International Organizations in Global Politics (Ithaka: Cornell University Press).Google Scholar
  5. Bauer, M. W. (2008a) ‘Introduction: Organizational Change, Management Reform and EU Policy-Making’, Journal of European Public Policy, 15, 627–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bauer, M. W. (2008b) Reformingthe European Commission (London: Routledge).Google Scholar
  7. Bellier, I. (1995) ‘Une culture de la Commission Europeenne? De la rencontre des cultures et du multilinguisme des fonctionnaires’, in Meny, Y., Muller, P. and Quermonne, J.-L. (eds.) Politiques Publiques en Europe (Paris: L Harmattan), 49–60.Google Scholar
  8. Checkel, J.T. (ed) International Institutions and Socialization in Europe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
  9. Christiansen, T. (1997) Tensions of European Governance: Politicized Bureaucracy and Multiple Accountability in the European Commission, Journal of European Public Policy, 4:1, 73–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. European Commission. (2004) Fourth Action Programme for Equal Opportunities for Women and Men at the European Commission, 2004–2008 (Brussels: DG ADMIN, European Commission).Google Scholar
  11. European Commission. (2005) ‘Targets for the Recruitment and Appointment of Women to Management and Other A*/AD Level Posts in the Commission 2005’, Communication from Vice-President S. Kallas, SEC (2005) 784/4 (Brussels: European Commission).Google Scholar
  12. European Commission. (2010) ‘Communication to the Commission on the Strategy on Equal Opportunities for Women and Men within the European Commission (2010–2014)’, SEC(2010) 1554/3 (Brussels: European Commission).Google Scholar
  13. European Commission. (2011) The 2004 Enlargement and Commission Recruitments. How the Commission Managed the Recruitment of Staff from 10 New Member States. Situation at the End of the EU-10 Transition Period. Final Report (Brussels: European Commission).Google Scholar
  14. European Commission. (2012) Women on Boards — Factsheet 4. Gender Equality in the European Commission (Brussels: DG Justice, European Commission).Google Scholar
  15. European Commission. (2014) Human Resources. Key Figures Card. Staff Members. (Brussels: DG Human Resources, European Commission), available at http://ec.europa.eu/civil_ service/docs/hr_key_figures_en.pdf.Google Scholar
  16. Coombes, D. L. (1970) Politics and Bureaucracy in the European Community: A Portrait of the Commission of the EEC (London: Allen & Unwin).Google Scholar
  17. Cox, R. W., Jacobson, H. K. and Curzon, G. (1973) The Anatomy of Influence: Decision Making in International Organization (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
  18. Davies, M. D. V. (2002) The Administration of International Organizations: Top Down and Bottom Up (Burlington: Ashgate).Google Scholar
  19. Featherstone, K. (1994) ‘Jean Monnet and the “democratic deficit” in the European Union’, Journal of Common Market Studies, 32, 149–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fresia, M. (2009) ‘Une elite transnationale: la fabrique d’une identite prof essionnelle chez les fonctionnaires du Haut Commissariat des Nations Unies aux Refugies’, Revue Europeenne des Migrations Internationales, 25(3), 167–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Häfliger, U. and Hug, S. (2012) ‘International Organizations, Their Employees and Volunteers and Their Values’, Paper prepared for presentation at the IPSA XXII World Congress of Political Science, Madrid.Google Scholar
  22. Hallstein, W. (1965) ‘The EEC Commission: A New Factor in International Life’, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 14, 727–741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hooghe, L. (1999a) ‘Consociationalists or Weberians? Top Commission Officials on Nationality’, Governance, 12, 397–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hooghe, L. (1999b) ‘Images of Europe: Orientations to European Integration Among Senior Officials of the Commission’, British Journal of Political Science, 29, 345–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hooghe, L. (1999c) ‘Supranational Activists or Intergovernmental Agents? Explaining the Orientations of Senior Commission Officials Toward European Integration’, Comparative Political Studies, 32, 435–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hooghe, L. (2001) The European Commission and the Integration of Europe: Images of Governance (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
