Christopher Hood
- Published in print:
- 2000
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780198297659
- eISBN:
- 9780191599484
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0198297653.001.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, Comparative Politics
Why does public management—the art of the state—so often go wrong, producing failure and fiasco instead of public service, and what are the different ways in which control or regulation can be ...
More
Why does public management—the art of the state—so often go wrong, producing failure and fiasco instead of public service, and what are the different ways in which control or regulation can be applied to government? Why do we find contradictory recipes for the improvement of public services, and are the forces of modernity set to produce worldwide convergence in ways of organizing government? This study aims to explore such questions, which are central to debates over public management. It combines contemporary and historical experience, and employs grid/group cultural theory as an organizing frame and method of exploration. Using examples from different places and eras, the study seeks to identify the recurring variety of ideas about how to organize public services—and contrary to widespread claims that modernization will bring a new global uniformity, it argues that variety is unlikely to disappear from doctrine and practice in public management. The book has three parts. Part I, Introductory, has three chapters that discuss various aspects of public management. Part II, Classic and Recurring Ideas in Public Management, has four chapters that discuss various ways of doing public management. Part III, Rhetoric, Modernity, and Science in Public Management, has three chapters that discuss the rhetoric, and culture of public management, contemporary public management, and the state of the art of the state.Less
Why does public management—the art of the state—so often go wrong, producing failure and fiasco instead of public service, and what are the different ways in which control or regulation can be applied to government? Why do we find contradictory recipes for the improvement of public services, and are the forces of modernity set to produce worldwide convergence in ways of organizing government? This study aims to explore such questions, which are central to debates over public management. It combines contemporary and historical experience, and employs grid/group cultural theory as an organizing frame and method of exploration. Using examples from different places and eras, the study seeks to identify the recurring variety of ideas about how to organize public services—and contrary to widespread claims that modernization will bring a new global uniformity, it argues that variety is unlikely to disappear from doctrine and practice in public management. The book has three parts. Part I, Introductory, has three chapters that discuss various aspects of public management. Part II, Classic and Recurring Ideas in Public Management, has four chapters that discuss various ways of doing public management. Part III, Rhetoric, Modernity, and Science in Public Management, has three chapters that discuss the rhetoric, and culture of public management, contemporary public management, and the state of the art of the state.
Peter Taylor-Gooby
- Published in print:
- 2008
- Published Online:
- January 2009
- ISBN:
- 9780199546701
- eISBN:
- 9780191720420
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199546701.001.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, Comparative Politics, Political Economy
Recent reforms in welfare states generate new challenges to social citizenship. Social citizenship depends on the readiness of voters to support reciprocity and social inclusion and their trust in ...
More
Recent reforms in welfare states generate new challenges to social citizenship. Social citizenship depends on the readiness of voters to support reciprocity and social inclusion and their trust in welfare state institutions as services that will meet their needs. Reform programmes in most western countries combine New Public Management, linking market competition and regulation by targets to achieve greater efficiency and responsiveness to service-users, and welfare-to-work and make-work-pay activation policies to manage labour market change. Both developments rest on a rational actor approach to human motivation. The UK has pursued the reform programme with more vigour than any other major European country and provides a useful object less of its strengths and limitations. The book provides a detailed analytic account of social science approaches to agency. It shows that the rational actor approach has difficulties in explaining how social inclusion and social trust arise. Policies based on it provide weak support for these aspects of citizenship. It is attractive to policy-makers seeking solutions to the problem of improving the efficiency and responsiveness of welfare systems in a more globalised world, in which citizens are more critical and the authority of national governments is in decline. Recent reform programmes were undertaken to meet real pressures on existing patterns of provision. They have been largely successful in maintaining mass services but risk undermining social inclusion and eroding trust in public welfare institutions. In the longer term, they may destroy the social citizenship essential to sustain welfare states.Less
Recent reforms in welfare states generate new challenges to social citizenship. Social citizenship depends on the readiness of voters to support reciprocity and social inclusion and their trust in welfare state institutions as services that will meet their needs. Reform programmes in most western countries combine New Public Management, linking market competition and regulation by targets to achieve greater efficiency and responsiveness to service-users, and welfare-to-work and make-work-pay activation policies to manage labour market change. Both developments rest on a rational actor approach to human motivation. The UK has pursued the reform programme with more vigour than any other major European country and provides a useful object less of its strengths and limitations. The book provides a detailed analytic account of social science approaches to agency. It shows that the rational actor approach has difficulties in explaining how social inclusion and social trust arise. Policies based on it provide weak support for these aspects of citizenship. It is attractive to policy-makers seeking solutions to the problem of improving the efficiency and responsiveness of welfare systems in a more globalised world, in which citizens are more critical and the authority of national governments is in decline. Recent reform programmes were undertaken to meet real pressures on existing patterns of provision. They have been largely successful in maintaining mass services but risk undermining social inclusion and eroding trust in public welfare institutions. In the longer term, they may destroy the social citizenship essential to sustain welfare states.
Christopher Hood, Oliver James, George Jones, Colin Scott, and Tony Travers
- Published in print:
- 1999
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780198280996
- eISBN:
- 9780191599491
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0198280998.001.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, UK Politics
Regulation Inside Government analyses the army of inspectors, auditors, grievance‐chasers, standard‐setters, and other bodies overseeing contemporary public organizations. On the basis ...
More
Regulation Inside Government analyses the army of inspectors, auditors, grievance‐chasers, standard‐setters, and other bodies overseeing contemporary public organizations. On the basis of a pioneering two‐year inside study of British Government by a team of leading scholars, this book provides an original analytical perspective on regulation within government. Given the limitations of orthodox constitutional checks on executive government, the courts, and elected politicians, regulation inside government deserves more attention than it has hitherto received. As one of the first comprehensive accounts of regulation inside government, this book begins to fill the gap. The empirical data for the study sets out the full range of modes of control applied to the public sector. The authors examine the relationship between formal oversight, of the traditional regulatory sort, with other forms of control based on competition, mutuality, and contrived randomness. They conclude that there is a failure in contemporary public management to deploy each of these modes of control to their full potential.Less
Regulation Inside Government analyses the army of inspectors, auditors, grievance‐chasers, standard‐setters, and other bodies overseeing contemporary public organizations. On the basis of a pioneering two‐year inside study of British Government by a team of leading scholars, this book provides an original analytical perspective on regulation within government. Given the limitations of orthodox constitutional checks on executive government, the courts, and elected politicians, regulation inside government deserves more attention than it has hitherto received. As one of the first comprehensive accounts of regulation inside government, this book begins to fill the gap. The empirical data for the study sets out the full range of modes of control applied to the public sector. The authors examine the relationship between formal oversight, of the traditional regulatory sort, with other forms of control based on competition, mutuality, and contrived randomness. They conclude that there is a failure in contemporary public management to deploy each of these modes of control to their full potential.
Luiz Carlos Bresser-Pereira
- Published in print:
- 2004
- Published Online:
- November 2004
- ISBN:
- 9780199261185
- eISBN:
- 9780191601507
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199261180.003.0014
- Subject:
- Political Science, Democratization
Public management reform started in Great Britain, New Zealand, and Australia in the 1980s. In the US, the reform occurred mainly at local level, but the National Performance Review Program ...
More
Public management reform started in Great Britain, New Zealand, and Australia in the 1980s. In the US, the reform occurred mainly at local level, but the National Performance Review Program ‘Reinventing Government’. Public management reform also advanced in the Scandinavian countries and in the Netherlands. In Canada, the reform had to await a major fiscal adjustment programme that lasted most of the 1990s, but it is today under way. In Italy, it is beginning. Among the developing countries, only in Brazil and Chile has public management reform gained ground. It is lagging behind in countries such as Germany, France, and Japan, where bureaucratic administration was more successfully and formally established.Less
Public management reform started in Great Britain, New Zealand, and Australia in the 1980s. In the US, the reform occurred mainly at local level, but the National Performance Review Program ‘Reinventing Government’. Public management reform also advanced in the Scandinavian countries and in the Netherlands. In Canada, the reform had to await a major fiscal adjustment programme that lasted most of the 1990s, but it is today under way. In Italy, it is beginning. Among the developing countries, only in Brazil and Chile has public management reform gained ground. It is lagging behind in countries such as Germany, France, and Japan, where bureaucratic administration was more successfully and formally established.
Christopher Hood
- Published in print:
- 2000
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780198297659
- eISBN:
- 9780191599484
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0198297653.003.0009
- Subject:
- Political Science, Comparative Politics
Returns to the general question of what sort of science public management is or can be and how cultural theory can contribute to that science. Critically discusses the pervasive ideas of ...
