9/10/2023 0 Comments Define silo approachThere is also increasing evidence that breaking down silos into specialised agencies may simply replicate silos-type practices on a smaller scale (Elston 2013). It is politically valued for its ability to deliver goods and services efficiently and there are seldom calls for radical reform. For many governments in Asia, the silo remains the principal organizational form. We contend that, despite the many failings of silos, some systems are still functioning well. It has also been suggested that the context in which coordination takes place is a critical variable and that an administrative culture which stresses a public sector ethos and trust relationships helps to promote organizational integration and coherence (Christensen and Lægreid 2007 Lægreid et al. Others highlight the difference between hierarchy and networks, arguing that effective coordination may be achieved through horizontal networks (O’Toole et al. However, some scholars do emphasise the resilience of silos, their importance within the formal organizational structure and the need for vertical coordination in decision-making processes (Rykkja and Lægreid 2014 Peters 2015). The problems of silos have prompted calls for them to be broken down, blown up or otherwise destroyed (De Bri and Bannister 2010 Froy and Giguère 2010 Tett 2015, pp. Their inability to overcome these problems may have disastrous outcomes, such as delays in decision-making, duplication of resources, poor service delivery, failure to resolve cross-cutting “wicked problems” and difficulties in collaborating with non-governmental actors. 33), and their tendency to become “single purpose organizations” (Bezes et al. Silos are criticised for the resulting “departmentalism” (Gulick 1937), “tunnel vision” (Rosenbloom et al. Much of the academic literature deals with their evident failures to share information, to resolve jurisdictional disputes with other government organizations and to coordinate effectively (Kettl 2006 Jurkiewicz 2007, pp. It is inward-looking and self-contained with little regard for outcomes other than those which affect its own narrowly conceived goals. In public administration, a silo is defined as a hierarchical organization which seeks to maximise vertical coordination at the expense of horizontal coordination. Radical reforms may improve coordination but they run the risk of political instability and service disruption. The Hong Kong case reveals that effective changes may be made by strengthening existing coordinating mechanisms and extending them to the implementation level in a silos-dominant system. Using Hong Kong examples, we distinguish three different types of coordination and examine their effects on silos: informal or semi-formal coordination where administrative elites and professionals use quid pro quos to overcome coordination problems formal coordination where political expectations, directions and monitoring may mitigate problems and remedial policy-making where failure is addressed. Therefore, it is important to identify what mechanisms may enable silos to work successfully with each other and under what conditions, so that there will be no need to pursue a total breakdown of silos, which can be politically and administratively costly. The problem is not so much with the structure of silos but with the lack of effective coordination mechanisms between them. While this is often true, silos-dominant administrative systems may still find ways to overcome or prevent incoherence in government. The literature on silos in government often focuses on their failure to engage effectively in horizontal coordination.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |