Multi-dimensional problems facing Weberian bureaucracy (WB) are increasingly seen as “wicked”. Analytically, the concept of “wicked problems” stresses the interplay of simultaneous high degrees of complexity, uncertainty and conflict (CUC). “Complexity” refers to interdependent policy subsystems and actors for problems solving “Uncertainty” reflects high degrees of contested, uncertain or “non-knowledge” in the respective area, whereas “conflict” highlights antagonistic values and world views on how to solve or even to define the policy problem in question. CUC challenges usually counteract classical Weberian features such as division of labor, conflicting with the need for “joint” responses; management by rules, inhibiting reflexivity and thus organizational learning; and unambiguous hierarchy, encountering participation and consensus-oriented bargaining processes. In organization theorist’s perspective, “wicked problems” present a three-dimensional challenge to the problem-solving capacity of WB: 1. Ensure “positive coordination” despite complexity; 2. Ensure professional expertise despite uncertainty; 3. Ensure input and output legitimacy despite conflict. Addressing “wicked” challenges to WB presents a fertile ground for cross-disciplinary research. Hence, our paper analyzes in depth how public administration in Germany copes with food safety hazards, constituting, as was illustrated by the BSE crisis, such a three dimensional “wicked” challenge as outlined above. In the wake of crisis, in 2001/2002, the German federal food safety administration was radically reorganized. Our research question is why and under which conditions this reorganization effectively changed intra- and interorganizational, horizontal and vertical coordination patterns within the policy field. Special attention is given to the role of expertise in decision making processes, mechanisms of knowledge gathering and transfer, hence to the handling of uncertainty. Theoretically, we apply a dual perspective borrowing ideas and arguments from both policy analysis and new institutionalist organization theory. Methodically, our study is based on semi-structured expert interviews and case studies of two different time-dimension profiles (short- and long-term food hazards).
