Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.


New Public Management

No description

Adib Chowdhury

on 7 December 2012

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of New Public Management

To what extent has the ‘new public management’ become a universal doctrine? Based on American economics and competitive capitalism
“The goal is no longer to protect society from the market's demands but to protect the market from society's demands.” Cohn 1997

Not so successful in countries with taditional bureacracies like Germany, Japan and China ... Osborne and Gaebler’s ten principles B Guy Peters, [2001]
3 primary causes for scepticism amongst N.P.M

Citizens increasingly wary of power of bureaucracy even in countries that have benevolent governments like in the UK

In heavily bureaucratized countries like Cuba and China, the desire for rapid economic progress has dictated substantial de-bureaucratization

A popular resistance to public organisations stemming from failure of social and educational programs So why not Universal? Bureaucracy tends to be more powerful in non-democratic regimes

A dictator cannot rule without officials

Incredibly elitist and sometimes nepotism rife

Leads to bloated and over-politicized systems that become a burden to progress and corruption often common Public management in authoritarian states In US, Spoils system continued

US saw civil service in European style as elitist

Focussed more on efficiency and enterprise- as seen by Osborne and Gaebler’s points

Open to most people, not as elitist as European system The U.S Germany and Denmark- countries with a tradition of codified law tend to favour lawyers and specialists

Legal training still seen as essential amongst higher bureaucrats

Hire from areas of expertise rather than elite civil service e.g. Finance Ministry recruits economists and Health- staff with medical degrees

Over 60% of top civil servants are lawyers compared to 20% in US Europe In Europe following the Pendleton Act created the Civil Service- merit based system created in reaction to the monarchy

Traditional views of positions of responsibility and where they lie still prevalent

Post War and rise of the welfare state. New larger state apparatus needed

Rules began to be set in place with regards to pensions etc.

Margret Thatcher- reforms. Move away from Weberian style to focus on effective management rather than bureaucratic application to formal rules Britain market oriented management of the public sector = greater cost-efficiency for governments, without negative impact on objectives

A move towards emphasis on the networks the government has and maintaining those

Moves away from the traditionalist elitist view

General change in Bureaucratic forms post war and globalisation changed nature of these due to new interconnectedness and wider networks

Osborne and Gaebler’s 10 principles for improving effectiveness of govt. agencies What is new public management? Weber on bureaucracy Weber: influenced by the Prussian bureaucracy
Structured hierarchy

5 features:
1) carefully defined division of tasks

2) decisions are reached by applying set rules (law) to particular documents (files)

3) People recruited based on their competence

4) Officials who perform their duties can expect promotion and a secure pay

5) Bureaucracy forms a strict hierarchy where the lower official are subject to the will of the seniors In Europe- clerical servants Classic Public management New public management exists in different forms- Varies as to extent in which it has evolved

Some political cultures have not accommodated changes enough to be classified as a fully evolved N.P.M - there is resistance

Presence of traditional bureaucracies with little change= NPM. Not universal Conclusion Globalisation- push for change

forms- Varies as to extent in which it has

NPM- too American or democratic. Traditionalist systems changed but not sufficiently enough e.g. Germany

Some political cultures have not accommodated changes enough to be like American bureaucracy

Therefore, NPM not widespread enough to be universalised My View not a large state apparatus like today Under instruction of ruling monarch Elitist  Sources Cohn, D. (1997) “Creating crises and avoiding blame: the politics of public service reform
and the New Public Management in Great Britain and the United States.” Administration & Society, 29:5, pp. 580-590 Hague, R and Harrop, M, Comparative Government and Politics: An Introduction, (London, Palgrave Macmillan, 2010), OECD government at a glance indicatorshttp://www.oecd- ilibrary.org/governance/government-at-a-glance- 2011_gov_glance-2011-en Handbook of Public Administration: Concise Paperback Edition
edited by Jon Pierre, B Guy Peters (2007) Key points-
promotes competition between service providers

Citizens have more control as bureaucracy has more say in the community

Driven by goals, not rules and regulations

Authority decentralised

Prefer market mechanisms to bureaucratic ones Osborne and Gaebler’s ten principles Slowly implemented in countries with law tradition e.g Spain
Full transcript