scholarly journals New Public Management and Governance: Quo Vadis?

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 430
Author(s):  
Vasilios P. Andrikopoulos ◽  
Amalia Α. Ifanti
Keyword(s):  
Public Service ◽  
Service Provision ◽  
Public Management ◽  
New Public Management ◽  
Public Governance ◽  
Sector Reform ◽  
Organizational Conditions ◽  
Governance Regime ◽  
New Public ◽  
Quo Vadis

This paper seeks to provide an overview of the literature regarding contemporary public management and administration. For this purpose, New Public Management and New Public Governance principles and methods are explored, since they remain the dominant approaches to public management and governance regime. A systematic examination of the relevant discourse was carried out. Data analysis revealed that the theoretical schemes continue to emphasize the priority of management over public service. As a result, the New Public Service approach is revisited focusing primarily on the reinterpretation and reorientation of public service provision. This study enriches our theoretical and practical understanding by providing important reflections and insights about the organizational conditions of public sector reform that is proceeding nowadays.

Hybrid stimulations and perversions in public service innovation

2021 ◽  
pp. 095207672110150
Author(s):  
Mette Sønderskov ◽  
Rolf Rønning ◽  
Siv Magnussen
Keyword(s):  
Public Service ◽  
Public Management ◽  
Service Sector ◽  
New Public Management ◽  
Service Innovation ◽  
Illustrative Case ◽  
Public Governance ◽  
The Public ◽  
New Public ◽  
Theoretical Paper

Innovation has been highlighted as a magic formula that can solve deep-seated, emerging complex social and economic problems in the public service sector. However, public innovation efforts face both drivers and barriers. Innovation depends on context, and currently different competing governance paradigms’ influence has attracted growing academic and political interest regarding the potential of public service innovation. Today, new public governance (NPG) has been suggested as an alternative paradigm to classic public administration (CPA) and new public management (NPM), as the focus of attention has shifted from traditional hierarchical forms of government and market-based competition strategies to interactive- and collaborative-based governance. In this paper, we discuss how elements from different governance paradigms interact, support and undermine one another in terms of innovation in hybrid organisations. Although hybridisation has been described in extant studies on administrative welfare reforms, it barely has been examined in the public innovation literature. This is a theoretical paper based on a scoping review; however, we use the Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration (NAV) as an illustrative case to explain how hybridisation may lead to both stimulations and perversions regarding the development, implementation and spread of public service innovation. Finally, the paper reflects on how public leaders can handle hybridity within their organisational units.

scholarly journals A Comparative Analysis of Contemporary Public Management Concepts in Thailand

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chaiyanant Panyasiri
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Public Service ◽  
Public Management ◽  
New Public Management ◽  
Public Governance ◽  
Evolution And Development ◽  
New Public ◽  
Management Concepts ◽  
New Public Governance

The main purpose of this article is to explore the competing concepts and perspectives in modern Public Management literatures including: New Public Management (NPM), New Public Governance (NPG) and New Public Service (NPS) and to compare the viability of these concepts toward public sectors of Thailand. The method of study relies mostly on documentary research on influential academic writings from well-known Public Administration theorists. This article explores these modern PA concepts in terms of rationale, assumptions, discursive aspects, evolution and development, strengths and limitations, applicability and so on.The result of the study shows dimensional comparison between various contemporary public management perspectives, including NPM, NPG and NPS in their theoretical backgrounds, perspectives and solutions on public governance in Thailand. Based on the results of the study, to properly adopt these competing modern Public Management concepts, Thailand should pursue a “hybrid” style of public management consisting of all elements from those three modern PA perspectives namely, NPM, NPG and NPS, plus Thai national value of moral and professionalism. The key to the sustainability of Thailand is to retain traditional value that is proven to be relevant and supportive of the responsive and participating form of public governance and to keep up with the postmodernist characteristics of the 21st century.