More
Returns to the general question of what sort of science public management is or can be and how cultural theory can contribute to that science. Critically discusses the pervasive ideas of modernization and global convergence in a cultural‐theory framework, suggesting there are more forces for divergence and less common ground on what modernity means in matters of organization than is commonly recognized. It argues that modernization is a rhetorically successful idea because when the powerful but implicit metaphor of technological development that underlies it is carried over into human organization it is inherently ambiguous—so it lends itself to quite different and contradictory ideas about the wave of the future that fit with each of the world views identified by cultural theory. Further, it argues that a vision of global transformation of public management into a convergent modern style is likely to be exaggerated because it ignores powerful forces of path‐dependency and self‐disequilibration—i.e. the capacity of management reform initiatives to produce the opposite of their intended result. The main sections of the chapter are: Modern, Global, Inevitable? The Claim of a New Paradigm in Public Management; Public‐Management Modernization as Deep Change; Public‐Management Modernization as Irreversible Change; Public‐Management Modernization as Convergent Change; Public‐Management Modernization as Beneficent Change; and Modernization—or ‘Fatal Remedies’?Less
Returns to the general question of what sort of science public management is or can be and how cultural theory can contribute to that science. Critically discusses the pervasive ideas of modernization and global convergence in a cultural‐theory framework, suggesting there are more forces for divergence and less common ground on what modernity means in matters of organization than is commonly recognized. It argues that modernization is a rhetorically successful idea because when the powerful but implicit metaphor of technological development that underlies it is carried over into human organization it is inherently ambiguous—so it lends itself to quite different and contradictory ideas about the wave of the future that fit with each of the world views identified by cultural theory. Further, it argues that a vision of global transformation of public management into a convergent modern style is likely to be exaggerated because it ignores powerful forces of path‐dependency and self‐disequilibration—i.e. the capacity of management reform initiatives to produce the opposite of their intended result. The main sections of the chapter are: Modern, Global, Inevitable? The Claim of a New Paradigm in Public Management; Public‐Management Modernization as Deep Change; Public‐Management Modernization as Irreversible Change; Public‐Management Modernization as Convergent Change; Public‐Management Modernization as Beneficent Change; and Modernization—or ‘Fatal Remedies’?
Luiz Carlos Bresser-Pereira
- Published in print:
- 2004
- Published Online:
- November 2004
- ISBN:
- 9780199261185
- eISBN:
- 9780191601507
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199261180.001.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, Democratization
The two major political institutions acting in modern democracies–civil society and the state–assume new ways of relating among themselves, thereby producing new democratic governance. Discusses two ...
More
The two major political institutions acting in modern democracies–civil society and the state–assume new ways of relating among themselves, thereby producing new democratic governance. Discusses two aspects of this global change: the republican democracy that is emerging in the twenty-first century and public management reform. The objective of this reform is to increase state capacity, to create a ‘strong state’: able to produce representative and accountable democratic governments; able to protect civil rights and assure markets, and so liberal; able to promote social justice, and so social; able to resist corruption and rent seeking, and thus republican. Starts from the assumption that, just as only a strong civil society may guarantee democracy, only a strong state may assure competitive markets. Defines the words ‘nation-state’ (or ‘country’), state, and civil society.Less
The two major political institutions acting in modern democracies–civil society and the state–assume new ways of relating among themselves, thereby producing new democratic governance. Discusses two aspects of this global change: the republican democracy that is emerging in the twenty-first century and public management reform. The objective of this reform is to increase state capacity, to create a ‘strong state’: able to produce representative and accountable democratic governments; able to protect civil rights and assure markets, and so liberal; able to promote social justice, and so social; able to resist corruption and rent seeking, and thus republican. Starts from the assumption that, just as only a strong civil society may guarantee democracy, only a strong state may assure competitive markets. Defines the words ‘nation-state’ (or ‘country’), state, and civil society.
Christopher Hood
- Published in print:
- 2000
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780198297659
- eISBN:
- 9780191599484
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0198297653.003.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, Comparative Politics
Discusses three conventional assumptions that are made about public management: that it is in the throes of a millennial transformation to a new style; that today's ‘new’ public management ideas ...
