Mapping the post-bureaucratic landscape: project managers’ perception of bureaucracy in European Union Cohesion policy projects

New post-bureaucratic organizational forms, such as projects, are increasingly used in policy implementation. Their assumed benefits in decreasing bureaucracy and increasing flexibility have, however, been questioned. It has been argued that public projects increase red tape (or bureaucracy perceive...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inInternational review of administrative sciences Vol. 88; no. 2; pp. 587 - 604
Main Authors Vento, Isak, Kuokkanen, Kanerva
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published London, England SAGE Publications 01.06.2022
Sage Publications Ltd
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN0020-8523
1461-7226
DOI10.1177/0020852320969801

Cover

Loading…
Abstract New post-bureaucratic organizational forms, such as projects, are increasingly used in policy implementation. Their assumed benefits in decreasing bureaucracy and increasing flexibility have, however, been questioned. It has been argued that public projects increase red tape (or bureaucracy perceived as a nuisance) because of the formal rules associated with them. Despite the topicality of the subject, we do not know how public project bureaucracy is perceived by the actors involved. This article explores the bureaucracy of public projects by analysing project managers’ perceptions of them with data from European Union Cohesion policy projects in Finland. The data consist of project register data and a survey to project managers (N = 728). The study finds that when talking of the perception of bureaucracy, it is relevant to distinguish between a general attitude towards bureaucracy and a specific perception of the task at hand. The general attitude seems more negative than the specific perception of bureaucracy. We also show that project managers’ experience, institutional background and share of administrative tasks in the project condition the extent to which bureaucracy is perceived as red tape. To conclude, the findings are discussed in relation to previous research on red tape in public administration. Points for practitioners Project organization connotes flexibility and innovation but involves also bureaucracy, which can be received as red tape, especially for inexperienced managers. In general, managers consider project bureaucracy as red tape, while in their own projects, bureaucracy is seen as less burdensome. Public managers have an advantage over managers from non-public organizations by perceiving public project bureaucracy as less burdensome.
AbstractList New post-bureaucratic organizational forms, such as projects, are increasingly used in policy implementation. Their assumed benefits in decreasing bureaucracy and increasing flexibility have, however, been questioned. It has been argued that public projects increase red tape (or bureaucracy perceived as a nuisance) because of the formal rules associated with them. Despite the topicality of the subject, we do not know how public project bureaucracy is perceived by the actors involved. This article explores the bureaucracy of public projects by analysing project managers’ perceptions of them with data from European Union Cohesion policy projects in Finland. The data consist of project register data and a survey to project managers (N = 728). The study finds that when talking of the perception of bureaucracy, it is relevant to distinguish between a general attitude towards bureaucracy and a specific perception of the task at hand. The general attitude seems more negative than the specific perception of bureaucracy. We also show that project managers’ experience, institutional background and share of administrative tasks in the project condition the extent to which bureaucracy is perceived as red tape. To conclude, the findings are discussed in relation to previous research on red tape in public administration. Points for practitioners Project organization connotes flexibility and innovation but involves also bureaucracy, which can be received as red tape, especially for inexperienced managers. In general, managers consider project bureaucracy as red tape, while in their own projects, bureaucracy is seen as less burdensome. Public managers have an advantage over managers from non-public organizations by perceiving public project bureaucracy as less burdensome.
New post-bureaucratic organizational forms, such as projects, are increasingly used in policy implementation. Their assumed benefits in decreasing bureaucracy and increasing flexibility have, however, been questioned. It has been argued that public projects increase red tape (or bureaucracy perceived as a nuisance) because of the formal rules associated with them. Despite the topicality of the subject, we do not know how public project bureaucracy is perceived by the actors involved. This article explores the bureaucracy of public projects by analysing project managers’ perceptions of them with data from European Union Cohesion policy projects in Finland. The data consist of project register data and a survey to project managers (N = 728). The study finds that when talking of the perception of bureaucracy, it is relevant to distinguish between a general attitude towards bureaucracy and a specific perception of the task at hand. The general attitude seems more negative than the specific perception of bureaucracy. We also show that project managers’ experience, institutional background and share of administrative tasks in the project condition the extent to which bureaucracy is perceived as red tape. To conclude, the findings are discussed in relation to previous research on red tape in public administration. Points for practitioners Project organization connotes flexibility and innovation but involves also bureaucracy, which can be received as red tape, especially for inexperienced managers. In general, managers consider project bureaucracy as red tape, while in their own projects, bureaucracy is seen as less burdensome. Public managers have an advantage over managers from non-public organizations by perceiving public project bureaucracy as less burdensome.
