In this special issue, we set the scene: we explain what we do in this special issue, and why. All authors analyze the 'improvement' of public managers, of their work, behavior, craft, profession. This is paradoxical: professional public managers are seen as highly important, but it is highly unclear what it means to be and act as professional public managers. We sketch four perspectives on the professionalization of public managers. They will be elaborated in the various papers: a 1) bureaucratic, 2) political, 3) strategic human resource, and 4) societal perspective. They will have to be combined to get a fuller picture of 'effective' public managers.

Functional politicization – political activities and capacities taken on by bureaucrats within their administrative function – has received increased academic attention over recent years. Regardless, the factors and determinants behind this phenomenon remain a point of uncertainty and debate. Within this study, we explore whether increased political polarization and fragmentation in the Dutch political landscape from 2007 to 2019 and functional politicization are related. To do so, we analyze data from surveys conducted in 2007, 2013 and 2019 and semi-structured interviews conducted in 2019 to establish which skills – political-strategic insight, substantive expertise (Fachwissen), or procedural knowledge (Dienstwissen) – are perceived by senior civil servants to be the most prevalent in exercising their profession. The data depicts the prevalence of political astuteness in the profession and highlights three causal dimensions: institutional, organizational, and interpersonal dynamics. It however fails to highlight a cross-time evolution, which is hypothesized to be due to a ceiling effect of this competence having constantly been perceived as the most prevalent. The latter adds a theoretical dimension to the notion of functional politicisation, as it aligns with other academic findings that suggest senior civil servants are now subject to heightened pressures due to being increasingly monitored and in the (public) spotlight.

In this paper we study the institutional impact of the Dutch senior executive service (Dutch: Algemene Bestuursdienst, hereafter: ABD) on the craft of senior civil servants in Dutch government. Our study rests upon a thorough evaluation conducted in 2020. For this study, we interviewed 51 (former) cabinet ministers, members of parliament, senior civil servants, HR experts and ‘outsiders’. We structure our paper in three parts. First, we discuss the founding principles and motives for the institutional renewal that became the ABD. Second, we discuss the ABD’s practice. Third, we signal and interpret the outcomes of the ABD so far. This results in five critical observations. We conclude the ABD has become an institutional fact. Nonetheless, the ABD could have done more to transcend the focus on individual appointments and development of collective craftmanship, and to visibly shape and protect such craftmanship.

This short essay identifies key future trends for public managers and outlines seven leadership challenges for public managers.

Employability is often framed as a win-win situation for both organizations and employees. It is therefore no surprise that governments’ management development policies usually heavily invest in the employability of public managers. Whether this approach has potential downsides for both parties has been overlooked so far. The aim of this article is to present a critical view on employability of public managers. We illustrate the added value as well as risks of employability investments by using recent Dutch data on senior civil servants. Our findings indicate that employability has benefits but that it can become ‘too much of a good thing’ leading to risks as organizational amnesia and loss of managerial credibility.

At the request of the General Administrative Service (ABD) of the Government in the Netherlands Mark Frequin developed a vision for public leadership. In his opinion it’s not about a paper-reality but about a movement to more leadership. For that reason he made a Compass for public leadership. If you want to set steps to more leadership it’s all about looking for direction. And despite what normally happens in the public sector, jumping to solutions, it’s therefore much more important to find out what are the dilemmas, the problems, the paradoxes, the puzzles…Mark is giving attention to some of them in this article: the need for more long-term-planning and at the same time short-term political promises; the importance of more knowledge in public on the one hand and the same time seeing more opinions in society and media; the information-paradox: not too much and not too little information; being in control and at the same time accepting uncertainty; and being a (civil) servant and also a (public) leader. The search for public leadership is understanding the difficulties. It’s therefore a search given the fact that there are not one-time answers.

In this article we reflect on the scientific, the administrative governmental and societal impact of Dutch public administration. We argue that this discipline has put itself strongly on the map in the last half century. Additionally, the discipline has, in line with the ethos of its founding fathers, developed itself closely in dialogue with administrative practices. This has led to many different forms of impact in the administrative-professional field. However, there is much to gain when it comes to societal impact, and in particular the visibility of public administration in the broader public debate about the many societal challenges that modern societies face.

In this paper, the athour responds to 't Hart's and Belabas' emphasis on a call for more impact, more specifically, more societal impact. First and foremost, it is important to define what societal impact means, and how it can be generated. In additon to increasing the effects of academic knowledge, it can also mean more links with societal issues, and/or more contributions to changing the societal order. This, in turn, also implies changing academic impact, namely impact on other academic disciplines. In addition, it is important to clarify 'impact pathways' when societal impact is 'made'. Impact can be visible and instantaneous, but it can also be hidden, and/or stretched in time. Public administration scholars should trave these different routes to impact, by going outside, observing grass roots processes, showcase intriguing experiences, and make subtle knowledge connections.

Recently, the construction of large datacentres has led to intense societal debate in the Netherlands. Political decision making preceding the building of these centres is usually done at a decentralized governance level. However, at that level, it appears to be challenging to balance the relevant interest with integrity, and the living environment of citizens is easily overlooked. At the core of this debate lies a systemic challenge that comes with the changing role of the local government. Driven by privatization, globalization, digital transformation and citizen emancipation, the identity of governments transforms. Consequentially, governments are not only legislators and policy makers, but also – and increasingly – business partner, shareholder and client. Local politicians struggle with combining and switching between these roles. The case of datacentres is the embodiment of these challenges, and it takes a powerful, hybrid government to address these challenges in a meaningful manner and adopt a more active role for civilians in line with the new Dutch spatial planning law. Above all, it is necessary to focus on acting as a professional and stable partner. This is not only in the interest of citizens, but also in the interest of the related private organizations.