More
Discusses three conventional assumptions that are made about public management: that it is in the throes of a millennial transformation to a new style; that today's ‘new’ public management ideas differ sharply from those of earlier eras; and that the favoured doctrines of contemporary public management tend to be dubbed as economic rationalism. Goes on to point out that the book looks at public management from a different perspective, and reduces its arguments to seven related propositions, discussed in the remainder of the chapter that: grid/cultural theory captures most of the variety in both current and historical debates about how to organize public services; application of a cultural‐theory framework can illuminate many of the central analytic questions of public management; if we look across time and space, we can identify ideas about how to organize government and public services that correspond to each of the four polar categories contained in cultural theory; no one of those recipes for good organization has a clear claim to be considered more modern than any of the others and each has in‐built weaknesses; variation in ideas about how to organize in government is not likely to disappear; the dimensions identified by cultural theory enable analysis of organizational variety to be pursued at a range of levels; and the understanding of cultural and organizational variety, within a historical perspective, merits a central place in the study of public management. These seven propositions overlap, and some of them are given more space than others in the book; this chapter concentrates mainly on the first proposition, and aims to introduce grid/group cultural theory in the context of public management, but the other six propositions are also discussed more briefly, as a way of setting the scene for the remainder of the book.Less
Discusses three conventional assumptions that are made about public management: that it is in the throes of a millennial transformation to a new style; that today's ‘new’ public management ideas differ sharply from those of earlier eras; and that the favoured doctrines of contemporary public management tend to be dubbed as economic rationalism. Goes on to point out that the book looks at public management from a different perspective, and reduces its arguments to seven related propositions, discussed in the remainder of the chapter that: grid/cultural theory captures most of the variety in both current and historical debates about how to organize public services; application of a cultural‐theory framework can illuminate many of the central analytic questions of public management; if we look across time and space, we can identify ideas about how to organize government and public services that correspond to each of the four polar categories contained in cultural theory; no one of those recipes for good organization has a clear claim to be considered more modern than any of the others and each has in‐built weaknesses; variation in ideas about how to organize in government is not likely to disappear; the dimensions identified by cultural theory enable analysis of organizational variety to be pursued at a range of levels; and the understanding of cultural and organizational variety, within a historical perspective, merits a central place in the study of public management. These seven propositions overlap, and some of them are given more space than others in the book; this chapter concentrates mainly on the first proposition, and aims to introduce grid/group cultural theory in the context of public management, but the other six propositions are also discussed more briefly, as a way of setting the scene for the remainder of the book.
Christopher Hood
- Published in print:
- 2000
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780198297659
- eISBN:
- 9780191599484
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0198297653.003.0008
- Subject:
- Political Science, Comparative Politics
Returns to the general question of what sort of science public management is or can be and how cultural theory can contribute to that science. If public management is (as suggested earlier) dominated ...
More
Returns to the general question of what sort of science public management is or can be and how cultural theory can contribute to that science. If public management is (as suggested earlier) dominated by rhetorical forms of argument, cultural theory can help take one step further than conventional analyses of rhetoric by differentiating rhetorical ‘families’—this theme is explored in this chapter, which looks at what a cultural‐theory framework can add to the analysis of public management as an arena for rhetoric, and aims to do three things. First, it briefly expands on a now familiar argument (noted in the first chapter)—that shifts in what counts as received ideas in public management work through a process of fashion and persuasion, not through proofs couched in strict deductive logic, controlled experiments, or even systematic analysis of all available cases. Second, and more ambitiously, it aims to bring together the analysis of rhetoric in public management with the four ways of doing public management that were explored in Part II, to show how each of those approaches can have its own rhetoric, in the sense of foreshortened proofs, analogies, and parables; the aim is to put a cultural‐theory perspective to work in a different way, to identify multiple rhetorics of public management. Third, it briefly develops the suggestion made in Chapters 1 and 2 that shifts (change) in received ideas about how to organize typically occur in a reactive way, through rejection of existing arrangements with their known faults, rather than through a positive process of reasoning from a blank slate.Less
Returns to the general question of what sort of science public management is or can be and how cultural theory can contribute to that science. If public management is (as suggested earlier) dominated by rhetorical forms of argument, cultural theory can help take one step further than conventional analyses of rhetoric by differentiating rhetorical ‘families’—this theme is explored in this chapter, which looks at what a cultural‐theory framework can add to the analysis of public management as an arena for rhetoric, and aims to do three things. First, it briefly expands on a now familiar argument (noted in the first chapter)—that shifts in what counts as received ideas in public management work through a process of fashion and persuasion, not through proofs couched in strict deductive logic, controlled experiments, or even systematic analysis of all available cases. Second, and more ambitiously, it aims to bring together the analysis of rhetoric in public management with the four ways of doing public management that were explored in Part II, to show how each of those approaches can have its own rhetoric, in the sense of foreshortened proofs, analogies, and parables; the aim is to put a cultural‐theory perspective to work in a different way, to identify multiple rhetorics of public management. Third, it briefly develops the suggestion made in Chapters 1 and 2 that shifts (change) in received ideas about how to organize typically occur in a reactive way, through rejection of existing arrangements with their known faults, rather than through a positive process of reasoning from a blank slate.
John Parkinson
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- September 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780199291113
- eISBN:
- 9780191604133
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/019929111X.003.0003
- Subject:
- Political Science, Political Theory
This chapter explores the context of the cases, setting out the history of patient involvement initiatives and deliberative experiments in the UK. It highlights the antipathy to interest groups and ...
