Abstract
This chapter starts by introducing how the public sector has adopted different governance metatrends during the last century and how the adoption of these metatrends over time has led to new, hybrid roles for service users and frontline staff. The focus in this chapter is dedicated to the changing roles of the frontline staff and especially the role ascribed to them as professional co-producers. The premise is that professional co-producers must build their capacity to navigate in the local co-production context that is a hybrid of the Old Public Administration, New Public Management, and New Public Governance. This complex, hybrid context is framed in the chapter as “the opportunity space for co-production.” The problem is that this opportunity space represents an arena in which there is potential for the creation of “double or triple pressure” on the professional co-producers because they are expected to handle top-down and bottom-up expectations simultaneously – and perhaps also horizontal pressures stemming from the expectations of staff from other organizations (interorganizational collaborations). The argument is that professional co-producers must build their capacity to navigate in this dynamic context, acting together with service users and members from other organizations.
References
Andersen, L. B., Greve, C., Klausen, K. K., & Torfing, J. 2017. Offentlige styringsparadigmer: Konkurrence og sameksistens. Copenhagen. Jurist- og Økonomforbundets Forlag.
Bartels, K.P.R. 2013. Public encounters: The history and future of face-to-face contact between public professionals and citizens. Public Administration 91 (2): 469–483.
Berger, P.L., and T. Luckmann. 1991. The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. London: Penguin Publishers.
Bickman, L., and S.M. Reich. 2009. Randomized controlled trials: A gold standard with feet of clay. In What counts as credible evidence in applied research and evaluation practice? ed. S. Donaldson, C. Christina, and M. Melvin. Thousand Oaks. SAGE Publications.
Bovaird, T., and E. Loeffler. 2012. From engagement to co-production: The contribution of users and communities to outcomes and public value. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations 23 (4): 1119–1138.
Boyle, D., and M. Harris. 2009. The challenge of co-production: How equal partnerships between professionals and the public are crucial to improving public services. London: New Economics Foundation.
Brandsen, T., T. Steen, and B. Verschuere. 2018. Co-creation and co-production in public services: Urgent issues in practice and research. In Co-production and co-creation engaging citizens in public services, ed. T. Brandsen, T. Steen, and B. Verschuere. London: Routledge.
Brodkin, E.Z. 2012. Reflections on street-level bureaucracy: Past, present, and future. Public Administration Review 72 (6): 940–949.
Brodkin, Z.E. 2013. Street level organization and the welfare state. In Work and the welfare states – Street-Level Organization and workfare policy, ed. Z.E. Brodkin and M. Grogory. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Bryson, J.M., B.C. Crosby, and L. Bloomberg. 2014. Public value governance: Moving beyond traditional public administration and the new public management. Public Administration Review 74 (4): 445–456.
Davy, S.G., and D. Ågård. 2017. Relationskapacitet som forudsætning for capacity building. In Samskabelse og Capacity Building i den offentlige sektor, ed. H.K. Krogstrup. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzels Forlag.
Dinesen, B., J. Seeman, and J. Gustafsson. 2011. Development of a program for tele-rehabilitation of COPD patients across sectors: Co-innovation in a network. International Journal of Integrated Care 18 (3): 1–18.
Duffy, J.R. 2018. Quality caring in nursing and health systems: Implications for clinicians, educators, and leaders. Springer Publishing Company.
Durose, C., C. Mangan, C. Needham, and J. Rees. 2013. Transforming local public services throug co-production. Birmingham: AHRC Connected Communities & Department for Communities and Local Government at University of Birmingham.
Durose, C., C. Needham, C. Mangan, and J. Rees. 2015. Generating ‘good enough’ evidence for co-production. Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice 13 (1): 135–151.
Evetts, J. 2011. A new professionalism? Challenges and opportunities. Current Sociology 59 (4): 406–422.
Ferlie, E., and K.J. Geraghty. 2005. Professionals in public service organizations. In The Oxford handbook of public management, ed. E. Ferlie, L.E. Lynn, and C. Pollitt. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Fledderus, J. 2015. Building trust through public service co-production. International Journal of Public Sector Management 28 (7): 550–565.
Funnell, S.C., and P.J. Rogers. 2011. Purposeful program theory – Effective use of theories of change and logic models. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Gouillart, F., and T. Hallett. 2015. Co-creation in government. Stanford Social Innovation Review 13 (0): 40–57.
Honadle, B.W. 1981. A capacity-building framework: A search for concept and purpose. Public Administration Review 41 (5): 575–580.
Hood, C., and R. Dixon. 2013. A model of cost-cutting in government? The great management revolution in UK central government reconsidered. Public Administration 91 (1): 114–134.
Hueftle Stockdill, S., M. Baizerman, and D.W. Compton. 2002. Toward a definition of the ECB process: A conversation with the ECB literature. New Directions for Evaluation (93) 7–26.
Hurlbert, M., and J. Gupta. 2015. The split ladder of participation: A diagnostic, strategic, and evaluation tool to assess when participation is necessary. Environmental Science & Policy 50: 100–113.
Jensen, J.B., H.K. Krogstrup, and A.O. Thomassen. 2019. Why are we here? The importance of sensemaking in co-production. IIAS Study Group on Coproduction of public services. KU Lueven, May 26–27.