Agencification and Location

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Morten Egeberg ◽  
Jarle Trondal
Keyword(s):  
Public Management ◽  
New Public Management ◽  
Government Agencies ◽  
Public Governance ◽  
Large N ◽  
New Public

Chapter 7 offers a large-N study on whether the geographical location of government agencies affects public governance. Two decades of New Public Management have placed agencification high on the agenda of administrative policymakers. Moreover, agencies organized at arm’s length from ministerial departments have sometimes also been located outside of the capital or political centre. Although practitioners tend to assign weight to location as regards political-administrative behaviour, this relationship has been largely ignored by scholars in the field. This chapter shows that agency autonomy, agency influence, and inter-institutional coordination seem to be relatively unaffected by agency site. The chapter also specifies some conditions under which this finding is valid.

Political Steering and Bureaucratic Autonomy

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Morten Egeberg ◽  
Jarle Trondal
Keyword(s):  
Public Management ◽  
New Public Management ◽  
Organizational Capacity ◽  
The Political ◽  
Questionnaire Data ◽  
Public Governance ◽  
Bureaucratic Autonomy ◽  
Large N ◽  
New Public ◽  
Political Steering

This chapter draws attention to the effects of vertical specialization of organizations and how it affects public governance. The chapter documents that agency officials pay significantly less attention to signals from executive politicians than their counterparts within ministerial (cabinet-level) departments. This finding also holds when controlling for variation in tasks, the political salience of issue areas, and officials’ rank. In addition, it is documented that the greater the organizational capacity available within the respective ministerial departments, the more agency personnel tend to assign weight to signals from the political leadership. Expert concerns are strongly emphasized at both levels; however, agency personnel are more sensitive to the influence of affected parties. The chapter applies large-N questionnaire data at four points in time (1986, 1996, 2006, and 2016) that spans three decades and shifting administrative doctrines: New Public Management as well as post-New Public Management.

scholarly journals Bringing the Law Back in the Law-Government Nexus in an Era of Network Governance

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stavros Zouridis ◽  
Vera Leijtens
Keyword(s):  
Public Management ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
New Public Management ◽  
Network Governance ◽  
Public Institutions ◽  
Management Theory ◽  
Public Governance ◽  
The Public ◽  
New Public ◽  
The Law

Abstract Recently, scholars have claimed that public management theory has too much ignored law. Consequently, the under-legalized conception of public management has produced a flawed understanding of public management theory as well as public management practices, threatening public institutions’ legitimacy. In this article, we argue that law never left public management theory. Rather, the link between government and law has been redefined twice. We refer to the assumptions that constitute this link as the law-government nexus. This nexus changed from lawfulness in a public administration paradigm, to legal instrumentalism in a (new) public management paradigm, and to a networked concept in the public governance (PG) paradigm. In order to prevent a faulty over-legalized conception of public management, bringing the law back in should be built on lessons from the past. This article elaborates on three strategies to reconnect law and public management. We map the strengths and weaknesses of each law-government nexus and illustrate these with the case of the Dutch tax agency. In our strategies that aim to reconceptualize the current law-government nexus, we incorporate the benefits of each paradigm for public management theory. The revised law-governance nexus enables the PG paradigm to correspond to contemporary issues without encountering old pathologies.

Co-design and action learning in local public services

2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 58-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ilpo Laitinen ◽  
Tony Kinder ◽  
Jari Stenvall
Keyword(s):  
Public Management ◽  
Service Management ◽  
Public Services ◽  
New Public Management ◽  
Action Learning ◽  
Social Activity ◽  
Analytical Framework ◽  
Public Governance ◽  
Local Public Services ◽  
New Public

The paper argues that from a new public governance and service management perspective, local public services are best conceptualised as service systems in which users co-produce and co-design; this differentiates public from private services, which have lower of trust and shared values resulting in a goods-dominant logic and are an alternative to the new public management viewpoint. Referencing new case studies from Finland and Scotland, we further argue that for local public servicesʼn co-production as an action- learning environment supports and encourages co-design: this makes local public services a special case of codesign. Analysing the two cases of co-design, we argue that since public services are subject to public scrutiny, and since design is a social activity, there exists a wider democratic footprint. Finally, we argue that co-design of local public services is best analysed from the perspective of action learning, for which we suggest an analytical framework.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document