‘It’s every breath we take here’: Political astuteness and ethics in civil service leadership development

References

• Alford, J., Hartley, J., Yates, S., & Hughes, O. (2017). Into the purple zone: Deconstructing the politics/administration dichotomy. American Review of Public Administration, 1–16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baddeley, S., & James, K. (1987). Owl, fox, donkey or sheep: Political skills for managers. Management Education and Development, 18(1), 3–19. doi: 10.1177/135050768701800101
   Google Scholar
• Benington, J., & Moore, M. (eds). Public value: Theory and practice. Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Briner, R., Denyer, D., & Rousseau, D. (2009). Evidence-based management: Concept cleanup time? Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(4), 19–32. doi: 10.5465/amp.23.4.19
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buchanan, D. A. (2008). You stab my back, I’ll stab yours: Management experience and perceptions of organization political behaviour. British Journal of Management, 19(1), 49–64. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8551.2007.00533.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butcher, D., & Clarke, M. (2003). Redefining managerial work: Smart politics. Management Decision, 41(5), 477–487. doi: 10.1108/00251740310479322
   Google Scholar
• Crosby, B., & Bryson, J. (2018). Why leadership of public leadership research matters: And what to do about it. Public Management Review, 20(9), 1265–1286. doi: 10.1080/14719037.2017.1348731
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt, K., Kahwagy, J., & Bourgeois, L. (1997). Conflict and strategic choice: How top management teams disagree. California Management Review, 39(2), 42–62. doi: 10.2307/41165886
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gold, J., Thorpe, R., & Mumford, A. (2010). Gower handbook of leadership and management development 5^th ed. Gower.
   Google Scholar
• Gray, A., & Jenkins, B. (1995). From public administration to public management: Reassessing a revolution. Public Administration, 73(1), 75–99. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9299.1995.tb00818.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartley, J. (2017). Politics and political astuteness in leadership. In J. Storey, J. Hartley, J.-L. Denis, P. ‘t Hart, & D. Ulrich (Eds.), The Routledge companion to leadership. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hartley, J., Alford, J., Hughes, O., & Yates, S. (2013). Leading with political astuteness: A study of public managers in Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. School of Government.
   Google Scholar
• Hartley, J., Alford, J., Hughes, O., & Yates, S. (2015). Public value and political astuteness in the work of public managers: The art of the possible. Public Administration, 93(1), 195–211. doi: 10.1111/padm.12125
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartley, J., & Fletcher, C. (2008). Leadership with political awareness: Leadership across diverse interests inside and outside the organization. In K. James, & J. Collins (Eds.), Leadership perspectives: Knowledge into action. Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• Jenkins, B., & Gray, A. (1983). Bureaucratic politics and power: Developments in the study of bureaucracy. Political Studies, 31, 177–193. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9248.1983.tb01340.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawton, A., Lasthuizen, K., & Rayner, J. (2013). Ethics and management in the public sector. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Manzie, S., & Hartley, J. (2013). Dancing on Ice: Leadership with political astuteness by senior public servants in the UK. Open University.
   Google Scholar
• Mintzberg, H. (1983). Power in and around organizations. Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Neuhold, C., Vanhoonacker, S., & Verhey, L. (2013). Civil servants and politics: A delicate balance. Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• O’Neill, R., & Nalbandian, J. (2018). Change, complexity, and leadership challenges. Public Administration Review, 78(2), 311–314. doi: 10.1111/puar.12917
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Overeem, P. (2005). The value of the dichotomy: Politics, administration, and the political neutrality of administrators. Administrative Theory and Praxis, 27(2), 311–329. doi: 10.1080/10841806.2005.11029490
   Google Scholar
• PACAC (House of Commons Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee). (2019). Strategic leadership in the civil service: Sustaining self- governance and future capability while supporting the government of the day. The Stationery Office.
   Google Scholar
• PACAC (House of Commons Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee). (2017). The work of the civil service: Key themes and preliminary findings. The Stationery Office.
   Google Scholar
• PACAC (House of Commons Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee). (2018). The minister and the official: The fulcrum of whitehall effectiveness. The Stationery Office.
   Google Scholar
• PASC (House of Commons Public Administration Select Committee). (2015). Developing civil service skills: A unified approach. The Stationery Office.
   Google Scholar
• Public Services Leadership Taskforce. (2018). Better public services. Cabinet Office.
   Google Scholar
• Rhodes, R. (2005). Everyday life in a ministry: Public administration as anthropology. American Review of Public Administration, 35(1), 3–25. doi: 10.1177/0275074004271716
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rhodes, R. (2015). Recovering the craft of public administration. Public Administration Review, 76(4), 638–647. doi: 10.1111/puar.12504
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Svara, J. (2001). The myth of the dichotomy: Complementarities of politics and administration in the past and future of public administration. Public Administration Review, 61(2), 176–183. doi: 10.1111/0033-3352.00020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar