Abstract:Aims of this book 'Leadership' often gets talked about in the world of politics and the public sphere at large. It is routinely admired, vilified, ridiculed, invoked, trivialised, explained and speculated about in media discourse and in everyday conversation. Yet, despite all this talk, there is surprisingly little consensus about how to answer some of the basic questions, for example, about the nature, place, role and impact of leadership in contemporary society. The idea of this project is to bring together … Show more
“…When elected to the role of leader by his party, Newman was seen as having good leadership credentials and political capital as a result of positive public perceptions of his handling of the 2011 Queensland floods and his role as the Lord Mayor of Brisbane City Council. However, while strong leaders appear to ‘thrive in emergency conditions’ (t'Hart and Uhr : 5), according to Wallis and Dollery (: 7), even in non‐crisis conditions strong leaders continue to embrace: an emphatic style of leadership that resists giving the impression of doubt. It also resists any empathy with potential losers…by refusing to take seriously the arguments of groups whose interests may be harmed by the reforms they are striving to implement.…”
Section: Discussion: Political Leadership Of Public Service Changementioning
Governments have historically offered their workforce a public service bargain founded on stable pay and conditions and job security. However, while the Westminster system aims for public service employment to be protected from the whims of government, public servants are nonetheless affected by the political environment in which they operate and changes to this bargain can occur with a new government. This paper focuses on a Queensland public service change process that resulted in large‐scale forced redundancies, non‐renewal of temporary contracts, and legislative changes that nullified the provisions in job security, organisational change, and redundancy policies. Using communication as a lens through which to understand leadership, it examines how the government communicated with the public service about this organisational change, immediately before and after the 2012 election. In particular, through analysis of public and media commentary, speeches and Hansard records, it examines Premier Newman's change leadership and communication by contrasting pre‐election messages to the public service with post‐election messages about the public service and the justifications for change during this period of downsizing. This analysis is used to reflect on political leadership, communication, fair treatment, and trust in public service change.
“…When elected to the role of leader by his party, Newman was seen as having good leadership credentials and political capital as a result of positive public perceptions of his handling of the 2011 Queensland floods and his role as the Lord Mayor of Brisbane City Council. However, while strong leaders appear to ‘thrive in emergency conditions’ (t'Hart and Uhr : 5), according to Wallis and Dollery (: 7), even in non‐crisis conditions strong leaders continue to embrace: an emphatic style of leadership that resists giving the impression of doubt. It also resists any empathy with potential losers…by refusing to take seriously the arguments of groups whose interests may be harmed by the reforms they are striving to implement.…”
Section: Discussion: Political Leadership Of Public Service Changementioning
Governments have historically offered their workforce a public service bargain founded on stable pay and conditions and job security. However, while the Westminster system aims for public service employment to be protected from the whims of government, public servants are nonetheless affected by the political environment in which they operate and changes to this bargain can occur with a new government. This paper focuses on a Queensland public service change process that resulted in large‐scale forced redundancies, non‐renewal of temporary contracts, and legislative changes that nullified the provisions in job security, organisational change, and redundancy policies. Using communication as a lens through which to understand leadership, it examines how the government communicated with the public service about this organisational change, immediately before and after the 2012 election. In particular, through analysis of public and media commentary, speeches and Hansard records, it examines Premier Newman's change leadership and communication by contrasting pre‐election messages to the public service with post‐election messages about the public service and the justifications for change during this period of downsizing. This analysis is used to reflect on political leadership, communication, fair treatment, and trust in public service change.
“…Rådmanskollegiet, og saerlig finansrådmannen, hadde dermed en svaert sterk stilling -naermest som en «skyggeregjering». Fordi rådmannskollegiet ble nedlagt, og funksjonene ble overført til byrådet, innebar reformen at alle de tre lederrollene i den administrative sfaeren ('t Hart & Uhr, 2008) ble lagt til byrådet. Byrådet fikk iverksetterrollen med ansvar for å levere «public value», forvalterrollen med ansvar for å lede administrasjonen, og rollen som rådgiver og demokrativokter, som nettopp innebaerer å sikre at administrasjonen er underlagt politisk styring.…”
Section: Fordeling Av Administrativt Lederskap Mellom Ordfører Og Byrunclassified
Med innføringen av parlamentarisk styreform i 1986, fikk Oslo kommune delt politisk topplederskap. Det tradisjonsrike ordførervervet ble beholdt, samtidig som byrådslederen inntok en viktig rolle som operativ politisk leder. Selv om reformen i 1986 åpenbart var inspirert av nasjonal parlamentarisme, gjorde de betydelige forskjellene mellom den kommunale og den nasjonale konteksten at rollefordelingen mellom de to ledervervene måtte utformes lokalt. Dermed er den politiske toppledelsen i Oslo kommune et interessant case for å utvikle forståelsen av delt offentlig lederskap mer generelt, et tema det er stigende interesse for innen ledelsesforskningen. Artikkelen presenterer en analysemodell basert på generell ledelsesteori samt teori om liberal konstitusjonalisme og demokratisk ansvarliggjøring, som viser tre mulige begrunnelser for å innføre delt lederskap. Innføringen av delt lederskap fremstilles videre som en «innovasjon» i en sterkt institusjonalisert kontekst. Analysemodellens relevans undersøkes empirisk ved hjelp av data fra en kvalitativ undersøkelse, som inkluderer intervjuer med alle nålevende ordførere og byrådsledere i Oslo kommune siden reformen i 1986. Artikkelens viktigste bidrag er å vise hvordan trekk ved den politiske og demokratiske konteksten utgjør spesielle premisser for delt lederskap i offentlig sektor, sammenlignet med andre kontekster.
“…Students of executive governance note that modern democracies are not characterized so much by fixed hierarchies as by networks in which individuals exercise forms of linked yet distributed leadership (Kickert, Klijn, and Koppenjan 1997;Rhodes 1997). Other scholars argue that leadership in democracies is best understood in terms of a 'lattice of leadership' that describes the dispersal and mutual influence of various forms of leadership (Uhr 2005(Uhr , 2008). Yet these are merely modern articulations of a fundamental insight regarding democratic politics that has an ancient provenance.…”
Section: Democratic Solutions To the Problem Of Leadershipmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In terms of the locus of study, public leadership entails four major domains: political, administrative, judicial, and civic leadership (ʻt Hart and Uhr 2008). Each entails a distinct set of roles, which can be embedded in a variety of public offices and performed by a broad range of individuals and groups, not just elected representatives or public office-holders (see Table 1.1).…”
Section: Democratic Leadership: New Perspectivesmentioning
Political decision-making is not only the sole responsibility of constituted government but it is the concern of various individuals and organizations involved in its interests and influence. This chapter emphasizes these interests and influence when taking into account the ability of liberal democracies to foster political pluralism, as freedom of speech and association and the legitimacy of democratic dissent make such pluralism inevitable. An ancient and non-democratic form of leadership is curiously preserved by constitutional monarchies and although this is assumed to be harmlessly ceremonial the chapter asks if this is more significant than the role of the monarch. A variety of contemporary leadership avenues in liberal democracies have resulted in the creation of a complex and opaque political system. An inquiry is made in this chapter on the necessity of a dispersed leadership as it has become inevitable in a democracy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
