Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Developments in public management theory

50+ years of public management theory. A history of public management theory as it applies to public administration.

Related Audiobooks

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all
  • Be the first to comment

Developments in public management theory

  1. 1. Developments in Public Management Theory Public Management Theory Evolution Adrienne A Wallace February 26, 2013
  2. 2.  1911 Principles of Scientific Management ◦ Processes and outcomesTaylor
  3. 3.  1937 major functions of management POSDCORB ◦ Planning ◦ Organizing ◦ Staffing ◦ Directing ◦ Coordinating ◦ Reporting ◦ BudgetingGulick
  4. 4.  1938 Acceptance Theory of Authority ◦ Does management take authority? ◦ Is it earned?Barnard
  5. 5.  Group of studies in the late 1920/30‟s Worker behavior affected by communication principles Researchers hypothesized: ◦ that choosing ones own coworkers ◦ working as a group ◦ being treated as ◦ having a sympathetic supervisor ◦ equal to productivity increaseHawthorne Effect
  6. 6.  Theory X (managerial oversight) vs. Theory Y (integrated individual and org goals) Group/organizational Theory Role Theory Communication Theory50’s, 60’s Middle-Range Theories
  7. 7. Theory X & Theory Y
  8. 8. Traditional vs. New Management
  9. 9. Theory X & Theory Y Simplified
  10. 10. Group Theory
  11. 11. Organizational Theory
  12. 12. Role Theory
  13. 13. Communication Theory
  14. 14.  Five different types of communication ◦ Interpersonal ◦ Dyadic ◦ Small Group ◦ Public ◦ MassCommunication Theory
  15. 15. Laswell, 1948
  16. 16. Shannon-Weaver, 1948-49
  17. 17. Interactive Model, 1948-49
  18. 18. Osgood Schramm, 1954
  19. 19. 1) Draw your ideal model of communication as a manager of public administration.2) OR, describe it in 2-3 sentences.3) Emphasize preferred methods of command and feedback.4) Explain and share.Activity
  20. 20.  Doctrines of Administration Public Management Theory Entrepreneurial Public Management New Public Management (NPM) ◦ New Managerialism70’s, 80’s, 90’s
  21. 21. 1) Ubiquitous (found everywhere)2) Based on “soft data” and “soft logic”3) Constantly shifting “received view” or “received wisdom”4) Often contradictory5) Unstable, changes with society6) Rotate (aka fashion)Hood & Jackson, 1991
  22. 22.  Hood & Jackson‟s doctrines become NPM Result in government that is: ◦ Better (for whom? Debated) ◦ Cleaner ◦ More efficient ◦ More professional ◦ Larger, more expensiveNew Public Management (NPM)
  23. 23.  Structural devolution and decentralization Vertical coordination and autonomy within single agency Managerialism and management techniques Contractualism, privatization, and entrepreneurship Market-driven techniques, competition, and citizens as customers Against the Weberian theory Deregulation and market transactions Performance management and outputMajor Ideas of NPM
  24. 24.  Fragmentation of roles and role ambiguity as a result of structural devolution Expansion of single-purpose organizations and vertical specialization Neglecting cooperation across agencies Excessive managerial autonomy Discontinuities and nonlinearities Undermining political control, creating mistrust, producing role ambiguityConsequences of NPM
  25. 25.  Where politic meets administration. Involves visionary skill – look beyond needs to create value Study of what leaders do rather than management theories. “The manager does things right; the leader does the right thing” (Bennis, 2003) ◦ Too much management not enough leadership ◦ Uses group theory and communication theory  Should do adaptive work  Tough under authoritative ruleLeadership
  26. 26.  “government by proxy” “third party government” “the hollow state” “indirect government” 1/6th of total federal spending on contract workContract
  27. 27. 1) Project can be clearly and precisely described for purposes of negotiation and compliance.2) Desired outcomes can be measured and identified.3) Penalties are imposed for noncompliance4) Contractors maybe discontinued or changedPrivatization Successful
  28. 28.  Information and communication technologies ◦ Reduce corruption ◦ Increase competition ◦ Collaborative in nature ◦ Facilitate improved communication ◦ Increase participation ◦ Promote transparency via E-government/Social Media  Contractor  GovernmentAccountability & Transparency
  29. 29.  NPM grounded in observations Difficult to replicate Not thought of as „scientific‟ Methods are transferrable * NPM more efficiency (output) than effective (outcome) Consider differences between day-to-day problems and long-term societal problems Paradigm is in troubleRisks and Returns