New post-bureaucratic organizational forms, such as projects, are increasingly used in policy implementation. Their assumed benefits in decreasing bureaucracy and increasing flexibility have, however, been questioned. It has been argued that public projects increase red tape (or bureaucracy perceived as a nuisance) because of the formal rules associated with them. Despite the topicality of the subject, we do not know how public project bureaucracy is perceived by the actors involved. This article explores the bureaucracy of public projects by analysing project managers’ perceptions of them with data from European Union Cohesion policy projects in Finland. The data consist of project register data and a survey to project managers ( N = 728). The study finds that when talking of the perception of bureaucracy, it is relevant to distinguish between a general attitude towards bureaucracy and a specific perception of the task at hand. The general attitude seems more negative than the specific perception of bureaucracy. We also show that project managers’ experience, institutional background and share of administrative tasks in the project condition the extent to which bureaucracy is perceived as red tape. To conclude, the findings are discussed in relation to previous research on red tape in public administration.
Author Kuokkanen, Kanerva
Vento, Isak
Author_xml – sequence: 1
  givenname: Isak
  orcidid: 0000-0001-6043-8627
  surname: Vento
  fullname: Vento, Isak
  email: isak.vento@helsinki.fi
  organization: , Finland
– sequence: 2
  givenname: Kanerva
  surname: Kuokkanen
  fullname: Kuokkanen, Kanerva
  organization: , Finland
BookMark eNp9kM9LwzAUx4NMcJvePQY8V5O0TVpvMuYPmHhx55Kmr1tHl8QkPeymf4b_nn-JLRsKAyWHBN7n897Ld4JG2mhA6JKSa0qFuCGEkSxlMSM5zzNCT9CYJpxGgjE-QuOhHA31MzTxfkMITTKajdHHs7S20Ssc1oCt8SEqOweyU06GRuFW6soraeEWW2c2oALeSi1X4PzX-ye24BTY0BiNTY1_TLXDjcbzzhkLUuOlHoCZWYMfHta0TU8c-vlzdFrL1sPF4Z6i5f38dfYYLV4enmZ3i0jFKQ2RqCiwEjIWcy4rXnIBokoryMsyV1mVAJOQsrSUTImY9kflCqq6liyPs1LQeIqu9n37wW8d-FBsTOd0P7JgPBU8T5jgPcX3lHLGewd1oZoghx8GJ5u2oKQY4i6O4-5FciRa12yl2_2nRHvF94H-bvMn_w3a_5Pb
CitedBy_id crossref_primary_10_1108_SASBE_06_2024_0225
crossref_primary_10_1080_09654313_2024_2392676
crossref_primary_10_1177_00953997211009884
Cites_doi 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199601936.001.0001
10.58235/sjpa.v17i2.15739
10.4135/9781446217580
10.1080/14719037.2016.1210907
10.4337/9781784715670.00014
10.1093/jopart/muv034
10.1177/0734371X04271526
10.4324/9781315622293
10.1017/9781108595841
10.4135/9781446200964.n14
10.1093/jopart/mui007
10.1177/1350508418812583
10.4324/9780203964774
10.1057/9781137495280
10.1177/0899764018760401
10.2307/jj.608189
10.4337/9781784715670.00032
10.1177/0308518X16674210
10.1177/1350508404039659
10.1111/padm.12049
10.1177/0020852315620291
10.1111/j.1467-9299.2010.01827.x
10.4324/9781315098586-10
10.1111/rego.12184
10.4324/9781315098586-9
10.1108/S0733-558X(2012)0000035005
10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02600.x
10.1515/9781400838103
10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199562978.003.0011
10.4324/9781315098586-1
10.1007/BF02371354
10.1007/s11115-010-0133-4
10.1177/1350508403010001380
10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199684168.001.0001
10.11126/stanford/9780804782524.003.0008
