As a reaction to the ‘mediatised society’, strategic communication is given increasing importance by governments throughout Western Democracies. As a response to this development, governments recruit advisers from outside the civil service to assist and provide advice on communication matters. Whereas special advisors are typically considered responsible for communication advice to ministers, we know very little on how government communication relates to policy making as the core activity of ministries. The proposed paper addresses this research gap by investigating the division of labor between the permanent secretary - as the formal prime adviser on policymaking - and the special advisers. The division of labor is conceptualized in a politicization perspective. Firstly, we expect that the more the permanent secretaries are functionally politicized, the more they are inclined to engage in government communication. They are highly engaged in policy advice and in other activities, which require both fachkompetenz skills and insight into the sphere and game of politics and the media. As a consequence we expect special advisers ‘merely’ supplement communication advice. Secondly, we expect that the more the permanent secretaries are placed in a formally politicized politico- administrative system including politically appointed civil servants and special advisers, the permanent secretaries are less likely to preserve their role as the prime adviser of the minister including advice etc. on government communication. As a consequence we expect that special advisers are engaged in communication advice, as well as advice on policy-making. The paper compares Germany and Denmark representing different politicization profiles. The paper includes data on the organization and recruitment of special advisers and interviews with permanent secretaries and special advisers.
