ABSTRACT

Tony Evans and Peter Hupe’s studies of discretion enable a practical analysis of the imaginative improvising required of diverse urban managers. Discretion “as granted” bounds the freedom but does not account for the complexity of context-responsive discretionary “uses.” Such responsive improvisation, no longer romanticized as spontaneous jazz, integrates careful judgments of listening, analysis, and negotiation. A narrative case analysis assesses three urban cases (of school administration, neighborhood controversy, and inter-ethnic conflict) to examine how morally sensitive, contextually responsive, practically crafted improvising takes place through distinct interpretive practices of listening for salience, analysis of relationships, and negotiated problem-solving. These findings suggest further research about accountability and possibilities revealed by this structural analysis of urban improvising.

摘要

托尼·埃文斯和彼得·休普对自由裁量权的研究能够对不同城市管理者所需的富有想象力的即兴发挥进行实际分析。“授予”的自由裁量权限制了自由，但没有考虑到上下文响应的自由裁量权“使用”的复杂性。这种反应灵敏的即兴创作不再被浪漫化为自发的爵士乐，而是融合了对聆听、分析和谈判的仔细判断。叙事案例分析评估了三个城市案例（学校管理、邻里争议和种族间冲突），以研究如何通过倾听显着性、分析关系和协商解决问题。