  30. 30.  JUG: joined up government (2003) WG: whole of government (1990‟s) More holistic strategy Using insights from the other social sciences, rather than just economics Designed to “get a grip” on wicked problems Presented as opposite of departmentalism, tunnel vision, and vertical silos„ Entails: ◦ Strong political control ◦ Reaching out to society via user forums and participation ◦ Enabling individual and organized private actors in civil society ◦ Representative government ◦ Public-private partnerships with NPO/NGO inclusion ◦ Networks ◦ Environmentally consciousPost-New Public Management
  31. 31.  Reducing fragmentation through structural integration Asserting recentralization and re-regulation Whole-of-government or joined-up government initiatives Eliminating role ambiguity and creating clear role relationships Private-public partnerships Increased centralization, capacity building, and coordination Strengthening central political and administrative capacity Paying attention to environmental, historical, and cultural elementsMajor Ideas Post-NPM
  32. 32.  Both assume public employees are accountable for: ◦ implementing management goals ◦ change initiatives. Employees are expected to: ◦ comply with new rules, procedures, and incentives ◦ be motivated by these external variables [“because I said so”]Accountability, Performance, &Trust Under NPM & Post-NPM
  33. 33.  What if this isn‟t the case? Where do we go from here in public management theory?Now what?
  34. 34.  Bertot, J.C., Jaeger, P. T., & Grimes, J. M. (2012). Promoting transparency and accountability through ICTs, social media, and collaborative e-government. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 6(1), 78-91. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17506161211214831 Christensen, Tom, and Per Lægreid. "Democracy and Administrative Policy: Contrasting Elements of New Public Management (NPM) and Post-NPM." European Political Science Review : EPSR 3.1 (2011): 125-46. ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection. Web. 26 Feb. 2013. 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. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mui057 Frederickson, H.G., Smith, K.B., Larimer, C.W., & Licari, M.J. (2012). The public administration theory primer. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Fu, K. (2012). The interaction of politics and management in public leadership: Measuring public political skill and assessing its effects. (The Florida State University). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, 132. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1095719509?accountid=15099. (1095719509). Girth, A. M. (2010). Accountability and discretion in the age of contracting: When and why do public managers implement sanctions for unsatisfactory contract performance? (The American University). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, 223. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/762408559?accountid=15099. (762408559). Gudelis, D., & Guogis, A. (2011). Integrating public and business management: A model of interaction between public and private sectors. International Review on Public and Non - Profit Marketing, 8(1), 1-9. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12208-010-0063-4. Jong, S. Jun. "The Limits of Post-New Public Management and Beyond." Public administration review 69.1 (2009): 161-5.ProQuest Business Collection; ProQuest Psychology Journals; ProQuest Research Library; ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection. Web. 26 Feb. 2013. Kelley, T. M., & Johnston, E. (2012). Discovering the appropriate role of serious games in the design of open governance platforms. Public Administration Quarterly, 36(4), 504-554. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1288363981?accountid=15099. Luke, B., Kearins, K., & Martie-Louise Verreynne. (2011). The risks and returns of new public management: Political business. The International Journal of Public Sector Management, 24(4), 325-355. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09513551111133489. Levitt, Steven, D. and List, John, A. (2011) "Was there really a Hawthorne Effect at the Hawthorne Plant? an Analysis of the Original Illumination Experiments." American Economic Journal Applied Economics 3.1 : 224-38. ProQuest Business Collection.Web. Masumi R. Izawa, Michael D. French, and Alan Hedge (2011). Shining New Light on the Hawthorne Illumination Experiments Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society October 2011 53: 528-547,doi:10.1177/0018720811417968 Westbrook, M. A. (2012). Building an architecture for leadership development. Public Manager, 41(3), 60-63. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1047052590?accountid=15099.References

    Be the first to comment

    Login to see the comments

  • koiralapn

    Nov. 3, 2016
  • MalisUMEN

    Dec. 3, 2016

50+ years of public management theory. A history of public management theory as it applies to public administration.

Views

Total views

6,087

On Slideshare

0

From embeds

0

Number of embeds

10

Actions

Downloads

502

Shares

0

Comments

0

Likes

2

×