More
This chapter explores the context of the cases, setting out the history of patient involvement initiatives and deliberative experiments in the UK. It highlights the antipathy to interest groups and the ‘research orientation’ of those experiments, and the effects that orientation has had on limiting the scope and agenda of deliberation. It argues that whether deliberation occurs at the local level or at the centre matters a great deal, but that deliberative experiments tend to be at least as much about resource battles between the centre and the periphery as responding to citizens’ needs.Less
This chapter explores the context of the cases, setting out the history of patient involvement initiatives and deliberative experiments in the UK. It highlights the antipathy to interest groups and the ‘research orientation’ of those experiments, and the effects that orientation has had on limiting the scope and agenda of deliberation. It argues that whether deliberation occurs at the local level or at the centre matters a great deal, but that deliberative experiments tend to be at least as much about resource battles between the centre and the periphery as responding to citizens’ needs.
Christopher Hood
- Published in print:
- 2000
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780198297659
- eISBN:
- 9780191599484
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0198297653.003.0004
- Subject:
- Political Science, Comparative Politics
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 (this chapter), individualist (Ch. 5), egalitarian (Ch. 6), and fatalist (Ch. 7). Looks briefly and selectively at four classic hierarchist approaches to public management. Two of them (Confucian public management in classical China and the cameralist tradition of early modern Europe) rarely receive a mention in conventional public‐management books—but those older traditions merit attention from present‐day students of public management, and not just for pietist or antiquarian reasons, for they show some of the different contexts in which hierarchist ideas have flourished, and their fate can help assess the strengths and weaknesses of doing public management the hierarchist way. The other two hierarchist approaches discussed are Progressivism and Fabianism.Less
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 (this chapter), individualist (Ch. 5), egalitarian (Ch. 6), and fatalist (Ch. 7). Looks briefly and selectively at four classic hierarchist approaches to public management. Two of them (Confucian public management in classical China and the cameralist tradition of early modern Europe) rarely receive a mention in conventional public‐management books—but those older traditions merit attention from present‐day students of public management, and not just for pietist or antiquarian reasons, for they show some of the different contexts in which hierarchist ideas have flourished, and their fate can help assess the strengths and weaknesses of doing public management the hierarchist way. The other two hierarchist approaches discussed are Progressivism and Fabianism.
Christopher Hood
- Published in print:
- 2000
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780198297659
- eISBN:
- 9780191599484
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0198297653.003.0005
- Subject:
- Political Science, Comparative Politics
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 (this chapter), egalitarian (Ch. 6), and fatalist (Ch. 7). What can loosely be called individualist approaches to public management start from the assumption that the world is populated by rational egoists who are bent on outsmarting one another to get something for nothing—rivalry and competition are central to the individualist view of what the world of public management is and should be like. The individualist bias embodies at least four basic propositions that contradict the underlying assumptions of hierarchism and of the egalitarian bias: first, an individualist bias does not automatically begin with a view of public management from the apex of the state, it rejects the viewpoint of the chancellory or presidential palace and is not disposed to examine public management in the context of power play among states, and instead is more predisposed to start bottom up; second, instead of assuming that the interests of the rulers and those of the ruled can go together in a positive‐sum game, an individualist bias is more likely to start from the assumption that rulers will tend to look after themselves at the expense of the ruled unless the institutions and incentive structures are very carefully engineered; third, instead of assuming that economic development and social order require hands on state administration guided by an enlightened technocratic elite, individualists will tend to assume that markets will ordinarily produce better results than bureaucratic hierarchies; and fourth, instead of assuming people that are only corrupted by evil institutions, individualists will tend to work on what Thomas Carlyle called the ‘pig principle’—the assumption that human beings, from the highest to the lowest, are inherently rational, calculative, opportunistic, and self‐seeking. These four assumptions taken together make a relatively coherent philosophy of institutional design for government; it is the first two assumptions that mainly distinguish the individualist bias in public management from the hierarchist approach considered in the last chapter, and the second two that mainly distinguish it from the egalitarian approach to be considered in the next.Less
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 (this chapter), egalitarian (Ch. 6), and fatalist (Ch. 7). What can loosely be called individualist approaches to public management start from the assumption that the world is populated by rational egoists who are bent on outsmarting one another to get something for nothing—rivalry and competition are central to the individualist view of what the world of public management is and should be like. The individualist bias embodies at least four basic propositions that contradict the underlying assumptions of hierarchism and of the egalitarian bias: first, an individualist bias does not automatically begin with a view of public management from the apex of the state, it rejects the viewpoint of the chancellory or presidential palace and is not disposed to examine public management in the context of power play among states, and instead is more predisposed to start bottom up; second, instead of assuming that the interests of the rulers and those of the ruled can go together in a positive‐sum game, an individualist bias is more likely to start from the assumption that rulers will tend to look after themselves at the expense of the ruled unless the institutions and incentive structures are very carefully engineered; third, instead of assuming that economic development and social order require hands on state administration guided by an enlightened technocratic elite, individualists will tend to assume that markets will ordinarily produce better results than bureaucratic hierarchies; and fourth, instead of assuming people that are only corrupted by evil institutions, individualists will tend to work on what Thomas Carlyle called the ‘pig principle’—the assumption that human beings, from the highest to the lowest, are inherently rational, calculative, opportunistic, and self‐seeking. These four assumptions taken together make a relatively coherent philosophy of institutional design for government; it is the first two assumptions that mainly distinguish the individualist bias in public management from the hierarchist approach considered in the last chapter, and the second two that mainly distinguish it from the egalitarian approach to be considered in the next.
Christopher Hood
- Published in print:
- 2000
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780198297659
- eISBN:
- 9780191599484
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0198297653.003.0002
- Subject:
- Political Science, Comparative Politics
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 (this chapter), and the analysis of the range of forms of control and regulation (in the broadest sense) available in public management (the next chapter); in both cases, an examination through the lens of cultural theory can add an extra dimension or an alternative perspective to the analysis. Aims to show how a cultural‐theory perspective can assist the analysis of public management failure and collapse in two ways. First, such a perspective can help bring out some of the varying and contradictory attitudes towards scandal or catastrophe in public management, in the sense of who to blame or how to put matters right. Second, the four basic organizational ways of life that cultural theory identifies (as introduced in the first chapter) can each be expected to have its own characteristic pattern of in‐built failure. The different sections are Responses to Public‐Management Disasters; Four Types of Failure and Collapse; Private Gain From Public Office; Fiascos Resulting from Excessive Trust in Authority and Expertise; Unresolved Conflict and Internecine Strife; Apathy and Inertia: Lack of Planning, Initiative, and Foresight; and Accounting for Failure in Public Management.Less
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 (this chapter), and the analysis of the range of forms of control and regulation (in the broadest sense) available in public management (the next chapter); in both cases, an examination through the lens of cultural theory can add an extra dimension or an alternative perspective to the analysis. Aims to show how a cultural‐theory perspective can assist the analysis of public management failure and collapse in two ways. First, such a perspective can help bring out some of the varying and contradictory attitudes towards scandal or catastrophe in public management, in the sense of who to blame or how to put matters right. Second, the four basic organizational ways of life that cultural theory identifies (as introduced in the first chapter) can each be expected to have its own characteristic pattern of in‐built failure. The different sections are Responses to Public‐Management Disasters; Four Types of Failure and Collapse; Private Gain From Public Office; Fiascos Resulting from Excessive Trust in Authority and Expertise; Unresolved Conflict and Internecine Strife; Apathy and Inertia: Lack of Planning, Initiative, and Foresight; and Accounting for Failure in Public Management.
Luiz Carlos Bresser-Pereira
- Published in print:
- 2004
- Published Online:
- November 2004
- ISBN:
- 9780199261185
- eISBN:
- 9780191601507
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199261180.003.0013
- Subject:
- Political Science, Democratization
Discusses the transition from bureaucratic public administration to public or new public management. Classic bureaucratic administration, based on the Prussian army’s administrative principles, ...
More
Discusses the transition from bureaucratic public administration to public or new public management. Classic bureaucratic administration, based on the Prussian army’s administrative principles, resulted from a series of civil service reforms implemented in the second half of nineteenth century. It revealed a surprising historical persistence. Public management reform is the capitalist state organization’s second major reform. It emerged when globalization and the crisis of the state challenged the legitimacy of state bureaucracies and bureaucratic public administration. Margaret Thatcher launched public management reform in Great Britain, but in the end it was adopted by governments formed by political parties from across the political spectrum, including parties on the traditional left, most notably Labour governments in Australia and New Zealand.Less
Discusses the transition from bureaucratic public administration to public or new public management. Classic bureaucratic administration, based on the Prussian army’s administrative principles, resulted from a series of civil service reforms implemented in the second half of nineteenth century. It revealed a surprising historical persistence. Public management reform is the capitalist state organization’s second major reform. It emerged when globalization and the crisis of the state challenged the legitimacy of state bureaucracies and bureaucratic public administration. Margaret Thatcher launched public management reform in Great Britain, but in the end it was adopted by governments formed by political parties from across the political spectrum, including parties on the traditional left, most notably Labour governments in Australia and New Zealand.
Christopher Hood
- Published in print:
- 2000
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780198297659
- eISBN:
- 9780191599484
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0198297653.003.0003
- Subject:
- Political Science, Comparative Politics
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
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.
Christopher Hood
- Published in print:
- 2000
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780198297659
- eISBN:
- 9780191599484
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0198297653.003.0006
- Subject:
- Political Science, Comparative Politics
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
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.
