Author
Listed:
- Daniela Argento
- G. Jan van Helden
Abstract
Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to explain how and why the initially ambitious reform of the Dutch water sector turned into a moderate pace of change. The explanations are based on institutional theory. Design/methodology/approach - This paper is a case study at the organizational field level of the Dutch water sector. Findings - In order to enhance efficiency and transparency, Dutch Central Government initially attempted to enforce top‐down radical changes, including the formation of integrated water chain companies. However, after discussions and reactions of the interested parties, the central government authorised a bottom‐up approach, giving discretional powers to the individual water organizations. This transition to a bottom‐up approach can mainly be explained by the limited pressure exerted by the central government to change and the powerful position of the relevant organizations within the water sector, as well as their ability to establish strong coalitions to avoid mandatory radical changes. Research limitations/implications - The theoretical background is useful in analysing the change processes in other public sectors. Practical implications - The Dutch way of consensus seeking might be threatened by its own inertia, and in the case of ineffectiveness, it could be replaced by a more top‐down and radical reform package. Originality/value - Unravelling public sector reform into goals, means and approaches is useful, because although goals can remain the same during the change process, the means and approaches may be altered. Resistance to radical changes might stimulate convergent change options, such as reinforcement of the existing means of reform and may also decrease the embededdness and impermeability of the institutional fields.
Suggested Citation
Daniela Argento & G. Jan van Helden, 2009.
"Reforming the Dutch water chain: how radical ambitions turned into a moderate pace of change,"
Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 5(3), pages 321-343, September.
Handle:
RePEc:eme:jaocpp:18325910910986954
DOI: 10.1108/18325910910986954
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:jaocpp:18325910910986954. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.