Portuguese public administration has undergone successive waves of administrative reform, marked by the paradigmatic sequence from Traditional Public Administration (TPA) to New Public Management (NPM), New Public Governance (NPG), and digital era governance (DG), described as the analytical successor to NPM and as competing public governance paradigms (Dunleavy et al., 2006; Torfing et al., 2020). In contexts shaped by the Napoleonic administrative tradition, normative codification and entrenched professional cultures tend to moderate or resist these pressures for change, generating hybrid organizational forms and competing institutional logics. How such paradigmatic shifts are enacted, rather than merely adopted on paper, remains a significant gap in the comparative public management literature. This study examines the extent to which a central public administration agency under direct ministerial supervision has effectively undergone, or merely formally adopted, this paradigmatic sequence, and how the management models adopted have reshaped its organisational logic. The case holds particular analytical interest: a strongly institutionalised structure with restricted access specialised careers recently exposed to organic restructuring and digital transformation under a national recovery programme. Rooted in the Napoleonic tradition shared by Southern and Central Europe, it offers potential for generalisation beyond Portugal. The study pursues three objectives: (i) the role of key actors in implementing or resisting institutional change; (ii) how management practices and instruments are appropriated or translated in daily organisational life; and (iii) the actual impact of these models on organisational logic. The theoretical framework draws on institutional logics theory (Thornton & Ocasio, 1999), management practice translation (Czarniawska & Joerges, 1996) and collective institutional entrepreneurship (Battilana et al., 2009; Pimentel, et al., 2023). Methodologically, the study adopts a longitudinal qualitative case study design (Yin, 2018), drawing on semi-structured interviews, systematic documentary analysis, organic statutes and regulatory instruments, and indirect observation. Data analysis follows qualitative content analysis (Miles & Huberman, 1994), with thematic categorisation and cross-source triangulation. The expected contributions address gaps in the literature: the lack of longitudinal studies on the hybridisation of management logics in Portuguese public agencies (Secchi et al., 2025); the role of key actors in appropriating or resisting management practices (Pimentel et al., 2023); and the effective impacts of management models on organisational logic (Torfing et al., 2024). Aligned with the NFM 2026 Conference, the study presents theoretical and practical implications of relevance to the comparative public management literature and to decision-makers and public managers operating in contexts of accelerated administrative reform. References Battilana, J., Leca, B., & Boxenbaum, E. (2009). How actors change institutions: Towards a theory of institutional entrepreneurship. Academy of Management Annals, 3(1), 65–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520903053598 Czarniawska, B., & Joerges, B. (1996). Travels of ideas. In B. Czarniawska & G. Sevón (Eds.), Translating organizational change (pp. 13–48). de Gruyter. Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S., & Tinkler, J. (2006). New public management is dead—Long live digital-era governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16(3), 467–494. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mui057 Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications. Pimentel, L., Major, M., & Cruz, A. (2023). Collective action in institutional entrepreneurship: The case of a government agency. Emerging Science Journal, 7(2), 538–557. https://doi.org/10.28991/ESJ-2023-07-02-017 Secchi, L., Caeiro, J. C., Pinto, R. R., & Arenilla Sáez, M. (2025). Administrative reforms in Portugal and Spain: From bureaucracy to digital transition. International Journal of Public Administration, 48(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523241250314 Thornton, P. H., & Ocasio, W. (1999). Institutional logics and the historical contingency of power in organizations: Executive Succession in the Higher Education Publishing Industry, 1958– 1990. American Journal of Sociology, 105(3), 801–843. https://doi.org/10.1086/210361 Torfing, J., Andersen, L. B., Greve, C., & Klausen, K. K. (2020). Public governance paradigms: Competing and co-existing. Edward Elgar Publishing. Torfing, J., Andersen, L. B., Greve, C., & Klausen, K. K. (2024). Developing New Public Governance as a public management reform model. Public Management Review, 26(11), 3040–3056. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2024.2313539 Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.

--

Public management models,Institutional logics,Organisational change,Institutional entrepreneurship,Portuguese public administration.