Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart 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.
Make your likes visible on Facebook?
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.
Public Administration Accountability: A Fundamental Approach
Transcript of Public Administration Accountability: A Fundamental Approach
Accountability Conclusion External and Formalized mechanisms
Internal Affairs Commissions
Rogers Commission All encompassing mixture of accountability mechanisms
Whitehall Model (1) Seldom, if ever does it exist where a group/individual fails to achieve an accountability structure.
(2) Holding public administrators accountable increases citizen’s satisfaction in turn helping to increase their trust in government
(3) Decentralization, deregulation, and downsizing has helped the field of public administration become more responsive and more effective, in turn developing newer mechanism of accountability
(4) Accountability is forever evolving in administration; just as it has changed in the past it will change again in the future. Public Administration Accountability:
A Fundamental Approach Political
Overview Particular and General
Internal and External
Formal and Informal
“Having the responsibility to uphold a certain level of performance based on a set of expectations outlined by another party” (Martin and Frahm, 2010, 138). Implications for
Public Administration Which accountability typology (i.e., hierarchal, political, professional and legal)
is most effective at holding public administrators in account for their actions today? I believe that no single accountability typology is any more successful than the others at holding public administrators accountable today Challenger Tragedy Freidrich and Finer
Richard Mulgan Legal Action vs.
Societal Reaction Formal and Informal mechanisms
Government Performance and Results Acts Performance reviews
Organizational directives Policy outcomes
Federal and State laws Head civil servants
Chief administrators “It’s not necessarily the hierarchy, it’s the peer group you account to it’s how you’re seen in the eyes of your colleagues it’s actually how you’re viewed by your colleagues is the thing that would drive me” External and Formalized mechanisms Responsiveness is key “The essential point is that the accountable official anticipates and responds to someone else’s agenda or expectations – ones that are beyond the scope of supervisor-subordinate obligations or professional expertise.” No two situations is public administration are ever exactly alike and thus each accountability typology and the mechanisms within are effective in their own right.
Although specific differences can be drawn between each of the four typologies, there is still an ample amount of common ground that they share with each other. I have determined that no single accountability mechanism is greater than the others at holding public administrators in account for their actions Legal > Hierarchal?
Political = Professional?