Cited by 376Public Policy and Administration ResearchPublic Administration and GovernancePublic Administration and Political Analysis

Managing Boundaries in American Administration: The Collaboration Imperative

Kettl, Donald F.·2006·Public Administration Review

Abstract

Boundaries have long played a central role in American public administration. In part, this is because boundaries are central to the administrative process, as they define what organizations are responsible for doing and what powers and functions lie elsewhere. It is also because of the nation’s political culture and unusual system of federalism, in which boundaries have always been the focus of conflict. Five boundaries have historically been important in the American administrative system: mission, resources, capacity, responsibility, and accountability. New forces make managing these boundaries increasingly difficult: political processes that complicate administrative responses, indirect administrative tactics, and wicked problems that levy enormous costs when solutions fail. Working effectively at these boundaries requires new strategies of collaboration and new skills for public managers. Failure to develop these strategies—or an instinct to approach boundaries primarily as political symbolism—worsens the performance of the administrative system.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00662.x

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 42 · Cited by 376

Authors
Kettl, D. F.
Affiliations
University of Pennsylvania (US)
Corresponding author
Kettl, Donald F.
Venue
Public Administration Review
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2006-11-09
Volume
66
Issue
s1
Pages
10-19
ISSN
  • 0033-3352 (ISSN-L)
  • 1540-6210
OpenAlex
W2127493267
Cited by
376
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 26
FWCI
36.56
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 › Public Administration and Governance
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Public Administration and Political Analysis
Keywords
administrative boundaries, public administration, collaboration, federalism, responsibility boundaries, accountability, wicked problems, indirect administration, political process, administrative performance

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