Reconciling the Varieties of Pragmatism in Public Administration

199

169

Modern societies are increasingly faced with “unknown unknowns,” Black Swans, and mega-crises. Both public and corporate leaders find it deeply challenging to respond to these crisis events. Existing approaches and tools to cope with crisis-induced uncertainty are of little help in these dynamic environments. This article explores how the principles of Pragmatism may provide the building blocks for a theory of effective strategic crisis management. We argue that these principles, formulated by a group of American philosophers in a time of deep uncertainty, provide a way of thinking that will help practitioners prepare for, and deal with, emerging risks, crises, and disasters.

Section: Introduction: the Challenges Of Strategic Crisis Managementmentioning

confidence: 95%

Taming Deep Uncertainty: The Potential of Pragmatist Principles for Understanding and Improving Strategic Crisis Management

Ansell

Boin

2017

199

169

“…This shift goes hand in hand with an overemphasis on the positivist approach to public administration. Indeed, “trapped within the positivist paradigm, ‘efficiency’ has become the only widely expressed and accepted principle of governance” (Whetsell & Shields, 2011, p. 475). So where does this leave us?…”

Section: For Public Administrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pragmatist Tools for Public Administration

Dieleman

2016

In this article, I aim to resuscitate discussions about the value of pragmatism for public administration by identifying some pragmatist tools that can transform the structures and processes of the administrative state. First, public administrators, having adopted a pragmatist fallibilism, will be able to make decisions and act in the absence of certainty. Second, the pragmatist emphasis on participatory inquiry makes possible a more democratic administrative state. Third, pragmatism helps define a new role for experts and expertise that can be used to realize the goals of democratic administration.

“…We could use a little more Ernest Hemingway and Dirty Harry in the bureaucracy! Indeed, even Whetsell and Shields (2011) recognize this:…”

Section: Out Of the Woodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Once upon a time, (neo-)pragmatism 1 wandered into the woods (Evans, 2010) and got a little lost (Snider, 2011), before issuing a distress call (Salem & Shields, 2011) that was deprioritized by more pressing issues of governance. The distress call was revisited (Whetsell & Shields, 2011) and then, a couple of years later, some search parties (Dieleman, 2014; Whetsell, 2013) were deployed for a rescue.…”

Section: Off the Pathmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

One More Look at (Neo-)Pragmatism in Public Administration

Kasdan

2015

The continued interest in (neo-)pragmatism for public administration is a validation of the very kind of democratic discourse that the philosophy holds dear. Yet the back-and-forth also reinforces a critique coming from one of its major figures, Richard Rorty: We seem to be jockeying for position in an analytic language game that will never have a winner. The matter may not be "settled" per se, but the groundwork of (neo-) pragmatism's use in public administration is practically done and, in the spirit of one of its very basic ideas, administrators should sally forth and see how it works.