Christopher Hood
- Published in print:
- 2000
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780198297659
- eISBN:
- 9780191599484
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0198297653.003.0007
- Subject:
- Political Science, Comparative Politics
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 (Ch. 6), and fatalist (this chapter). Starts by asking whether there can be a fatalist approach to public management—cultural theorists have identified fatalism as a viable way of life, but it does not figure prominently in conventional accounts on the provision of public services; Banfield has stated that in fatalist societies (such as Montegrano) public management will be (only) narrowly bureaucratic and statist because only paid officials will be concerned with public affairs, and the citizenry at large will be cynical about the motives of public officials; in spite of this widespread belief, however, there are likely to be few effective checks on public officials in a fatalist society, and Banfield sees fatalism as a social pathology bound to produce social backwardness and stagnation. Cultural theory is ambiguous on whether fatalism can be a viable basis of organization in the sense that a Montegrano‐type society could survive and reproduce itself over time, nor is it clear from the work of cultural theorists exactly what fatalists’ focus on karma amounts to. The last possibility—that fatalism might link to how‐to‐do‐it ideas about organizational design, as distinct from a view of the world as ineluctably ruled by the fickle goddess of fortune—has had little attention: from conventional cultural‐theory accounts, it would seem the most appropriate role, for fatalist social science in public management would be like that of the chorus in classical Greek theatre—and the second section of the chapter examines such a perspective on public management, looking particularly at one influential strain of ‘new institutionalist’ literature, which portrays the functioning of organizations as a highly unpredictable process, involving eclectic decision‐making unavoidably dependent on chance connections. It then moves on to build on the recipe for contrived randomness, and argues that a fatalist perspective can at least in some sense be taken beyond commentary and criticism into a positive prescription for conducting management and designing organizations to operate on the basis of chance.Less
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 (Ch. 6), and fatalist (this chapter). Starts by asking whether there can be a fatalist approach to public management—cultural theorists have identified fatalism as a viable way of life, but it does not figure prominently in conventional accounts on the provision of public services; Banfield has stated that in fatalist societies (such as Montegrano) public management will be (only) narrowly bureaucratic and statist because only paid officials will be concerned with public affairs, and the citizenry at large will be cynical about the motives of public officials; in spite of this widespread belief, however, there are likely to be few effective checks on public officials in a fatalist society, and Banfield sees fatalism as a social pathology bound to produce social backwardness and stagnation. Cultural theory is ambiguous on whether fatalism can be a viable basis of organization in the sense that a Montegrano‐type society could survive and reproduce itself over time, nor is it clear from the work of cultural theorists exactly what fatalists’ focus on karma amounts to. The last possibility—that fatalism might link to how‐to‐do‐it ideas about organizational design, as distinct from a view of the world as ineluctably ruled by the fickle goddess of fortune—has had little attention: from conventional cultural‐theory accounts, it would seem the most appropriate role, for fatalist social science in public management would be like that of the chorus in classical Greek theatre—and the second section of the chapter examines such a perspective on public management, looking particularly at one influential strain of ‘new institutionalist’ literature, which portrays the functioning of organizations as a highly unpredictable process, involving eclectic decision‐making unavoidably dependent on chance connections. It then moves on to build on the recipe for contrived randomness, and argues that a fatalist perspective can at least in some sense be taken beyond commentary and criticism into a positive prescription for conducting management and designing organizations to operate on the basis of chance.
Christopher Hood
- Published in print:
- 2000
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780198297659
- eISBN:
- 9780191599484
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0198297653.003.0010
- Subject:
- Political Science, Comparative Politics
Returns to the general question of what sort of science public management is or can be and how cultural theory can contribute to that science. Concludes by taking stock of the cultural‐theory ...
