Search Results

Control and Regulation in Public Management

Christopher Hood

in The Art of the State: Culture, Rhetoric, and Public Management

In Chapters 2–3 of the Introduction, the cultural‐theory framework is used to explore two central problems of public management—the analysis of the characteristic ways in which different forms of ... More

In Chapters 2–3 of the Introduction, the cultural‐theory framework is used to explore two central problems of public management—the analysis of the characteristic ways in which different forms of organization can collapse and fail (the last chapter), and the analysis of the range of forms of control and regulation (in the broadest sense) available in public management (this chapter); in both cases, an examination through the lens of cultural theory can add an extra dimension or an alternative perspective. Aims to build on four important insights by putting them together in a single framework that identifies a set of basic forms of regulation or control linked to a view of what makes different groups cohere. Four generic types of control and regulation in public management are discussed, each of which is loosely linked to one of the polar ways of life identified by cultural theory. The four approaches are bossism (control by oversight); choicism (control by competition); groupism (control by mutuality); and chancism, (control by contrived randomness). Each of these approaches to control and regulation can operate at several different levels of organization: i.e. they can be applied to the ways organizations control their clients, to the way control relationships operate inside organizations, and to the way organizations are themselves controlled by external forces; each is also capable of being linked to a broader view of good government and accountability, these four types will be returned to in Parts II and III of the book.Less

Doing Public Management the Egalitarian Way

Christopher Hood

in The Art of the State: Culture, Rhetoric, and Public Management

In the four chapters of Part II, public management ideas that loosely correspond to each of the four polar world views identified by cultural theory are discussed; here the cultural‐theory framework ... More

In the four chapters of Part II, public management ideas that loosely correspond to each of the four polar world views identified by cultural theory are discussed; here the cultural‐theory framework is mixed with a historical perspective to survey recurring approaches to public management that can be loosely characterized as hierarchist (Ch. 4), individualist (Ch. 5), egalitarian (this chapter), and fatalist (Ch. 7). Like individualism and hierarchism, egalitarianism embodies a particular vision of control of public management both within organizations and by the society at large, and that approach to organization can be linked to a broader vision of good government that takes groupism rather than bossism, choicism, or chancism as the point of departure or central organizing principle for co‐operative behaviour. The egalitarian approach to organization involves at least three closely interrelated elements: these are group self‐management, control by mutuality, and maximum face‐to‐face accountability. A fourth idea often associated with egalitarianism is the view that the process by which decisions are reached in an organization or group is just as important, if not more so, than the results or outcomes in a narrow sense—i.e. the achievement of the substantive policy goals of egalitarians is not held to be more important than reaching the process goal of decision‐making through high‐participation weak‐leadership structures. The main sections are: What Egalitarians Believe; The Managerial Critique of Egalitarianism; and Varieties of Egalitarianism.Less

Quebec Interculturalism and Canadian Multiculturalism

Gérard Bouchard

Nasar Meer, Tariq Modood, and Ricard Zapata-Barrero (eds)

in Multiculturalism and Interculturalism: Debating the Dividing Lines

This chapter considers how pluralism provides the general background of interculturalism, which translates into respect for human rights, support for immigration, assistance to minority languages and ... More

This chapter considers how pluralism provides the general background of interculturalism, which translates into respect for human rights, support for immigration, assistance to minority languages and cultures, wider practices of accommodation, and so forth. At the micro level, a second defining trait of interculturalism is its emphasis on exchange and interaction between citizens of all origins, with a view to activating diversity as a resource, fighting stereotypes, avoiding ‘groupism,’ and preventing social exclusion. This model of interculturalism further stresses integration as a two-way process but, in addition, is designed for societies where perceptions of ethnocultural realities are structured on the basis of a majority/minorities relationship. In this view the protection of minority rights must be reconciled with majority rights.Less

Things Fall Apart

Manujendra Kundu

in So Near, Yet So Far: Badal Sircar's Third Theatre

The problems with Third Theatre and Sircar’s way of functioning cannot go unnoticed. The reasons for the present decline of Sircar’s own group, Satabdi, and other groups following the principles of ... More

The problems with Third Theatre and Sircar’s way of functioning cannot go unnoticed. The reasons for the present decline of Sircar’s own group, Satabdi, and other groups following the principles of the Third Theatre, are attestations to this statement. The departure of old patrons, the absence of new ones, lack of interest among the new generation, shortcomings in the basic principles and actor–director relationships, and lack of innovation and contemporaneity explain why ‘Things Fall Apart’. Sircar’s detachment from his old comrades-in-arms, who set out with him in the early 1970s, turned the progress into a prosaic practice. This chapter deals with Satabdi’s group dynamics, or lack thereof, and reveals an emotional history of pain and disillusionment.Less

Niebuhr on Collective Society, Nations, and International Relations

Gregory J. Moore

in Niebuhrian International Relations: The Ethics of Foreign Policymaking

This chapter follows Niebuhr’s logic to a discussion of collective society, the state, and international relations. Niebuhr believed that moral dualism is necessary because while moral conduct such ... More

This chapter follows Niebuhr’s logic to a discussion of collective society, the state, and international relations. Niebuhr believed that moral dualism is necessary because while moral conduct such as pacifism might be possible for individuals, it is difficult to find between human collectivities (groups, states) because groupism (nationalism in the context of states) is fundamental for any group. From this flows collective pride, which the group depends on to maintain group unity, then conflict, because groups depend on groupism and pride to maintain group cohesion. Niebuhr concluded that power is the primary motivating force in international relations (IR), key to order at home and abroad, that there must by necessity be a measure of moral ambiguity in IR because what morality we might espouse at the individual level may not be practicable at the national or international level (“turning the other cheek” is plausible with Aunt Mary, but not with Hitler).Less