{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020644511581067473, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002014098690835851, 'mean_word_length': 5.69023569023569, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The challenges of coordination in national security management – the case of the terrorist attack in Norway

The article addresses a ‘wicked problem’: Organizing for internal security and societal safety. It examines the central emergency and crisis management under the terrorist attack in Norway in July 2011, with a special focus on the coordinating role of the Ministry of Justice (MJ). Our analysis is based on an in-depth qualitative analysis of relevant official documents and interviews with government officials, using a structural-instrumental and a cultural-institutional perspective to understand outcomes. There is a consensus when it comes to diagnosing the problems, identified as fragmentation, pulverization of accountability and weak coordination arrangements. The organizational changes have been cautious and incremental, however. A gradual upgrading of the MJ as an overarching coordinating ministry does not challenge the existing principles of ministerial responsibility. Suggested solutions are beset with ambiguity and conflicts, and there is a mismatch between problems and available solutions. Points for practitioners Challenges of coordination are evident in modern public administration, related to both vertical and horizontal coordination, and particularly so within the field of internal security and crisis management. New Public Management (NPM)-related reforms have created further coordination problems, especially in policy areas and public services that cross sector boundaries. New arrangements, labeled post-NPM reforms, have tried to counter the alleged increasing fragmentation. The challenges are quite evident when it comes to crisis management, where a combination of organizing for coordination and flexibility is necessary. Major crises do not always lead to radical changes, however. Instrumental and formal changes are often mediated by the existing culture. The result is a rather hybrid and multi-layered modern public administration.