nach oben

Erschienen in:

2019 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

5. The Alarms That Were Sent, but Never Received: Attention Bias in a Novel Setting

verfasst von : Helge Renå

Erschienen in: The Blind Spots of Public Bureaucracy and the Politics of Non-Coordination

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

In an analysis of the Norwegian police’s response to two terrorist attacks in 2011, Renå examines the reasons behind and implications of the failure of the police’s internal alarm system to work. The system was email based with limited functionality and had been given hardly any attention pre-2011. The chapter argues the alarm system was a de facto blind spot. Renå shows that this was a result of locally rational behaviours, because (i) crisis coordination in the police was traditionally a one-to-one interaction at the local level, (ii) there was no disruptive incident that put swift crisis coordination on the political agenda, and (iii) the political steering of the police was characterized by detailed and biased performance management—biased towards issues other than crisis preparedness.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel Professional Integrity and Leadership in Public Administration

Nächstes Kapitel Why Cooperation Between Agencies is (Sometimes) Possible: Turf Protection as Enabler of Regulatory Cooperation in the European Union

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

For comments on earlier drafts, I am grateful to Per Lægreid, the editors, the participants at a workshop for this edited volume, and at a seminar at the Norwegian Institute for Social Research respectively.

An Official Norwegian Report (Norsk offentlig utredning, NOU) is a report written by an ad hoc advisory commission appointed by the national government or one of the ministries. The 22 July Commission report was written by an independent commission appointed by the government to investigate 22/7 (see NOU, 2012).

All citations from references in Norwegian have been translated to English by the author.

Subtle change is outside the scope of this chapter and is thus not further discussed (see Feldman & Pentland, 2003, for an elaboration).

The performance contracts for the period 2001–03 are excluded because their format is less elaborate. The operationalization draws on Askim and colleagues’ large-N studies of annual performance contracts (Askim, 2015; Askim et al., 2017). The numbers have also been validated by cross-checking with an existing study on political control and steering in police (Fremstad, 2013). I thank Askim, Bjurstrøm, and Fremstad for giving me access to their data.

In the aftermath of 22/7, the national police commissioner set up an internal committee to evaluate the police response, called the Sønderland committee after the name of the leader of the committee (see Sønderland, 2012). In addition, the respective police districts, agencies, and the POD conducted their own internal evaluations of their own response. When referring to these reports, I use the name of the police agency (e.g. Kripos, 2011).

There are some parallels between PIT’s response, which signal both professional autonomy and loyalty, and the chapter in this volume by Wolfgang Seibel on the tension between the ‘logic of professional integrity’ and the ‘logic of system maintenance’.

The data source does not say anything about the total number of police districts that did and did not respond respectively.

Askim, J. (2015). The role of performance management in the steering of executive agencies: Layered, imbedded, or disjointed? Public Performance & Management Review, 38(3), 365–394.CrossRef

Askim, J., Bjurstrøm, K. H., & Kjærvik, J. (2017). Quasi-contractual ministerial steering of state agencies: Its intensity, modes and association with agency characteristics (Working paper, March 2017). Department of Political Science, University of Oslo, Oslo.

Bachrach, P., & Baratz, M. S. (1962). Two faces of power. American Political Science Review, 56(4), 947–952.CrossRef

Bakli, O., & Botheim, I. (2004). Nytt direktorat – Nye roller (Rapport 2004:3). Oslo: Statskonsult.

Baumgartner, F., & Jones, B. D. (1993). Agendas and instability in American politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Bergsaker, T., & Melgård, M. (2011, December 28). Riksalarm ble aldri testet før 22. juli. Dagbladet. Retrieved from http://www.dagbladet.no/a/63457437

Brändström, A., Bynander, F., & ‘t Hart, P. (2004). Governing by looking back: Historical analogies and crisis management. Public Administration, 82(1), 191–210.

Cohen, M. D., March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1972). A garbage can model of organizational choice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(1), 1–25.CrossRef

Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. (1992). A behavioral theory of the firm (2nd ed.). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Direktoratet for forvaltning og IKT. (2013). Evaluering av Politidirektoratet (Rapport 2013:3). Oslo: Direktoratet for forvaltning og IKT.

Eltun, R. (2013). Mål- og resultatstyring av Norges forskningsråd 2004–2012. Master’s thesis, University of Oslo, Oslo.

Feldman, M. S., & Pentland, B. T. (2003). Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(1), 94–118.CrossRef

Fremstad, E. H. (2013). En målstyrt etat i en regelstyrt verden? En studie av styringspraksisen i politi- og lensmannsetaten. Master’s thesis, University of Oslo, Oslo.

Greenwood, R., & Hinings, C. R. (1996). Understanding radical organizational change: Bringing together the old and the new institutionalism. Academy of Management Review, 21(4), 1022–1054.CrossRef

Gulick, L. (1937). Notes on the theory of organization: With special reference to government in the United States. In L. Gulick & L. Urwin (Eds.), Papers on the science of administration (pp. 2–45). New York: A. M. Kelley.

Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1983). Structural inertia and organizational change. American Sociological Review, 49(2), 149–164.CrossRef

Helle, P. K. N. (2016). Etatsstyring med flere prinsipaler: En studie av styringen av fylkesmannen. Master’s thesis, University of Oslo, Oslo.

Helsetilsynet. (2014). Rapport fra tilsyn med samfunnssikkerhets- og beredskapsarbeidet i Justis- og beredskapsdepartementet. Oslo: Statens Helsetilsyn.

Helsingeng, T. (2011, November 17). Flere politidistrikt mottok aldri Riksalarmen. Verdens Gang. Retrieved from http://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/22-juli/artikkel.php?artid=10031521

Helsingeng, T., & Sæther, A. S. (2010, October 12). Mangler kontroll: Her er den hemmelige rapporten. Verdens Gang, p. 4.

Inderhaug, E., & Trædal, T. (2016, August 16). Derfor har politidistriktene dårlig råd. Politiforum. Retrieved from http://www.politiforum.no/no/nyheter/2016/august/Derfor+har+politidistriktene+d%C3%A5rlig+r%C3%A5d.d25-T2JDU38.ips

Kaasin, H. (2016). Etatsstyringen av Innovasjon Norge 2011–2015: Omlegging til koordinert styring mot alle odss? Master’s thesis, University of Oslo, Oslo.

Kettl, D. F. (2007). System under stress: Homeland security and American politics (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: CQ.

Killengren, I. (2012, May 30). Interview given to the 22 July Commission. Oslo: National Archives of Norway.

Kingdon, J. W. (2003). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies (2nd ed.). New York: Longman.

Kripos. (2011). Kripos’ evaluering 22. juli 2011. Retrieved from https://www.politiet.no/aktuelt-tall-og-fakta/tall-og-fakta/22.-juli-evalueringsrapport/

Kuipers, B. S., Higgs, M., Kickert, W., Tummers, L., Grandia, J., & Van Der Voet, J. (2014). The management of change in public organizations: A literature review. Public Administration, 92(1), 1–20.CrossRef

Lægreid, P., Christensen, T., & Rykkja, L. H. (2016). Ambiguities of accountability and attention: Analyzing the failure of a preventive security project. Scandinavian Journal of Public Administration, 20(1), 21–44.

LaPorte, T. R. (2007). Critical infrastructure in the face of a predatory future: Preparing for untoward surprise. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 15(1), 60–64.CrossRef

Lindblom, C. E. (1959). The science of ‘muddling through’. Public Administration Review, 19(2), 79–88.CrossRef

Ministry of Justice. (1999). Ot.prp. nr. 7 (1999–2000): Om lov om endringer i politiloven. Oslo: Ministry of Justice.

Njåstad, M. (2017). Mål- og resultatstyring av politiet. En studie av Justis- og beredskapsdepartementet sin mål- og resultatstyring av Politidirektoratet i perioden 2004–2016. Master’s thesis, University of Oslo, Oslo.

Norges offentlig utredning (NOU). (1981). Politiets rolle i samfunnet. Delutredning I (No. 1981:35). Oslo: Justis- og politidepartementet.

Norges offentlig utredning (NOU). (2012). Rapport fra 22.juli-kommisjonen (No. 2012:14). Oslo: Departementenes servicesenter.

Perrow, C. (1999). Normal accidents: Living with high-risk technologies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Politidirektoratet. (2007). PBS I: Politiets Beredskapssystem Del I, Retningslinjer for politiets beredskap (Politidirektoratet 2007/04). Oslo: Politidirektoratet.

Politidirektoratet. (2011). Vedrørende spørsmål fra Stortingets 22. juli komité. Oslo: Politidirektoratet.

Politidirektoratet. (2012). Evaluering av Politidirektoratets håndtering av hendelsene 22. juli. Retrieved from https://www.politiet.no/aktuelt-tall-og-fakta/tall-og-fakta/22.-juli-evalueringsrapport/

Politidirektoratet. (2014). Politiets trussel om bruk av skytevåpen eller bruk av skytevåpen 2002–2014. Oslo: Politidirektoratet.

Schattschneider, E. E. (1960). The semisovereign people: A realist’s view of democracy in America. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Scott, W. R. (2013). Institutions and organizations: Ideas, interests, and identities (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Selznick, P. (1957). Leadership in administration: A sociological interpretation. New York: Harper & Row.

Sønderland, O. (2012). 22. juli 2011: Evaluering av politiets innsats (POD-publikasjon 2012/03). Oslo: Politidirektoratet.

Standing Committee on Justice. (2006). Innstilling fra justiskomiteen om politiets rolle og oppgaver (Innst. S. nr. 145 (2005–2006)). Oslo: Standing Committee on Justice.

Standing Committee on Justice. (2015). Innstilling fra justiskomiteen om endringer I politiloven (Innst. 306 S (2014–2015)). Oslo: Standing Committee on Justice.

Streeck, W., & Thelen, K. A. (Eds.). (2005). Beyond continuity: Institutional change in advanced political economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Thelen, K. A., & Mahoney, J. (2010). Explaining institutional change: Ambiguity, agency, and power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Vaughan, D. (1996). The Challenger launch decision: Risky technology, culture, and deviance at NASA. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Vaughan, D. (2005). Organizational rituals of risk and error. In B. Hutter & M. Power (Eds.), Organizational encounters with risk (pp. 33–66). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Vaughan, D. (2006). The social shaping of commission reports. Sociological Forum, 21(2), 291–307.CrossRef

Wathne, C. T. (2015). Som å bli fremmed i eget hus: Politiets opplevelse av mening og motivasjon i nye styringssystemer. Doctoral thesis, University of Oslo, Department of Criminology and Sociology of Law, Oslo.

Titel: The Alarms That Were Sent, but Never Received: Attention Bias in a Novel Setting
verfasst von: Helge Renå
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Buch: The Blind Spots of Public Bureaucracy and the Politics of Non-Coordination
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-76671-3

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-76672-0

Copyright-Jahr: 2019
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76672-0_5