10.1080/01402380903354080
10.1177/0170840604047996
10.1177/0143831X08096228
10.1111/j.1540-6210.2009.02019.x
10.1075/ddcs.5
ContentType Journal Article
Copyright The Author(s) 2020
Copyright_xml – notice: The Author(s) 2020
DBID AFRWT
AAYXX
CITATION
7TQ
7UB
8BJ
DHY
DON
FQK
JBE
DOI 10.1177/0020852320969801
DatabaseName Sage Journals Open Access Journals (WRLC)
CrossRef
PAIS Index
Worldwide Political Science Abstracts
International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)
PAIS International
PAIS International (Ovid)
International Bibliography of the Social Sciences
International Bibliography of the Social Sciences
DatabaseTitle CrossRef
International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)
PAIS International
Worldwide Political Science Abstracts
DatabaseTitleList International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)

CrossRef
Database_xml – sequence: 1
  dbid: AFRWT
  name: Sage Journals GOLD Open Access 2024
  url: http://journals.sagepub.com/
  sourceTypes: Publisher
DeliveryMethod fulltext_linktorsrc
Discipline Government
Business
Political Science
EISSN 1461-7226
EndPage 604
ExternalDocumentID 10_1177_0020852320969801
10.1177_0020852320969801
GrantInformation_xml – fundername: Palkansaajasäätiö
GroupedDBID -TM
-~X
.2G
.2L
01A
09Z
0R~
1XV
1~K
29J
2A-
31S
31V
31W
31X
3R3
4.4
56W
5GY
5VS
9M8
AABOD
AACKU
AADIR
AADUE
AAGGD
AAGLT
AAIKC
AAJPV
AAKTJ
AAMFR
AAMNW
AANSI
AAOYI
AAPEO
AAQDB
AAQXI
AARIX
AATAA
AAWLO
ABAWP
ABCCA
ABCJG
ABEIX
ABFXH
ABHQH
ABIDT
ABKRH
ABPNF
ABQKF
ABQPY
ABQXT
ABRHV
ABUJY
ABYTW
ACAEP
ACDXX
ACFUR
ACFZE
ACGFS
ACHQT
ACJER
ACLZU
ACNCT
ACOFE
ACOXC
ACROE
ACRPL
ACRYD
ACSIQ
ACUFS
ACUIR
ADDLC
ADEBD
ADEIA
ADMHG
ADNMO
ADNON
ADPEE
ADRRZ
ADSTG
ADTOS
ADUKL
ADYCS
AEDXQ
AEOBU
AESMA
AESZF
AEUHG
AEVPJ
AEWDL
AEWHI
AEXNY
AFEET
AFFNX
AFKBI
AFKRG
AFMOU
AFQAA
AFRWT
AFUIA
AFWMB
AGDVU
AGKLV
AGNHF
AGNWV
AGQPQ
AGWNL
AHDMH
AHHFK
AHWHD
AI.
AJUZI
ALFTD
ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS
ALNCK
ANDLU
ARTOV
ASPBG
AUTPY
AUVAJ
AVWKF
AYPQM
AZFZN
B8O
B8S
B8T
B8Z
BDZRT
BMVBW
BPACV
BYIEH
CAG
CBRKF
CCGJY
CEADM
COF
CS3
DD0
DD~
DG~
DOPDO
DU5
DV7
DV8
EBS
EJD
FEDTE
FHBDP
GROUPED_SAGE_PREMIER_JOURNAL_COLLECTION
H13
HF~
HVGLF
HZ~
H~9
J8X
LPU
N9A
O9-
P.B
P2P
PQQKQ
Q1R
Q7O
Q7P
Q7X
RIG
ROL
S01
SASJQ
SAUOL
SCNPE
SFB
SFC
SFI
SFK
SFN
SFT
SFX
SGP
SGU
SGV
SHB
SHF
SHM
SPJ
SPP
SQCSI
SSDHQ
TN5
UPT
VH1
XOL
ZCG
ZPLXX
ZPPRI
~32
AAYXX
ACCVC
AJGYC
AMNSR
CITATION
7TQ
7UB
8BJ
AAPII
AJVBE
DHY
DON
FQK
JBE
ID FETCH-LOGICAL-c351t-7d1e2be82366ad6b67e7d5de9bb9c8d4e2ae525ba2c731313c9cedffa2938b713
IEDL.DBID AFRWT
ISSN 0020-8523
IngestDate Fri Jul 25 03:25:08 EDT 2025
Tue Jul 01 05:19:34 EDT 2025
Thu Apr 24 23:10:53 EDT 2025
Tue Jun 17 22:28:37 EDT 2025
IsDoiOpenAccess true
IsOpenAccess true
IsPeerReviewed true
IsScholarly true
Issue 2
Keywords project management
public management
public administration
public governance
bureaucracy
Language English
License This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
LinkModel DirectLink
MergedId FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c351t-7d1e2be82366ad6b67e7d5de9bb9c8d4e2ae525ba2c731313c9cedffa2938b713
Notes ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ORCID 0000-0001-6043-8627
OpenAccessLink https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0020852320969801?utm_source=summon&utm_medium=discovery-provider
PQID 2657694276
PQPubID 27405
PageCount 18
ParticipantIDs proquest_journals_2657694276
crossref_citationtrail_10_1177_0020852320969801
crossref_primary_10_1177_0020852320969801
sage_journals_10_1177_0020852320969801
ProviderPackageCode CITATION
AAYXX
PublicationCentury 2000
PublicationDate 2022-06-01
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD 2022-06-01
PublicationDate_xml – month: 06
  year: 2022
  text: 2022-06-01
  day: 01
PublicationDecade 2020
PublicationPlace London, England
PublicationPlace_xml – name: London, England
– name: London
PublicationTitle International review of administrative sciences
PublicationYear 2022
Publisher SAGE Publications
Sage Publications Ltd
Publisher_xml – name: SAGE Publications
– name: Sage Publications Ltd
References Munzi 1965; 19
Brewer, Walker 2010; 88
Godenhjelm, Johanson 2018; 84
Hodgson 2004; 11
Lopdrup-Hjorth, Roelsgaard Obling 2019; 26
Fazekas, King 2019; 13
Kuokkanen, Vihinen 2009; 2
Bolin, Härenstam 2008; 29
Grabher 2004; 25
Clegg 2012; 35
Heinrich 2016; 26
Munck af Rosenschöld, Wolf 2017; 49
Bozeman, Crow 1991; 16
Peters 2010; 10
Scott, Pandey 2005; 25
Sjöblom, Löfgren, Godenhjelm 2013; 17
Bache 2010; 33
Kaufmann, Tummers 2017; 19
Wiley, Berry 2018; 47
Kaufmann, Feeney 2013; 92
DeHart-Davis, Pandey 2005; 15
Feeney, Bozeman 2009; 69
Burden, Canon, Mayer 2012; 72
Farrell, Morris 2003; 10
bibr13-0020852320969801
bibr9-0020852320969801
Rokeach M (bibr59-0020852320969801) 1968
Alvesson M (bibr2-0020852320969801) 2005
bibr22-0020852320969801
bibr39-0020852320969801
bibr48-0020852320969801
bibr65-0020852320969801
bibr63-0020852320969801
Sahlin-Andersson K (bibr60-0020852320969801) 2002
bibr12-0020852320969801
Christensen T (bibr14-0020852320969801) 2011
bibr8-0020852320969801
bibr47-0020852320969801
Osborne D (bibr55-0020852320969801) 1992
Jensen AF (bibr37-0020852320969801) 2012
Moynihan DP (bibr50-0020852320969801) 2008
bibr64-0020852320969801
bibr32-0020852320969801
Lundquist L (bibr46-0020852320969801) 1991
bibr24-0020852320969801
bibr58-0020852320969801
bibr11-0020852320969801
Kuokkanen K (bibr43-0020852320969801) 2009; 2
bibr61-0020852320969801
Jensen C (bibr38-0020852320969801) 2007
bibr19-0020852320969801
bibr6-0020852320969801
bibr27-0020852320969801
bibr66-0020852320969801
Kaufman H (bibr40-0020852320969801) 1977
Bozeman B (bibr7-0020852320969801) 2000
Heckscher C (bibr30-0020852320969801) 1994
bibr51-0020852320969801
bibr26-0020852320969801
bibr18-0020852320969801
Meyerson D (bibr49-0020852320969801) 1996
bibr4-0020852320969801
Clegg S (bibr16-0020852320969801) 2011
bibr35-0020852320969801
Peck F (bibr56-0020852320969801) 2012
bibr3-0020852320969801
bibr25-0020852320969801
bibr17-0020852320969801
bibr42-0020852320969801
Brulin G (bibr10-0020852320969801) 2012
bibr34-0020852320969801
Munzi U (bibr52-0020852320969801) 1965; 19
bibr15-0020852320969801
bibr28-0020852320969801
bibr54-0020852320969801
bibr33-0020852320969801
bibr44-0020852320969801
bibr31-0020852320969801
bibr41-0020852320969801
bibr57-0020852320969801
Hall P (bibr29-0020852320969801) 2012
Blomberg H (bibr5-0020852320969801) 2002
bibr23-0020852320969801
bibr36-0020852320969801
bibr62-0020852320969801
References_xml – volume: 49
  start-page: 273
  issue: 2
  year: 2017
  end-page: 292
  article-title: Toward projectified environmental governance?
  publication-title: Environment and Planning
– volume: 84
  start-page: 42
  issue: 1
  year: 2018
  end-page: 62
  article-title: The effect of stakeholder inclusion on public sector project innovation
  publication-title: International Review of Administrative Sciences
– volume: 72
  start-page: 741
  issue: 5
  year: 2012
  end-page: 751
  article-title: The effect of administrative burden on bureaucratic perception of policies: Evidence from election administration
  publication-title: Public Administration Review
– volume: 25
  start-page: 1491
  issue: 9
  year: 2004
  end-page: 1514
  article-title: Temporary architectures of learning: Knowledge governance in project ecologies
  publication-title: Organization Studies
– volume: 19
  start-page: 1311
  issue: 9
  year: 2017
  end-page: 1327
  article-title: The negative effect of red tape on procedural satisfaction
  publication-title: Public Management Review
– volume: 10
  start-page: 209
  issue: 3
  year: 2010
  end-page: 222
  article-title: Bureaucracy and democracy.
  publication-title: Public Organization Review
– volume: 10
  start-page: 129
  issue: 1
  year: 2003
  end-page: 156
  article-title: The ‘neo-bureaucratic’ state: Professionals, managers and professional managers in schools, general practices and social work
  publication-title: Organization
– volume: 29
  start-page: 541
  issue: 4
  year: 2008
  end-page: 564
  article-title: An empirical study of bureaucratic and post-bureaucratic characteristics in 90 workplaces
  publication-title: Economic and Industrial Democracy
– volume: 11
  start-page: 81
  issue: 1
  year: 2004
  end-page: 100
  article-title: Project work: The legacy of bureaucratic control in the post-bureaucratic organization
  publication-title: Organization
– volume: 17
  start-page: 3
  issue: 2
  year: 2013
  end-page: 12
  article-title: Projectified politics – Temporary organisations in a public context
  publication-title: Scandinavian Journal of Public Administration
– volume: 13
  start-page: 405
  issue: 3
  year: 2019
  end-page: 430
  article-title: Perils of development funding? The tale of EU funds and grand corruption in Central and Eastern Europe
  publication-title: Regulation & Governance
– volume: 19
  start-page: 286
  issue: 2
  year: 1965
  end-page: 296
  article-title: The European Social Fund in the development of the Mediterranean regions of the EEC
  publication-title: Journal of International Affairs
– volume: 15
  start-page: 133
  issue: 1
  year: 2005
  end-page: 148
  article-title: Red tape and public employees: Does perceived rule dysfunction alienate managers?
  publication-title: Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory
– volume: 26
  start-page: 403
  issue: 3
  year: 2016
  end-page: 420
  article-title: The bite of administrative burden: A theoretical and empirical investigation
  publication-title: Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory
– volume: 33
  start-page: 58
  issue: 1
  year: 2010
  end-page: 74
  article-title: Partnership as an EU policy instrument: A political history
  publication-title: West European Politics
– volume: 88
  start-page: 418
  issue: 2
  year: 2010
  end-page: 438
  article-title: Explaining variation in perceptions of red tape: A professionalism-marketization model
  publication-title: Public Administration
– volume: 92
  start-page: 178
  issue: 1
  year: 2013
  end-page: 191
  article-title: Beyond the rules: The effect of outcome favourability on red tape perceptions
  publication-title: Public Administration
– volume: 25
  start-page: 155
  issue: 2
  year: 2005
  end-page: 180
  article-title: Red tape and public service motivation: Findings from a national survey of managers in state health and human services agencies
  publication-title: Review of Public Personnel Administration
– volume: 2
  start-page: 60
  year: 2009
  end-page: 70
  article-title: Participation of third sector in implementation of Regional Structural Fund programmes in Finland
  publication-title: Maaseudun uusi aika
– volume: 47
  start-page: 55S
  issue: 4_suppl
  year: 2018
  end-page: 75S
  article-title: Compassionate bureaucracy: Assuming the administrative burden of policy implementation
  publication-title: Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly
– volume: 26
  start-page: 830
  issue: 6
  year: 2019
  end-page: 852
  article-title: Monstrous rebirth: Re-instating the ethos of bureaucracy in public organization
  publication-title: Organization
– volume: 16
  start-page: 29
  issue: 2
  year: 1991
  end-page: 37
  article-title: Red tape and technology transfer in U.S. government laboratories
  publication-title: Journal of Technology Transfer
– volume: 35
  start-page: 59
  year: 2012
  end-page: 84
  article-title: The end of bureaucracy?
  publication-title: Research in the Sociology of Organizations
– volume: 69
  start-page: 710
  issue: 4
  year: 2009
  end-page: 726
  article-title: Stakeholder red tape: Comparing perceptions of public managers and their private consultants
  publication-title: Public Administration Review
– ident: bibr65-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199601936.001.0001
– ident: bibr58-0020852320969801
– ident: bibr63-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.58235/sjpa.v17i2.15739
– volume-title: Dynamics of Performance Management: Constructing Information and Reform
  year: 2008
  ident: bibr50-0020852320969801
– start-page: 485
  volume-title: The Oxford Handbook of Work and Organizations
  year: 2005
  ident: bibr2-0020852320969801
– ident: bibr19-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.4135/9781446217580
– ident: bibr42-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.1080/14719037.2016.1210907
– volume: 2
  start-page: 60
  year: 2009
  ident: bibr43-0020852320969801
  publication-title: Maaseudun uusi aika
– ident: bibr11-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.4337/9781784715670.00014
– ident: bibr25-0020852320969801
– ident: bibr31-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.1093/jopart/muv034
– ident: bibr61-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.1177/0734371X04271526
– ident: bibr39-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.4324/9781315622293
– ident: bibr54-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.1017/9781108595841
– ident: bibr48-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.4135/9781446200964.n14
– ident: bibr17-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.1093/jopart/mui007
– start-page: 11
  volume-title: Beyond Project Management: New Perspectives on the Temporary–Permanent Dilemma
  year: 2002
  ident: bibr60-0020852320969801
– ident: bibr44-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.1177/1350508418812583
– volume-title: Beliefs, Attitudes, and Values: A Theory of Organization and Change
  year: 1968
  ident: bibr59-0020852320969801
– ident: bibr47-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.4324/9780203964774
– ident: bibr32-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.1057/9781137495280
– ident: bibr66-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.1177/0899764018760401
– volume-title: The Project Society
  year: 2012
  ident: bibr37-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.2307/jj.608189
– ident: bibr4-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.4337/9781784715670.00032
– ident: bibr51-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.1177/0308518X16674210
– volume-title: Bureaucracy and Red Tape
  year: 2000
  ident: bibr7-0020852320969801
– volume-title: Re-inventing Government
  year: 1992
  ident: bibr55-0020852320969801
– ident: bibr33-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.1177/1350508404039659
– volume-title: Managementbyråkrati – organisationspolitisk makt i svensk offentlig förvaltning
  year: 2012
  ident: bibr29-0020852320969801
– volume-title: Managing Sustainable Development Programmes
  year: 2012
  ident: bibr10-0020852320969801
– ident: bibr41-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.1111/padm.12049
– ident: bibr26-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.1177/0020852315620291
– volume-title: Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research
  year: 1996
  ident: bibr49-0020852320969801
– volume-title: Red Tape, Its Origins, Uses, and Abuses
  year: 1977
  ident: bibr40-0020852320969801
– ident: bibr9-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9299.2010.01827.x
– ident: bibr13-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.4324/9781315098586-10
– ident: bibr23-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.1111/rego.12184
– ident: bibr27-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.4324/9781315098586-9
– volume-title: Projektledning i offentlig miljö
  year: 2007
  ident: bibr38-0020852320969801
– ident: bibr15-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.1108/S0733-558X(2012)0000035005
– ident: bibr12-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02600.x
– ident: bibr18-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.1515/9781400838103
– ident: bibr62-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199562978.003.0011
– volume-title: The Ashgate Research Companion to New Public Management
  year: 2011
  ident: bibr14-0020852320969801
– ident: bibr34-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.4324/9781315098586-1
– ident: bibr8-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.1007/BF02371354
– ident: bibr57-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.1007/s11115-010-0133-4
– ident: bibr22-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.1177/1350508403010001380
– ident: bibr36-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199684168.001.0001
– ident: bibr64-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.11126/stanford/9780804782524.003.0008
– volume-title: Förvaltning och demokrati
  year: 1991
  ident: bibr46-0020852320969801
– volume: 19
  start-page: 286
  issue: 2
  year: 1965
  ident: bibr52-0020852320969801
  publication-title: Journal of International Affairs
– ident: bibr3-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.1080/01402380903354080
– ident: bibr28-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.1177/0170840604047996
– start-page: 52
  volume-title: The End of the Welfare State? Responses to State Retrenchment
  year: 2002
  ident: bibr5-0020852320969801
– volume-title: The Post-bureaucratic Organization: New Perspectives on Organizational Change
  year: 1994
  ident: bibr30-0020852320969801
– volume-title: Managing and Organizations: An Introduction to Theory and Practice
  year: 2011
  ident: bibr16-0020852320969801
– volume-title: Business Perceptions of Regulatory Burden
