American Federalism and the Search for Models of Management
Abstract
Changes in the United States federal system mean that managers must operate by taking into account multiple interacting governments and nongovernmental organizations; dealing with numerous programs emanating from Washington and state capitols; and engaging in multiple intergovernmental transactions with an expanding number of intergovernmental instruments. Four models of management within this changing system are identified. The top‐down model emphasizes executive‐branch control and is embedded in enforcement and exchange related to the laws, regulations, funding rules, program standards, and guidelines associated with federal/state grant, procurement, and regulation programs. The donor‐recipient model emphasizes mutual dependence or shared program administration, where two‐party bargaining or reciprocal interactions among government officials is the norm. The jurisdiction‐based model is defined by the initiated actions of local officials and managers who seek out program adjustments and other actors and resources to serve the strategic aims of their governments. The network model highlights the actions of multiple interdependent government and nongovernmental organizations pursuing joint action and intergovernmental adjustment. Although the first two models are long‐standing and the latter two are emergent, all appear to be alive and well on the intergovernmental scene, posing complex challenges for public managers.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Cited by
Sorted by citations
An Integrative Framework for Collaborative Governance
Emerson, K., Nabatchi, T., & Balogh, S. (2012) · Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory · doi:10.1093/jopart/mur011 · Cited by 3,637 · see citing works
- Authors
- Agranoff, R., & McGuire, M.
- Affiliations
- Indiana University Bloomington (US)
- University of North Texas (US)
- ORCID
- McGuire, Michael
- Venue
- Public Administration Review
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2001-11
- Volume
- 61
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 671-681
- ISSN
- 0033-3352 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-6210
- OpenAlex
- W1974009898
- Cited by
- 157
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 11.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Public Administration Review (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Public Administration › Public Policy and Administration Research
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Systems and Governance
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Local Government Finance and Decentralization
- Keywords
- intergovernmental relations, federalism, management model, top-down management, network models, public sector management, non-governmental organizations
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review