Search results

Knowledge-intensive public organizations (KIPOs henceforth) rely heavily on knowledge as the primary resource to provide public services. This study deals with a specific kind of KIPO in the judiciary system: the courts. The paper aims to explore the court’s managerial and organisational change resulting from the national recovery and resilience plan (NRRP) reform in response to Covid-19, focussing on how this neglected KIPO responds to change, either by showing acts of resistance or undergoing a hybridisation process.

The paper adopts a qualitative research design, developing an explorative case study to investigate the process of a court’s managerial and organisational change caused by NRRP reform and to shed light on how this neglected KIPO reacts to change, showing resistance acts and developing the hybridisation process. Thirty-one interviews in six months have been conducted with the three main actors in Courts: judges, clerks and trial clerks.

The paper shows that in this understudied KIPO, judges fiercely resist the managerial logic that decades of reforms have been trying to impose. The recent introduction of an office for speeding up trials (Ufficio Per il Processo (UPP)) was initially opposed. Then, the resistance strategy changed, and judges started to benefit from UPP delegating repetitive and low-value tasks while retaining their core activities. Clerks approached the reform with a more positive attitude, seeing in UPP the mechanism to bridge the distance between them and the judges.

Considering their relevance to society, courts must be more addressed in KIPOs' studies. This paper allows the reader to enter such KIPO and understand its peculiar features. Secondly, the article helps to understand micropractices of resistance that may hinder the effectiveness of managerial reforms.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the effect of new public management‐based reforms on public accountability in two countries, Italy and Sweden, explaining what strategies can be used to enhance accountability toward citizens.

Two case studies have been analysed in order to compare how public accountability has been enhanced in different cultural and geographical contexts.

In both countries, the enhancement of public accountability is at stake both in the political debate and in the public policies, but the strategies implemented resulted are path dependent especially in the choice between more disclosure and more citizen participation.

The paper uses only two case studies and therefore results can hardly be generalised; also the selected cases are both examples of best practice in the two countries.

The comparison offers critical insights on the adopted choices to enhance public accountability in two different contexts, also emphasising the role of IT and their possible use.

From a theoretical point of view, the paper offers an original framing of the possible strategies to improve accountability toward citizens: more accountability through more disclosure and more accountability through more citizen participation. The empirical analysis analyses the solutions adopted in two different countries aimed at improving accountability toward citizens and their advantages and limitations.