  year: 2012
  ident: bibr56-0020852320969801
– ident: bibr6-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.1177/0143831X08096228
– ident: bibr24-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2009.02019.x
– ident: bibr35-0020852320969801
  doi: 10.1075/ddcs.5
SSID ssj0014818
Score 2.3007576
Snippet New post-bureaucratic organizational forms, such as projects, are increasingly used in policy implementation. Their assumed benefits in decreasing bureaucracy...
SourceID proquest
crossref
sage
SourceType Aggregation Database
Enrichment Source
Index Database
Publisher
StartPage 587
SubjectTerms Attitudes
Bureaucracy
Data
Flexibility
Innovations
Mapping
Perceptions
Policy implementation
Project managers
Public administration
Talking
Title Mapping the post-bureaucratic landscape: project managers’ perception of bureaucracy in European Union Cohesion policy projects
URI https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0020852320969801
https://www.proquest.com/docview/2657694276
Volume 88
hasFullText 1
inHoldings 1
isFullTextHit
isPrint
link http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwjV1LS-RAEC5chcWL6LjLji_6IAse4phO5-VFRBxEGHFF0T2FfmVZ0MzgZA7e9Gf49_wlViXdM7srK5JDIOlOh65-fF31VRXANiICwQ1KINKxDIQobZBbrQJpyjyLlQ3LxrdqcJacXInTm_hmDirvC-N6cLxLtCr8o2axptlN2uieMzL22tSSCAYQgOe4xh5M6rui1Xb7pBr0hMzTkzuybGviQz4E3rvtEyxQLiacyAuH_Yvry6ndQWRhu3bjoYoamBk237T590Y2Q6d_EMKaPaq_DEsOXLLDdjSswJytOvDZc9s7sDjLrNuBZUd9wwpugq_C00BSvIZfDGEhGw3HdaCItT7RNE40a_yCiTG1z5wGh7Xs1_vxy-MzG01JMmxYsmlN_cB-V8yr_RmiXCxAbiGkqGOjJjCx_974C1z1jy-PTgKXpCHQURzWQWpCy5WlvOmJNIlKUpua2NhcqVxnRlgubcxjJblOoxAvnWtrylIizsgUHpG_wnw1rOw3YHuZDG0UKYR0UlgrcyLBGCUTLWK-Z9Iu9HyPF9pFMKdEGrdF6IOW_yOjLuxMa4za6B3vlN3wQiz8KCx4guexXPA06cJ3Euzs1f--s_bRguuwyMmXolHpbMB8fT-xm4hwarXlhiXdf57_GLwCr1n4pw
linkProvider SAGE Publications
linkToHtml http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwjV1LSwMxEB6kBe1FalWsVs1BBA-r3WyyD29FLFXbHqTF3pa8VgTZlj4O3vRn-Pf8JSb7alUU2WMyw5LJ48vkmxmAE40ICJbaAo6gzCIkUlagBLeYjAKfcmVHSWxVr-92huR2REcrpb6yEZydG1qV_qNksy5Wt8mUlFSV1DhAY-_AN5FbZUITbFRute8fBsUTAvHtdBvW9yMjsHyj_KHj65m0BJor3K7kuGlXYTPDiaiVGnYL1lRcg_Wcpl6DyrJIbg2qGYtNC2RrdRveesykXnhEGuGhyXg2t7ghoC-EMblASYivIT9doswZg1Ii63T28fqOJgXfBY0jVEiKF_QUo9yDjzRg1R1MhIfxuaFJkmM41zfbgWH7enDVsbJ6C5ZwqD23PGkrzJUpge4y6XLXU56kUgWcB8KXRGGmKKacYeE5tv5EIJSMIqYhg8_1bXcXSvE4VnuAmj6zleNwjc4YUYoFhs8iOXMFobgpvTpc5CMeiiwZuamJ8Rzaef7xbzaqw1khMUkTcfzRt5EbMcwnVIhdfbUKCPbcOpwawy6bftOz_9-Ox7DRGfS6Yfemf3cAFWxCJBJPTQNK8-lCHWrgMudH2RT9BOXe5GI
linkToPdf http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV1LT9wwEB5Vi4S4FLotYsvLB1Sph7Abx3n1hqAr2rKISkWCU-RXEKLajUj2ACf4Gf17_SWdSZxdSgVCVY72WI7Hj8-eb2YAdhARCG5QA4EOpSdEbr3UauVJk6dJqKyf175Vo-Po8FR8PQvPHDeHfGHcCJa7RKvCHtWbNa3uwuR9Z2PsN5klEQsg_k4T8t5awHNqwDuwsHd-8n00MyOIxG-2YrwjkcDcTvlPG3-fS3Ow-YDfVR85w-Umr2pZRyokpsnV7rTCft4-iuP433-zAq8dGGV7zex5A6_suAuLLRe-C0vzTLxdWHFUORRwG8JbuB9Jiu9wwRBGsmJSVp4ilvtU07zSrPYjJobVJ-ZefFjDlr0uf9_9YsWMVMMmOZtJ6ht2OWatmYAhKsYK5EZCD3usqAMZt-2V7-B0-PnH_qHnkjp4Ogj9youNb7mylGc9kiZSUWxjExqbKpXqxAjLpQ15qCTXceDjp1NtTZ5LxCWJwiv1KnTGk7FdAzZIpG-DQCEElMJamRJpxigZaRHygYl70G9VmmkX8ZwSb_zM_DbI-aOh78HHmUTRRPt4pu5GO0uyVs8Zj_D-lgoeRz34QEqfFz3VzvuXVtyGxZODYXb05fjbOixxcsOoX4M2oFNdT-0mgqNKbbkl8AfdVQS6
openUrl ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Mapping+the+post-bureaucratic+landscape%3A+project+managers%E2%80%99+perception+of+bureaucracy+in+European+Union+Cohesion+policy+projects&rft.jtitle=International+review+of+administrative+sciences&rft.au=Vento+Isak&rft.au=Kuokkanen+Kanerva&rft.date=2022-06-01&rft.pub=Sage+Publications+Ltd&rft.issn=0020-8523&rft.eissn=1461-7226&rft.volume=88&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=587&rft.epage=604&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177%2F0020852320969801&rft.externalDBID=NO_FULL_TEXT
thumbnail_l http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=0020-8523&client=summon
thumbnail_m http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=0020-8523&client=summon
thumbnail_s http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=0020-8523&client=summon