  27. Hooghe, L. (2012) ‘Images of Europe: How Commission Officials Conceive Their Institution’s Role’, Journal of Common Market Studies, 50, 87–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Joana, J. and Smith, A. (2002) Les commissaires européens: Technocrates, diplomates ou politiques? (Paris: Presses de Sciences Po).Google Scholar
  29. Kassim, H. (2004a) ‘A Historic Accomplishment? The Prodi Commission and Administrative Reform’, in D. G. Dimitrakopoulos (ed.) The Changing European Commission (Manchester: Manchester University Press), 33–62.Google Scholar
  30. Kassim, H. (2004b) ‘The Kinnock Reforms in Perspective: Why Reforming the Commission Is an Heroic, but Thankless, Task’, Public Policy and Administration, 19, 25–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kassim, H. (2008) ‘“Mission impossible”, but Mission Accomplished: The Kinnock Reforms and the European Commission’, Journal of European Public Policy, 15, 648–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kassim, H., Peterson, J., Bauer, M. W., Connolly, S., Dehousse, R., Hooghe, L. and Thompson, A. (2013) The European Commission of the Twenty-First Century (Oxford: Oxford University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lindberg, L. N. (1963) The Political Dynamics of European Integration (Stanford: Stanford University Press).Google Scholar
  34. Michelmann, H. J. (1978) Organisational Effectiveness in a Multinational Bureaucracy (Farnborough: Saxon House).Google Scholar
  35. Monnet, J. (1978) Memoirs, London: CollinsGoogle Scholar
  36. Murray, P. E. (1991) ‘The “International Outlook”’, in Peachey, P., Kromkowski, J. and McLean, G. F. (eds.) The Place of the Person in Social Life (Washington, DC: The Council for Research in Values and Philosophy), 321–344.Google Scholar
  37. Page, E. C. (1997) People Who Run Europe (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
  38. Radaelli, C. M. (1999) ‘The Public Policy of the European Union: Whither Politics of Expertise?’, Journal of European Public Policy, 6, 757–774.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sasse, C., Poullet, E., Coombes, D. L. and Deprez, G. (1977) Decision Making in the European Community (New York: Praeger).Google Scholar
  40. Scharpf, F. W. (1999) Governing in Europe: Effective and Democratic? (Oxford: Oxford University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schon-Quinlivan, E. (2011) Reforming the European Commission (Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Spierenburg Report. (1979) Proposals for Reforms of the Commission of the European Communities and Its Services. Report Made at the Request of the Commission by an Independent Review Body Under Chairmanship of Mr. Dirk Spierenburg (Brussels).Google Scholar
  43. Spies, Y. K. (2013) ‘Multilateral Diplomats in the Early Twenty-First Century’, in Reinalda, B. (ed.) Routledge Handbook of International Organization (London: Routledge), 205–217.Google Scholar
  44. Stevens, A. and Stevens, H. (2001) Brussels Bureaucrats? The Administration of the European Union (Houndmills: Palgrave).Google Scholar
  45. Szarek, P. and Peterson, P. (2007) ‘Studying the European Commission: A Review of the Literature’, Paper presented at the EU Consent workshop ‘The Commission and the European Civil Service Paris’, 21–22 June 2006.Google Scholar
  46. Woodward, A. (2011) ‘International Organizations and the Organization of Gender’, in Jeanes, E. L., Knights, D. and Martin, P. Y. (eds.) Handbook of Gender, Work and Organization (Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell), 355–374.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Sara Connolly and Hussein Kassim 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sara Connolly
    • 1
  • Hussein Kassim
    • 2
  1. 1.Norwich Business SchoolUniversity of East AngliaUK
  2. 2.University of East AngliaUK

Personalised recommendations