User ID Password  
New user? Forgot password or login?

 
Join APSA
Donate
Donate

Dissertation Awards
Gabriel A. Almond Award
William Anderson Award
Edward S. Corwin Award
Harold D. Lasswell Award
2004 Harold D. Lasswell Award
2005 Harold D. Lasswell Award
2006 Harold D. Lasswell Award
Harold D. Lasswell Award Winners
2007 Harold D. Lasswell Award
Helen Dwight Reid Award
E.E. Schattschneider Award
Leo Strauss Award
Leonard D. White Award
 
 

home › About APSA  › Awards  › Dissertation Awards 

2004 Harold D. Lasswell Award
Printer-friendly format

For the best doctoral dissertation completed and accepted in 2002 or 2003 in the field of policy studies.

2004 Award Committee: Amy Bridges, University of California, San Diego, chair; Nicole E. Johnson, University of South Florida, St. Petersburg; R. Shep Melnick, Boston College.

Recipient: Suzanne Christine Nielsen, Harvard University

Dissertation: "Preparing for War: The Dynamics of Peacetime Military Reform"

Dissertation Chair: Stephen Peter Rosen, Harvard University

Citation: Suzanne Nielson's dissertation addresses a question that is both perennial and of great contemporary importance: how can a large army achieve fundamental reform during times of peace? She argues that the impetus for reform must come from within the military, not be imposed on it by civilians; that comprehensive change requires support from an organizational entity that has broad authority reaching nearly every corner of the army; and that reforms must be institutionalized in the details of training practices, personnel policies, and leadership development programs.

Nielson develops these themes in a rich, detailed investigation of the transformation of the U.S. Army in the 1970s and early 1980s. She combines extensive use of military documents, oral histories, congressional hearings, specialized publications, and the secondary literature with an impressive understanding of the operation of military organizations. Nielson supplements her examination of the U.S. Army with short case studies on the French army before World War I and the British and German armies between the wars.

Nielson demonstrates the usefulness of applying insights gained from analysis of domestic policymaking to the realm of the military. She also helps us understand how training and personnel practices help shape a complex bureaucracy's sense of mission, an intangible factor of central importance for comprehensive organizational reform. In the process she manages to make a complex story understandable to those who are not experts on military policy.