Highly qualified personnel in technical fields like building engineers, architects, geodesists, or environmental engineers are difficult to recruit for work in the public sector – it is even more difficult to motivate and prepare them for leadership roles in public administration. In the highly regulated public employment system of Germany, there exists a special career for technical staff in the ‘higher public service’, i.e. the highest level of German civil service system. After their disciplinary study in the respective fields of natural science and engineering, prospective civil servants have to complete a preparatory stage (Referendariat) of two years, where – besides practical work in different positions of the public sector – they get a basic training in public administration and management with public administration fundamentals, public law, leadership and public economics as core elements of the curriculum which are tested in a central state examination (Große Staatsprüfung).

The design of such a curriculum is especially challenging, as persons with a technical background have a mindset different from other public personnel and the public sector is often not the original career option at the beginning of their studies. The knowledge of the public sector is often quite rudimentary. In addition, the technical study programs procure them with only marginal expertise in areas as law and management. Therefore, with entering in the preparatory stage, they are confronted with threefold social, cognitive and action-based challenges: They have to find their roles in coping with other (esp. legal and economic) rationalities, they have to acquire PA-basic skills in a rather short time, and finally have to develop practical competencies to take over leadership roles after their state examination.

The paper reports results from a repeated action research which was conducted with six cohorts (2019 to 2024) in a four-weeks seminar for public engineers in the second half of their preparatory stage. In small-group discussions, participants were asked to identify the biggest individual challenges for the take-over of leadership roles in public contexts at the beginning of the seminar. In the course of the four weeks they had to develop a proposal, how these specific challenges could be addressed by the seminar itself, but also the design of the whole preparatory stage. Through all six cohorts, the main challenges remained quite stable, but the developed proposals changed.

The paper analyses this unique material with a focus on group composition and group dynamics, changes in the curriculum, and varying contexts (esp. reduced practical experiences through the pandemic). It develops proposals to improve leadership training for this specific target group which should not only enhance the individuals’ skills, but make the choice for a career in the public sector more attractive by the reduction of doubts and insecurities of the future demands of the jobs they face.

While the training and daily business of the bureaucracy is in many ways characterized by routines, in the turn of recent crises - the “polycrisis” - institutional structures and governing dynamics are challenged, and new duties and obligations emerge for public administrators on all levels. To maintain a high performance during crises, public personnel needs to be prepared and trained for such “non-routine” situations.

The proposed paper focuses on this challenge, asking which implications for teaching PA emerge. More specifically, we discuss a) how far and which depth and scope crisis management is covered in current curricula in higher education institutions in the EU, b) the role of administrative learning and knowledge management, c) which adjustments (methods, content etc.) are needed against the backdrop of the current polycrisis, and d) which role executive trainings may play.

The study is based on document analysis as well as on the analysis of data from several large-N surveys and complementary interviews with Austrian and German bureaucrats conducted on crisis management (including the refugee crisis in 2015 and currently related to the Ukraine war, several waves of Covid-19, as well as natural disasters) on the local level by the author.

The paper aims to discuss the potential role of the universities in building competencies of future public sector professionals and strengthening capacities of public governance institutions to be resilient facing different types of crisis, which are fueled by rapid and unpredictable changes that affect the capacities of public organizations to deliver accessible and high quality public services. In contemporary societies universities are playing a triple role; besides education and research they are actively implementing a third mission which emphasizes cooperation with society and acceleration of social change by strengthening capacities of society in general and public governance in particular, to build resilience, to operate efficiently, adapt to changing environment and provide public services that meet the needs and expectations of citizens.

This paper will present the various perspectives and practices on how universities are building capacities for public sector resilience in changing environments: Public Administration Programs for building competencies of future public sector professionals: What are the competencies that are essential for resilient future public sector professionals? What are the curriculum activities for providing students with these competencies? How are higher education institutions contributing to capacity building of public sector institutions through trainings of public sector professionals? What are the methods and innovations in developing and providing trainings for public administration professionals?