Algorithms applied in public administration are often criticized for lack of transparency. Lawmakers and citizens alike expect that automated decisions based on algorithmic recommendations to be explainable. The focus of this article is the organizational context behind the idea of transparent algorithms. Transparency is portrayed as one of numerous values that are at play when algorithms are applied in public administration. The article shows that applying algorithms may lead to conflicts between these values. Such conflicts often result in trade-off decisions. Looking from the organizational perspective, we describe how such trade-offs can be made both explicitly and implicitly. The article thus shows the complexity of algorithmic trade-offs. As a result of this complexity, we not only call for more transparency about algorithms, but also more transparency about trade-offs that take place in public administration. Finally, we present a research agenda focused on studying the organization of trade-offs.

‘Nudging’ has been introduced as a policy and management tool as a way to influence behaviour without limiting choice. Nudging is mainly used to influence citizens’ behaviour but can also be used to influence the behavior of healthcare professionals. Examples include posters used to improve hand-hygiene compliance, or ‘default’ options in systems to reduce excessive prescriptions of specific medication. However, using nudges raises major worries and ethical issues, also in relation to the independence of healthcare professionals. While the scientific discussion about the desirability of nudges is extensive, the voices of healthcare professionals, who are the subjects of nudges, remain unheard. In this qualitative research we explore the perceptions of nudging held by various healthcare professionals. The interviews reveal that healthcare professionals are generally unfamiliar with the concept of nudging, but they do recognize nudges in their own field of practice. Furthermore, while they are predominantly positive about nudging, they also express concerns about the pressure on their autonomy. These concerns are related to changing professionalism and regulatory pressures in healthcare.

Since the late eighties, Mexico has experienced profound economic modernisation and political democratisation. However, the corresponding administrative reforms have lagged: professionalisation of the public sector, improvement of public service delivery and development of modern management principles are plagued by a lack of coherence, implementation, and continuity. This can be traced back to several historically rooted and structural characteristics of Mexican public administration, which reproduce vicious circles of low trust and dysfunction. For example, (1) the extreme spoils system maintains a culture of distrust towards civil servants; (2) Mexico’s weak state capacity is a consequence of a lack of collective action, but also further undermines citizens’ trust in government; (3) strong labour unions are a response to poor labour rights, but also uphold a system of capture and confrontation; and (4) corruption is inevitable if cooperation depends on personal loyalties.

Recently the authors, who all work at the Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations, published a paper in which they analysed contemporary literature and research on social discontent to clarify whether this current feeling of discontent is different to previous periods of discontent and how it might affect the functioning of the Dutch government. In addition, to strengthen their analysis they discussed its implications with local politicians, experts and practitioners. In this article, the authors reflect on the outcome of these discussions. Their dialogues revealed that there is a need to redefine the dialogue between administration and society. They distilled five lessons from these discussions: they argue that government should be more 1) reliable and credible, 2) responsive, 3) effective, 4) empathic and 5) cohesive.

Discussions of public service motivation tend to emphasize the idealistic side of civil servants, stressing how they are led by self-sacrifice and a commitment to the public good. This article adopts a different perspective by linking the personality trait of narcissism to public service motivation. This notion was tested through a survey among employees of three public organizations. The statistical analysis shows that personalities with narcissistic elements tend to be more attracted to the world of policy and politics. This is accompanied by diminished feelings of compassion. Although the significance of this correlation should not be overstated, it does show that the link between public service motivation and commitment to the public interest is more complex than is sometimes suggested. Given the growth of narcissistic tendencies in contemporary society, it may be effective to take account of them in recruiting and managing civil service personnel.

Risks taken by some organizations may have considerable impact on society. In this contribution the assessment and management of risk are perceived to take place in a multi-actor setting. Within an organization operators, risk managers, and top managers interact about risk assessments and risk mitigation strategies. Public regulators and inspectorates increasingly focus on risk management systems instead of the operational activities or organizational outputs. Are organizations systematically assessing their risks? This contribution identifies two contrasting perspectives on risk assessment and risk mitigation in literature: risk management and risk governance. An empirical study in three sectors reveals evidence of both perspectives in practice. Companies adopt hybrid approaches, which are essential for the quality of risk assessment and mitigation. Indeed, adopting just one perspective seems dangerous. We conclude that public regulators and inspectorates might provide incentives to focus on just one perspective and suggest two heuristics for public inspectorates that respect hybrid approaches of risk assessment and mitigation.

‘Big Society’ has been one of those inspirational concepts that have recently swept through the public administration literature. With their appeal for a ‘Big Society’, the British Tories contrasted their policy program with Labours’ traditional ‘Big Government’ program. Upon closer inspection, however, it is revealed that the underlying analysis is not new at all, but reflects a specific analysis that can be traced back to Wilson’s famous essay on the study of public administration in 1887. Stripped from its details, the never-ending story claims that public administration now struggles with overwhelming complexity, which makes traditional bureaucratic methods obsolete and calls for innovative, new approaches. The fact that this story has remained fairly constant for over 125 years is cause for some concern. The article traces the historical genesis of this never-ending story and lands on a plea for more sophisticated attention for administrative history, more critical scrutiny of new ideas and more serious study of the nature and effects of complexity.

There seems to be a contradiction between what is happening in public administration discipline and public administration practice. Whereas public administration discipline and law largely separated during the past decades public administration practice and law have converged. Recently three books have been published which emphasize the importance of the rule of law as an explanatory variable for public administration's design and behavior. In this review essay these books are discussed from a public administration theory perspective. The point of departure of the authors substantially differs. Beckett (‘Public Management and the Rule of Law’, 2010) focuses on the rule of law, Cooper (‘Public Law & Public Administration’, 2007) and Rosenbloom, O'Leary & Chanin (‘Public Administration and Law’, 2010) aim at constitutionalizing public administration. The rule of law and the constitution prove to be shaky grounds for a public administration theory. In general constitutional competence may be important for public managers and professionals, but what it means for everyday practices is not easy to establish. The authors therefore extensively describe American public law, emphasizing the constitutional constraints and general administrative law. With these books the authors provide excellent building blocks for a comparative approach of the rule of law from a public administration perspective. The aim of such an approach would be to discover patterns between legal and constitutional designs on the one hand and everyday administrative practices on the other hand.

The literature on the management of organizational change is mostly based on private sector research. Research on the management of change in public sector organizations is relatively scarce. Because of the specific characteristics of public sector organizations, insights in the management of change may not be translated from one sector to the other. In this essay, four recent books about organizational change in public sector organizations are reviewed. Based on these books and other literature, an overview of the contemporary insights in the management of change of public sector organizations is presented.The essay concludes with an agenda for future research.