01909pab a2200229 454500008004000000100002100040245006800061260000900129300001500138362000800153520120400161650002601365650002601391650001901417650001901436650002601455700001801481773004501499909001101544999001901555952010501574180718b2018   xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d  aChristensen, Tom  aReputation management in societal security: a comparative study  c2018  ap.119-132.  aFeb  aSocietal security poses fundamental challenges for the doctrines of accountability and transparency in government. At least some of the national security state?s effectiveness requires a degree of non-transparency, raising questions about legitimacy. This article explores in cross-national and cross-sectoral perspective, how organizations seek to manage their reputation by accounting for their activities. This article contributes in three main ways. First, it highlights how distinct tasks facilitate and constrain certain reputation management strategies. Second, it suggests that these reputational considerations shape the way in which organizations can give account. Third, it considers three domains associated with societal security, namely intelligence, flood defense, and food safety, in five European countries with different state traditions?the United Kingdom, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, and Norway. By using a ?web census,? this article investigates cross-sectoral and cross-national variation in the way organizations seek to account for their activities and manage their reputation. This article finds variation across tasks to be more dominant than national variation. - Reproduced  aReputation management  aSecrecy in government  aTransportation  aAccountability  aPublic administration  aLodge, Martin  aAmerican Review of Public Administration  a117092  c117086d117086  00104070aIIPAbIIPAd2018-07-19hVolume no: 48, Issue no: 2pAR117552r2018-07-19w2018-07-19yAR