Kleinhans, R. 2017. False promises of co-production in neighbourhood regeneration: The case of Dutch community enterprises. Public Management Review 19 (10): 1500–1518.
Krag Jespersen, P. 1996. Bureaukratiet – magt og effektivitet. Copenhagen: Jurist og Økonomforbundets Forlag.
Krogstrup, H.K. 2016. Evalueringsmodeller, 3. Udgave. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzels Forlag.
Krogstrup, H.K., and J. Brix. 2019. Co-produktion i den offentlige sektor: Brugerinvolvering i kvalitetsudvikling. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzels Forlag.
Lipsky, M. 2010. Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public service. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Maynard-Moody, S.W., M. Musheno, and M.C. Musheno. 2003. Cops, teachers, counselors: Stories from the front lines of public service. Published in the United States of America by The University of Michigan.
McGuire, M. 2011. Network management. In The Sage handbook of governance, ed. M. Bevir. London: SAGE.
Merton, R. 1940. Bureaucratic structure and personality. Social Forces 28 (0): 560–568.
Mortensen, N.M. forthcoming. The challenges of translating and implementing co-production in care services – A Danish case study. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Aalborg University.
Nederhand, J., and I. Van Meerkerk. 2018. Case study – Co-production of care services: Co-opting citizens in the reform agenda. In Co-production and co-creation engaging citizens in public services, ed. T. Brandsen, T. Steen, and B. Verschuere. London: Routledge.
Needham, C., and C. Mangan. 2016. The 21st-century public servant: Working at three boundaries of public and private. Public Money & Management 36 (4): 265–272.
OECD. 2011. Together for better public Services: Partnering with citizens and civil society. OECD Public Governance Reviews. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264118843-en.
Ostrom, E. 1996. Crossing the great divide: Synergy and development. World Development 24 (6): 1073–1087.
Pestoff, V. 2018. Co-production and public service management: Citizenship, governance and public service management. London: Routledge.
Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. 2011. Public ManagementReform A Comparative Analysis—New PublicManagement, Governance, and the Neo-Weberian State (3rd ed.). Oxford university press.
Rist, R.C. 1995. Management accountability. In Policy evaluation – Linking theory to practice, The international library of comparative public policy, ed. R.C. Rist. Cambridge: Edgar Elgar.
Rogers, P. 2011. Implications of complicated and complex characteristics for key tasks in evaluation. In Evaluating the complex – Attribution, contribution, and beyond, Comparative policy evaluation, ed. K. Forss, M. Marra, and R. Schwartz. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
Røvik, K.A. 2010. Managementtrender. Praktisk Økonomi & Finans 26 (03): 61–72.
Schlappa, H., and Y. Imani. 2018. Who is in the lead? New perspectives on leading service co-production. In Co-production and co-creation engaging citizens in public services, ed. T. Brandsen, T. Steen, and B. Verschuere. London: Routledge.
Seemann, J. 2002. Distriktspsykiatri i et organisatorisk spændingsfelt. In Disktriktspsykiatri: En Lærebog, ed. S. Blinkenberg. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzels Forlag.
Sehested, K. 2002. How new public management reforms challenge the roles of professionals. International Journal of Public Administration 25: 1513–1537.
Steen, T., and S. Tuurnas. 2018. The roles of the professional in co-production and co-creation processes. In Co-production and co-creation engaging citizens in public services, ed. T. Brandsen, T. Steen, and B. Verschuere. London: Routledge.
Stringer, P. 2013. Capacity building for school improvement: Revisited. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Torfing, J., and Triantafillou, eds. 2017. New public governance på dansk. Copenhagen: Akademisk Forlag.
Tuurnas, S. 2016. The professional side of co-production. Academic dissertation, University of Tampere, Tampera. Acta Universitatis Tamperensis 2163.
Tuurnas, S., J. Stenvall, and P.H. Rannisto. 2016. The impact of co-production on frontline accountability: The case of the conciliation service. International Review of Administrative Sciences 82 (1): 131–149.
Van Eijk, C., and T. Steen. 2016. Why engage in co-production of public services? Mixing theory and empirical evidence. International Review of Administrative Sciences 82 (1): 28–46.
Vedung, E. 2009. Utvärdering i politik och förvaltning. Studentlitteratur.
Vedung, E. 2010. Four waves of evaluation diffusion. Evaluation 16 (3): 263–277.
Wiesel, F., and S. Modell. 2014. From new public management to new public governance? Hybridization and implications for public sector consumerism. Financial Accountability & Management 30 (2): 175–205.
Xu, R., Q. Sun, and W. Si. 2015. The third wave of public administration: The new public governance. Canadian Social Science 11 (7): 11–21.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Section Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this entry
Cite this entry
Mortensen, N.M., Brix, J., Krogstrup, H.K. (2020). Reshaping the Hybrid Role of Public Servants: Identifying the Opportunity Space for Co-production and the Enabling Skills Required by Professional Co-producers. In: Sullivan, H., Dickinson, H., Henderson, H. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of the Public Servant. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03008-7_17-1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03008-7_17-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-03008-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-03008-7
eBook Packages: Springer Reference Political Science and International StudiesReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences