R. A. W. Rhodes

Court politics is about who in British government did what to whom, when, how, why, and with what consequences. In The Prime Ministerial Court Rod Rhodes provides a thorough depiction of the court politics of the Conservative governments of the twenty-first century, namely the courts of David Cameron, Theresa May, and Boris Johnson. Exploring specific topics, including the courtiers, the prime minister's craft, reshuffles, resignations, and leadership challenges, and the political games and feuds in the court between ministers, advisers, and civil servants, Rhodes concludes that the British government has a new Establishment in which the skills of 'knavery' abound. He finds evidence of betrayal, revenge, lying, scandals, and bullying with such machinations oiled by gossip, humour, and alcohol. Analysing the everyday practice of the 'dark arts' by the British political and administrative elite, each chapter includes a short case study of the court in action, covering the education wars, the 2018 election, and the Covid-19 crisis. Each case illustrates the personal, electoral, and governmental consequences of court politics. Rhodes warns that there are more and more knaves, decency is in decline, and British government needs 'rules for rulers'. Above all, he cautions citizens - 'beware, here be dragons'.

Why is cabinet government so resilient? Despite many obituaries, why does it continue to be the vehicle for governing across most parliamentary systems? Comparing Cabinets answers these questions by examining the structure and performance of cabinet government in five democracies: the United Kingdom, Denmark, the Netherlands, Switzerland, and Australia. The book is organised around the dilemmas that cabinet governments must solve: how to develop the formal rules and practices that can bring predictability and consistency to decision making; how to balance good policy with good politics; how to ensure cohesion between the factions and parties that constitute the cabinet while allowing levels of self-interest to be advanced; how leaders can balance persuasion and command; and how to maintain support through accountability at the same time as being able to make unpopular decisions. All these dilemmas are continuing challenges to cabinet government, never solvable, and constantly reappearing in different forms. Comparing distinct parliamentary systems reveals how traditions, beliefs, and practices shape the answers. There is no single definition of cabinet government, but rather arenas and shared practices that provide some cohesion. Such a comparative approach allows greater insight into the process of cabinet government that cannot be achieved in the study of any single political system, and an understanding of the pressures on each system by appreciating the options that are elsewhere accepted as common beliefs.

Published in 1999. Originally published in 1981, Control and Power in Central-Local Government Relations set out to provide a re-interpretation of central-local relations in Britain. The book reviewed the (then) existing literature; redefined the subject of intergovernmental relations (IGR); and developed a theory linking IGR to broader issues in the study of British Government. It rapidly became a classic in the study of local government. The link to broader issues what achieved through the power-dependence model and the focus on policy communities. The book underpinned the vast growth in the study of policy networks in British government. This revised edition includes four new chapters, two of which have been specially written. The new Preface traces the fortunes of the power-dependence model, commenting on and updating the individual chapters. A new part II continues the story. It contains a 1986 essay reviewing criticism of the original model (chapter 6); a 1992 article discussing unresolved issues in the study of policy networks (chapter 7); and a new chapter assessing where we are now in the study of networks. It argues, provocatively, for an ethnographic focus on traditions and narratives; on how individuals construct networks. The book remains essential reading for all students and academics concerned with the study of IGR and policy networks.

Is it possible to compare French presidential politics with village leadership in rural India? Most social scientists are united in thinking such unlikely juxtapositions are not feasible. Boswell, Corbett and Rhodes argue that they are possible. This book explains why and how. It is a call to arms for interpretivists to embrace creatively comparative work. As well as explaining, defending and illustrating the comparative interpretive approach, this book is also an engaging, hands-on guide to doing comparative interpretive research, with chapters covering design, fieldwork, analysis and writing. The advice in each revolves around 'rules of thumb', grounded in experience, and illustrated through stories and examples from the authors' research in different contexts around the world. Naturalist and humanist traditions have thus far dominated the field but this book presents a real alternative to these two orthodoxies which expands the horizons of comparative analysis in social science research.

Is it possible to compare French presidential politics with village leadership in rural India? Most social scientists are united in thinking such unlikely juxtapositions are not feasible. Boswell, Corbett and Rhodes argue that they are possible. This book explains why and how. It is a call to arms for interpretivists to embrace creatively comparative work. As well as explaining, defending and illustrating the comparative interpretive approach, this book is also an engaging, hands-on guide to doing comparative interpretive research, with chapters covering design, fieldwork, analysis and writing. The advice in each revolves around 'rules of thumb', grounded in experience, and illustrated through stories and examples from the authors' research in different contexts around the world. Naturalist and humanist traditions have thus far dominated the field but this book presents a real alternative to these two orthodoxies which expands the horizons of comparative analysis in social science research.

Published in 1999. Originally published in 1981, Control and Power in Central-Local Government Relations set out to provide a re-interpretation of central-local relations in Britain. The book reviewed the (then) existing literature; redefined the subject of intergovernmental relations (IGR); and developed a theory linking IGR to broader issues in the study of British Government. It rapidly became a classic in the study of local government. The link to broader issues what achieved through the power-dependence model and the focus on policy communities. The book underpinned the vast growth in the study of policy networks in British government. This revised edition includes four new chapters, two of which have been specially written. The new Preface traces the fortunes of the power-dependence model, commenting on and updating the individual chapters. A new part II continues the story. It contains a 1986 essay reviewing criticism of the original model (chapter 6); a 1992 article discussing unresolved issues in the study of policy networks (chapter 7); and a new chapter assessing where we are now in the study of networks. It argues, provocatively, for an ethnographic focus on traditions and narratives; on how individuals construct networks. The book remains essential reading for all students and academics concerned with the study of IGR and policy networks.

Interpretive Political Science is the second of two volumes featuring a selection of key writings by R. A. W. Rhodes. Volume II looks forward and explores the 'interpretive turn' and its implications for the craft of political science, especially public administration, and draws together articles from 2005 onwards on the theme of 'the interpretive turn' in political science. Part I provides a summary statement of the interpretive approach, and Part II develops the theme of blurring genres and discusses a variety of research methods common in the humanities, including: ethnographic fieldwork, life history, and focus groups. Part III demonstrates how the genres of thought and presentation found in the humanities can be used in political science. It presents four examples of such blurring 'at work' with studies of: applied anthropology and civil service reform; women's studies and government departments; and storytelling and local knowledge. The book concludes with a summary of what is edifying about an interpretive approach, and why this approach matters, and revisits some of the more common criticisms before indulging in plausible conjectures about the future of interpretivism. The author seeks new and interesting ways to explore governance, high politics, public policies, and the study of public administration in general. Volume I collects in one place for the first time the main articles written by Rhodes on policy networks and governance between 1990 and 2005, and explores a new way of describing British government, focusing on policy making and the ways in which policy is put into practice.

Network Governance and the Differentiated Polity is the first of two volumes featuring a selection of key writings by R. A. W. Rhodes. Volume I collects in one place for the first time the main articles written by Rhodes on policy networks and governance between 1990 and 2005. The introductory section provides a short biography of the author's journey, Part I focuses on policy networks, and Part II focuses on governance. The conclusion provides critical commentary, both replying to critics and reflecting on theoretical developments since publication. The volume complements the author's other publications on networks and governance, and many chapters in the volume feature an afterword setting out the context in which it was written and identifying what has changed empirically. Volume II looks forward and explores the 'interpretive turn' and its implications for the craft of political science, especially public administration.

As citizens, why do we care about the everyday life of ministers and civil servants? We care because the decisions of the great and the good affect all our lives, for good or ill. For all their personal, political, and policy failings and foibles, they make a difference. So, we want to know what ministers and bureaucrats do, why, and how. We are interested in their beliefs and practices. In his fascinating piece of political anthropology, Rod Rhodes uncovers exactly how the British political elite thinks and acts. Drawing on unprecedented access to ministers and senior civil servants in three government departments, he answers a simple question: 'what do they do?' On the basis of extensive fieldwork, supplemented by revealing interviews, he tries to capture the essence of their everyday life. He describes the ministers' and permanent secretaries' world through their own eyes, and explores how their beliefs and practices serve to create meaning in politics, policy making, and public-service delivery. He goes on to analyze how such beliefs and practices are embedded in traditions; in webs of protocols, rituals, and languages. The story he has to tell is dramatized through in-depth accounts of specific events to show ministers and civil servants 'in action'. He challenges the conventional constitutional, institutional, and managerial views of British governance. Instead, he describes a storytelling political-administrative elite, with beliefs and practices rooted in the Westminster model, which uses protocols and rituals to domesticate rude surprises and cope with recurrent dilemmas.

The State as Cultural Practice offers a fully worked out account of the authors' distinctive interpretive approach to political science. It challenges the new institutionalism, probably the most significant present-day strand in both American and British political science. It moves away from such notions as 'bringing the state back in', 'path dependency' and modernist empiricism. Instead, Bevir and Rhodes argue for an anti-foundational analysis, ethnographic and historical methods, and a decentred approach that rejects any essentialist definition of the state and espouses the idea of politics as cultural practice. The book has three aims: · to develop an anti-foundational theory of the state · to develop a new research agenda around the topics of rule, rationalities, and resistance · by exploring empirical shifts and debates about the changing nature of the state to show how anti-foundational theory leads us to see them differently. Bevir and Rhodes argue for the idea of 'the stateless state' or the state as meaning-in-action. So, the state is neither monolithic nor a causal agent. It consists solely of the contingent actions of specific individuals; of diverse beliefs about the public sphere, about authority and power, which are constructed differently in contending traditions. Continuity and change are products of people inheriting traditions and modifying them in response to dilemmas. A decentred approach explores the limits to the state and seeks to develop a more diverse view of state authority and its exercise. In short, political scientists need to bring people back in to the study of the state.

So, you want to be Chief of Staff to the Australian Prime Minister? The Gatekeepers provides the key lessons to equip you for the job. Australian prime ministers need help and it is their chief of staff who supports the person and the office, steering the prime minister through the challenges and landmines of political leadership. It is about making sure the urgent doesn't crowd out the important. It comes down to finely tuned coordination. It is about winning support in cabinet, caucus and country. The Gatekeepers offers unparalleled insights into how things really work at the centre of Australia's governing networks from those who have worked as chiefs of staff under prime ministers from Fraser to Rudd. It identifies eight key lessons for success as the PM's gatekeeper and shock absorber. It reveals what to do, what not to do, how to do it and how not to do it.

Lessons in Governing is a unique contribution to the study of Australian policy, politics and government institutions. It examines the position of Chief of Staff to the Australian Prime Minister from the perspective of key individuals who have held it. Exploring the support needs of Australian political leaders, it traces the forces that have shaped the growth and specialisation of the Prime Minister's Office since Gough Whitlam first formalised the appointment of a trusted senior person as head of his private office in 1972. Individuals in successive PMOs have long been recognised as key players, but their role has come under greater scrutiny as the link between prime ministerial effectiveness and the performance of their private offices has become more widely understood. While insights and advice have been passed from one incumbent to the next, there has been no systematic attempt to understand and document the evolution of the chief-of-staff position. Lessons in Governing addresses this critical gap in our understanding of the contemporary practice of Australian political leadership, reporting the findings of a project designed to develop an empirically informed understanding of the role of prime ministerial chiefs of staff as seen by those who held the post.

Lessons in Governing is a unique contribution to the study of Australian policy, politics and government institutions. It examines the position of Chief of Staff to the Australian Prime Minister from the perspective of key individuals who have held it. Exploring the support needs of Australian political leaders, it traces the forces that have shaped the growth and specialisation of the Prime Minister's Office since Gough Whitlam first formalised the appointment of a trusted senior person as head of his private office in 1972. Individuals in successive PMOs have long been recognised as key players, but their role has come under greater scrutiny as the link between prime ministerial effectiveness and the performance of their private offices has become more widely understood. While insights and advice have been passed from one incumbent to the next, there has been no systematic attempt to understand and document the evolution of the chief-of-staff position. Lessons in Governing addresses this critical gap in our understanding of the contemporary practice of Australian political leadership, reporting the findings of a project designed to develop an empirically informed understanding of the role of prime ministerial chiefs of staff as seen by those who held the post.

Comparing Westminster explores how the governmental elites in Australia, Britain, Canada, New Zealand, and South Africa understand their Westminster system. It examines in detail four interrelated features of Westminster systems. Firstly, the increasing centralisation in collective, responsible cabinet government. Second, the constitutional convention of ministerial and collective responsibility. Third, the role of a professional, non-partisan public service. And finally, parliament's relationship to the executive. The authors explain the changes that have occured in the Westminster model by analysing four traditions: royal prerogative, responsible government, constitutional bureaucracy, and representative government. They suggest that each tradition has a recurring dilemma, between centralisation and decentralisation, party government and ministerial responsibility, professionalisation and politicisation, and finally elitism and participation. They gone on to argue that these dilemmas recur in four present-day debates: the growth of prime ministerial power, the decline in individual and collective ministerial accountability, politicisation of the public service, and executive dominance of the legislature. They conclude by identifying five meanings of - or narratives about - Westminster. Firstly, 'Westminster as heritage' - elite actors' shared governmental narrative understood as both precedents and nostalgia. Second, 'Westminster as political tool' - the expedient cloak worn by governments and politicians to defend themselves and criticise opponents. Third, 'Westminster as legitimising tradition' - providing legitimacy and a context for elite actions, serving as a point of reference to navigate this uncertain world. Fourth, 'Westminster as institutional category' - it remains a useful descriptor of a loose family of governments with shared origins and characteristics. Finally, 'Westminster as an effective political system' - it is a more effective and efficient political system than consensual parliamentary governments. Westminster is a flexible family of ideas that is useful for many purposes and survives, even thrives, because of its meaning in use to élite actors.

As citizens, why do we care about the everyday life of ministers and civil servants? We care because the decisions of the great and the good affect all our lives, for good or ill. For all their personal, political, and policy failings and foibles, they make a difference. So, we want to know what ministers and bureaucrats do, why, and how. We are interested in their beliefs and practices. In his fascinating, new piece of political anthropology, Rod Rhodes uncovers exactly how the British political elite thinks and acts. Drawing on unprecedented access to ministers and senior civil servants in three government departments, he answers a simple question: 'what do they do?' On the basis of extensive fieldwork, supplemented by revealing interviews, he tries to capture the essence of their everyday life. He describes the ministers' and permanent secretaries' world through their own eyes, and explores how their beliefs and practices serve to create meaning in politics, policy making, and public-service delivery. He goes on to analyze how such beliefs and practices are embedded in traditions; in webs of protocols, rituals, and languages. The story he has to tell is dramatized through in-depth accounts of specific events to show ministers and civil servants 'in action'. He challenges the conventional constitutional, institutional, and managerial views of British governance. Instead, he describes a storytelling political-administrative elite, with beliefs and practices rooted in the Westminster model, which uses protocols and rituals to domesticate rude surprises and cope with recurrent dilemmas.

The State as Cultural Practice offers a fully worked out account of the authors' distinctive interpretive approach to political science. It challenges the new institutionalism, probably the most significant present-day strand in both American and British political science. It moves away from such notions as 'bringing the state back in', 'path dependency' and modernist empiricism. Instead, Bevir and Rhodes argue for an anti-foundational analysis, ethnographic and historical methods, and a decentred approach that rejects any essentialist definition of the state and espouses the idea of politics as cultural practice. The book has three aims: · to develop an anti-foundational theory of the state · to develop a new research agenda around the topics of rule, rationalities, and resistance · by exploring empirical shifts and debates about the changing nature of the state to show how anti-foundational theory leads us to see them differently. Bevir and Rhodes argue for the idea of 'the stateless state' or the state as meaning-in-action. So, the state is neither monolithic nor a causal agent. It consists solely of the contingent actions of specific individuals; of diverse beliefs about the public sphere, about authority and power, which are constructed differently in contending traditions. Continuity and change are products of people inheriting traditions and modifying them in response to dilemmas. A decentred approach explores the limits to the state and seeks to develop a more diverse view of state authority and its exercise. In short, political scientists need to bring people back in to the study of the state.

This book explores how the governmental elites in Australia, Britain, Canada, New Zealand, and South Africa understand their Westminster system. It examines in detail four interrelated features of Westminster systems. Firstly, the increasing centralisation in collective, responsible cabinet government. Second, the constitutional convention of ministerial and collective responsibility. Third, the role of a professional, non-partisan public service. And finally, parliament's relationship to the executive. The authors explain the changes that have occured in the Westminster model by analysing four traditions: royal prerogative, responsible government, constitutional bureaucracy, and representative government. They suggest that each tradition has a recurring dilemma, between centralisation and decentralisation, party government and ministerial responsibility, professionalisation and politicisation, and finally elitism and participation. They go on to argue that these dilemmas recur in four present-day debates: the growth of prime ministerial power, the decline in individual and collective ministerial accountability, politicisation of the public service, and executive dominance of the legislature. They conclude by identifying five meanings of - or narratives about - Westminster. Firstly, 'Westminster as heritage' - elite actors' shared governmental narrative understood as both precedents and nostalgia. Second, 'Westminster as political tool' - the expedient cloak worn by governments and politicians to defend themselves and criticise opponents. Third, 'Westminster as legitimising tradition' - providing legitimacy and a context for elite actions, serving as a point of reference to navigate this uncertain world. Fourth, 'Westminster as institutional category' - it remains a useful descriptor of a loose family of governments with shared origins and characteristics. Finally, 'Westminster as an effective political system' - it is a more effective and efficient political system than consensual parliamentary governments. Westminster is a flexible family of ideas that is useful for many purposes and survives, even thrives, because of its meaning in use to élite actors.

The study of political institutions is among the founding pillars of political science. With the rise of the 'new institutionalism', the study of institutions has returned to its place in the sun. This volume provides a comprehensive survey of where we are in the study of political institutions, covering both the traditional concerns of political science with constitutions, federalism and bureaucracy and more recent interest in theory and the constructed nature of institutions. The Oxford Handbook of Political Institutions draws together a galaxy of distinguished contributors drawn from leading universities across the world. Authoritative reviews of the literature and assessments of future research directions will help to set the research agenda for the next decade.

This book explores the roles and workings of the heads of government departments in six nations: departmental secretaries in Australia, departmentschefs in Denmark, directeurs d'administration in France, secretaris-generaal in the Netherlands, chief executives in New Zealand, and permanent secretaries in the UK. It also seeks to explore their 'infinite variety' by showing how inherited government traditions shape the response to reform. It examines how such reforms as privatization and contracting out have affected who does these jobs and how they do them. It asks whether the demands of the new public management have made departmental heads more accountable, more public and more vulnerable. For each of the six countries the authors give details of departmental secretaries' backgrounds, their career paths, their conditions of employment, their impacts, and their changing positions. Central to each chapter are short biographies or portraits of top officials with extensive quotations from interviews in which they talk about how they see their worlds and how, for instance, they now focus more on managing their departments and less on policy-making. The experience of senior public servants is brought vividly to life. This book is the first comprehensive, comparative portrait of top government officials, and is an important resource for students and scholars of politics, public policy and public management, and makes fascinating reading for all senior civil servants themselves.

Understanding Governance asks:* What has changed in British government over the past two decades, how and why?* Why do so many government policies fail?* What does the shift from government to governance mean for the practice and study of British government? This book provides a challenging reinterpretation which interweaves an account of recent institutional changes in central, local and European Union government with methodological innovations and theoretical analysis. It emphasizes: the inability of the 'Westminster model', with its accent on parliamentary sovereignty and strong executive leadership, to account for persistent policy failure; the 'hollowing out' of British government from above (the European Union), below (special purpose bodies) and sideways (to agencies); and the need to respond to the postmodern challenge, rethinking the methodological and theoretical assumptions in the study of British government. Professor Rhodes makes a significant and timely contribution to our understanding of government and governance.