Leading and recognizing public value

This article examines the relationship between leadership and public value, which is particularly challenging in a context of explicit contest and conflict. The theoretical framework is illustrated through a case study of policing rural crime. The study reveals that the police worked with multiple and competing publics rather than a single homogeneous public, and that part of their leadership role was to create and convene a public space in which different voices and divergent views could be expressed. The study notes that research needs to pay attention to the loss and displacement of public value, not solely its creation and recognition. The need to convene multiple publics required the police to lead, as part of a leadership constellation, and with political astuteness. The findings have wider relevance for other public services, and for studies of leadership and public value at the intersection between the state and civil society.     

Breaking the rules and making the rules: Evasion, avoidance, and policy reform

Rule evasion and avoidance can have a significant impact on policy outcomes, and therefore on the design, implementation, and enforcement of policies. The purposes of this paper is to assess the causes and consequences of evasion and avoidance in general settings, including their implications for policy reform. Evasion of rules often serves a socially useful role, and can promote efficient policies. Small-scale evasion typically provokes one of three responses: it is either effectively ignored, enforcement is increased, or the rule is revised. Large-scale evasion, alternatively, tends to meet with major policy shifts. Avoidance and evasion frequently temper the anticipated impacts of policy reforms, but are unlikely to render reform futile. Indeed, ongoing processes of reform might be required to maintain effective policies.