Institutional Hybridity in Public Sector Reform: Replacement, Blending, or Layering of Administrative Paradigms

Despite an abundance of studies on hybridization and hybrid forms of organizing, scholarly work has failed to distinguish consistently between specific types of hybridity. As a consequence, the analytical category has become blurred and lacks conceptual clarity. Our paper discusses hybridity as the simultaneous appearance of institutional logics in organizational contexts, and differentiates the parallel co-existence of logics from transitional combinations (eventually leading to the replacement of a logic) and more robust combinations in the form of layering and blending. While blending refers to hybridity as an ‘amalgamate’ with original components that are no longer discernible, the notion of layering conceptualizes hybridity in a way that the various elements, or clusters thereof, are added on top of, or alongside, each other, similar to sediment layers in geology. We illustrate and substantiate such conceptual differentiation with an empirical study of the dynamics of public sector reform. In more detail, we examine the parliamentary discourse around two major reforms of the Austrian Federal Budget Law in 1986 and in 2007/2009 in order to trace administrative (reform) paradigms. Each of the three identified paradigms manifests a specific field-level logic with implications for the state and its administration: bureaucracy in Weberian-style Public Administration, market-capitalism in New Public Management, and democracy in New Public Governance. We find no indication of a parallel co-existence or transitional combination of logics, but hybridity in the form of robust combinations. We explore how new ideas fundamentally build on – and are made resonant with – the central bureaucratic logic in a way that suggests layering rather than blending. The conceptual findings presented in our article have implications for the literature on institutional analysis and institutional hybridity.

Justice, Truth and Oral History: Legislating the Past 'From Below' in Northern Ireland

Drawing on the ‘from below’ perspective which has emerged in transitional justice scholarship and practice
over the past two decades, this article critically examines the dealing with the past debate in Northern
Ireland. The paper begins by offering an outline of the from below perspective in the context of post-conflict
or post-authoritarian societies which are struggling to come to terms with past violence and human rights
abuses. Having provided some of the legal and political background to the most recent efforts to deal with
the past in Northern Ireland, it then critically examines the relevant past-related provisions of the Stormont
House Agreement, namely the institutions which are designed to facilitate ‘justice’, truth recovery and the
establishment of an Oral History Archive. Drawing from the political science and social movement
literature on lobbying and the ways in which interests groups may seek to influence policy, the paper then
explores the efforts of the authors and others to contribute to the broader public debate, including through
drafting and circulating a ‘Model Bill’ on dealing with the past (reproduced elsewhere in this issue) as a
counterweight to the legislation which is required from the British government to implement the Stormont
House Agreement. The authors argue that the combination of technical capacity, grass-roots
credibility and ‘international-savvy’ local solutions offers a framework for praxis from below in other
contexts where activists are struggling to extend ownership of transitional justice beyond political elites.
Keywords: transitional justice; from below; dealing with the past; legislation; truth
recovery; prosecutions; oral history

Managing the Entanglement: Complexity Leadership in Public Sector Systems

Abstract
Complexity and environmental uncertainty in public sector systems requires leaders to balance the administrative practices necessary to be aligned and efficient in the management of routine challenges, and the adaptive practices required to respond to complex and dynamic circumstances. Conventional notions of leadership in the field of public administration do not fully explain the role of leadership in enabling and balancing the entanglement of formal, top-down, administrative functions and informal, emergent, adaptive functions within public sector settings with different levels of complexity. Drawing on and extending existing complexity leadership constructs, this paper explores how change was enabled over the duration of three urban regeneration projects, each representing high, medium and low levels of project complexity. The data reveals six distinct yet interconnected functions of enabling leadership that were identified within the three urban regeneration projects. The paper contributes to our understanding of how leadership is enacted and poses questions for those engaged in leading in complex public sector settings.