The article raises the question of to what extent municipalities adopting reforms of decentralization are able to find a stable balance between strategic management and operational autonomy. We performed a case study in a Norwegian municipality with more than 10 years of experience in practicing the agency model characterized by a radical disaggregation and autonomization of functions. Our findings suggest that finding a stable balance seems hard to obtain. Instead, there is a continuous process of “negotiation” going on between the two levels. The risk of sliding back to hierarchy and central rule seems to be more or less permanent.
AarsJ.RingkjøbH.-E. (2011). Local Democracy Ltd: The political control of local government enterprise in Norway. Public Management Review, 13, 825-844.
2.
AarsethT. (2012). Politisk styring i resultatkommunen [Political governance in the performance oriented municipality]. In TorsteinsenH. (Ed.), Resultatkommunen [The performance oriented municipality] (pp. 210-224). Oslo, Norway: Universitetsforlaget.
3.
AndersenO. J.TorsteinsenH. (in press). Selskapsreisen: En casestudie av fristilling som innovasjonskatalysator [The companification journey: A case study of autonomization as a catalyst for innovation]. In AndersenO. J.BondasT.Gårseth-NesbakkL. (Eds.), Innovasjon i offentlig tjenesteyting [Innovation in public service provision]. Bergen, Norway: Fagbokforlaget.
CampbellJ. L. (1998). Institutional analysis and the role of ideas in political economy. Theory and Society, 27, 377-409.
6.
ChristensenT.LægreidP. (2001). A transformative perspective on administrative reforms. In ChristensenT.LægreidP. (Eds.), New public management: The transformation of ideas and practice (pp. 13-39). Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
7.
ChristensenT.LægreidP.RonessP. G.RøvikK. A. (2009). Organisasjonsteori for offentlig sektor [Organization theory for the public sector]. Oslo, Norway: Universitetsforlaget.
8.
ClaesD. H.MydskeP. K. (2011). Styringsutfordringer [Governance challenges]. In ClaesD. H.MydskeP. K. (Eds.), Forretning eller fordeling. Reform av offentlige nettverkstjenester [Business or distribution? Reforming public network services] (pp. 205-229). Oslo, Norway: Universitetsforlaget.
9.
DidrikssonM.MogensenM. (1993). Resultatansvar innom kommunal förvaltning – en (o)möjlig styrform? [Performance responsibility in municipal administration – an (im)possible form of government?]. KEFUs skriftserie, 6, 3.
10.
DoughertyD. (1996). Organizing for innovation. In CleggS. R.HardyC.NordW. R. (Eds.), Handbook of organization studies (pp. 424-439). London, England: SAGE.
11.
EcksteinH. (1975). Case study and theory in political Science. In GreensteinF. I.PolsbyN. W. (Eds.), Handbook in political science (pp. 79-138). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
12.
FerlieE.AshburnerL.FitzgeraldL.PettigrewA. (1996). The new public management in action. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
13.
HoodC. (1991). A public management for all seasons?Public Administration, 69, 3-19.
14.
HovikS.StigenI. M. (2008). Kommunal organisering 2008 [Local government organization]. (NIBR-rapport 2008:20). Oslo, Norway: NIBR.
OlsenT. H.TorsteinsenH. (2012). Enhetslederrollen [The role of the agency manager]. In TorsteinsenH. (Ed.), Resultatkommunen [The performance oriented municipality] (pp. 125-142). Oslo, Norway: Universitetsforlaget.
17.
PollittC.TalbotC.CaulfieldJ.SmullenA. (2004). Agencies: How governments do things through semi-autonomous organizations. Houndmills, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
18.
RøvikK. A. (1998). Moderne organisasjoner. Trender i organisasjonstenkningen ved tusenårsskiftet [Modern organizations. Trends in organizational philosophy at the turn of the millennium]. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.
19.
ScharpfF. W. (1997). Games real actors play: Actor-centered institutionalism in policy research. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
20.
StraussA. (1978). Negotiations: Varieties, contexts, processes, and social order. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
21.
ThorntonP. H.OcasioW.LounsburyM. (2012). The new institutional logics perspective. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
22.
TorsteinsenH. (2006). Resultatsenhetsmodellen i kommunal tjenesteproduksjon. Instrument, symbol eller maktmiddel [The agency model in municipal service provision: Instrument, symbol or instrument of power]. (Doctoral dissertation in political science). Tromsø, Norway: University of Tromsø.
TorsteinsenH. (2012c). Why does post-bureaucracy lead to more formalisation?Local Government Studies, 38, 321-344.
26.
TummersL.BekkersV.SteijnB. (2009). Policy alienation of public professionals: Application in a new public management context. Public Management Review, 11, 685-706.
27.
TummersL.KarstenN. (2012). Reflecting on the role of literature in qualitative public administration research learning from grounded theory. Administration & Society, 44, 64-86.
28.
VancilR. F. (1979). Decentralization: Managerial ambiguity by design. Homewood, IL: Dow Jones-Irwin.
29.
van ThielS. (2004). Quangos in Dutch government. In PollittC.TalbotC. (Eds.), Unbundled government (pp. 167-183). London, England: Routledge.
30.
VerhoestK.van ThielS.BouckaertG.LægreidP. (Eds.). (2011). Government agencies: Practices and lessons from 30 countries. Houndmills, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
31.
WettenhallR. (2005). Agencies and non-departmental public bodies: The hard and soft lenses of agencification theory. Public Management Review, 7, 615-635.
32.
YinR. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
33.
ZunaH. R. (2001). The effects of corporatisation on political control. In ChristensenT.LægreidP. (Eds.), New public management: The transformation of ideas and practice (pp. 121-144). Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
34.
The South-East municipal council: 0056/05-20.06.05 Samlet saksframstilling (arkivsak 05/01307): Justering og modernisering av organisasjonsstrukturen - oppfølging av sak 30/05 i utvalg for plan og utvikling [Collected presentation of the matter “Revision and modernization of the organizational structure”, municipal file 05/01/1307].
35.
The South-East municipal council: 42/07-07.05.07 Samlet saksframstilling (arkivsak 07/639): Vurdering av tildelingsenhet - forvaltningen [Collected presentation of the matter “Assessment of whether or not to establish an agency for the distribution of health services”, municipal file 07/639].
36.
The South-East municipal administration: Organisasjonsgjennomgang og modernisering 2005: Ny organisasjonsstruktur og justert oppgavefordeling [Report on organizational structure 2005: New organizational structure and revised distribution of tasks].
