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...
Saved in:
Published in | International review of administrative sciences Vol. 88; no. 2; pp. 587 - 604 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
London, England
SAGE Publications
01.06.2022
Sage Publications Ltd |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
ISSN | 0020-8523 1461-7226 |
DOI | 10.1177/0020852320969801 |
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 |