More
Returns to the general question of what sort of science public management is or can be and how cultural theory can contribute to that science. Concludes by taking stock of the cultural‐theory approach as a framework for analysing public management, surveying its strengths and weaknesses. It does not claim there are no problems with the approach—on the contrary, there are major gaps and ambiguities and some of the underlying logic needs attention, but in spite of such weaknesses, the claim is that a cultural‐theory framework has much to contribute to a way of thinking about the art of the state that is neither sham science nor mere craft. To assess the cultural‐theory approach, this concluding chapter discusses three sorts of objections to the cultural‐theory framework as a way of analysing public management. One possible line of criticism might be called the ‘nursery toys’ objection—the claim that cultural theory is too simple for sophisticated analysis and is therefore better suited for the elementary stages of understanding than for advanced or professional analysis; a second possible line of criticism might be called the ‘soft science’ objection—the claim that, whatever its level of sophistication or applicability to management, the theory is, even on its own terms, limited, ambiguous, and perhaps even unfalsifiable; a third line of criticism might be called the ‘wrong tool’ objection—i.e. the claim that cultural theory, however sophisticated, cannot be an adequate basis for a theory of management, because ultimately it has little to say about the central what‐to‐do questions of organization that management and managers need to be concerned with—and by this view, it is the wrong tool for the job.Less
Returns to the general question of what sort of science public management is or can be and how cultural theory can contribute to that science. Concludes by taking stock of the cultural‐theory approach as a framework for analysing public management, surveying its strengths and weaknesses. It does not claim there are no problems with the approach—on the contrary, there are major gaps and ambiguities and some of the underlying logic needs attention, but in spite of such weaknesses, the claim is that a cultural‐theory framework has much to contribute to a way of thinking about the art of the state that is neither sham science nor mere craft. To assess the cultural‐theory approach, this concluding chapter discusses three sorts of objections to the cultural‐theory framework as a way of analysing public management. One possible line of criticism might be called the ‘nursery toys’ objection—the claim that cultural theory is too simple for sophisticated analysis and is therefore better suited for the elementary stages of understanding than for advanced or professional analysis; a second possible line of criticism might be called the ‘soft science’ objection—the claim that, whatever its level of sophistication or applicability to management, the theory is, even on its own terms, limited, ambiguous, and perhaps even unfalsifiable; a third line of criticism might be called the ‘wrong tool’ objection—i.e. the claim that cultural theory, however sophisticated, cannot be an adequate basis for a theory of management, because ultimately it has little to say about the central what‐to‐do questions of organization that management and managers need to be concerned with—and by this view, it is the wrong tool for the job.
Christopher Hood, Colin Scott, Oliver James, George Jones, and Tony Travers
- Published in print:
- 1999
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780198280996
- eISBN:
- 9780191599491
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0198280998.003.0009
- Subject:
- Political Science, UK Politics
Examines the relationship between new public management (NPM) reforms and regulation inside government. It charts the changes in regulatory style over a 20‐year period. The relaxation of controls ...
More
Examines the relationship between new public management (NPM) reforms and regulation inside government. It charts the changes in regulatory style over a 20‐year period. The relaxation of controls associated with NPM has often been accompanied by the tightening of other forms of control.Less
Examines the relationship between new public management (NPM) reforms and regulation inside government. It charts the changes in regulatory style over a 20‐year period. The relaxation of controls associated with NPM has often been accompanied by the tightening of other forms of control.
Rosemary Deem, Sam Hillyard, and Michael Reed
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- September 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199265909
- eISBN:
- 9780191708602
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199265909.001.0001
- Subject:
- Business and Management, Knowledge Management
The nature of Higher Education in the UK has changed over the last three decades. Academics can no longer be said to carry out their work in ‘ivory towers’, as increasing government intervention and ...
More
The nature of Higher Education in the UK has changed over the last three decades. Academics can no longer be said to carry out their work in ‘ivory towers’, as increasing government intervention and a growing ‘target culture’ has changed the way they work. Increasingly universities have transformed from ‘communities of scholars’ to ‘workplaces’. The organization and administration of universities has seen a corresponding prevalence of ideas and strategies drawn from the ‘New Public Management’ ideology in response, promoting a more ‘business-focussed’ approach in the management of public services. This book examines the issues that these changes have had on academics, both as the ‘knowledge-workers’ managed, and the ‘manager-academic’. It draws on a study of academics holding management roles in sixteen UK universities, exploring their career histories and trajectories, and providing accounts of their values, practices, relationships with others, and their training and development as managers. Examining debates around ‘New Public Management’, knowledge management, and knowledge workers, the wider implications of these themes for policy innovation and strategy in HE and the public sector more generally are considered, developing a critical response to recent approaches to managing public services, and practical suggestions for improvements which could be made to the training and support of senior and middle managers in universities.Less
The nature of Higher Education in the UK has changed over the last three decades. Academics can no longer be said to carry out their work in ‘ivory towers’, as increasing government intervention and a growing ‘target culture’ has changed the way they work. Increasingly universities have transformed from ‘communities of scholars’ to ‘workplaces’. The organization and administration of universities has seen a corresponding prevalence of ideas and strategies drawn from the ‘New Public Management’ ideology in response, promoting a more ‘business-focussed’ approach in the management of public services. This book examines the issues that these changes have had on academics, both as the ‘knowledge-workers’ managed, and the ‘manager-academic’. It draws on a study of academics holding management roles in sixteen UK universities, exploring their career histories and trajectories, and providing accounts of their values, practices, relationships with others, and their training and development as managers. Examining debates around ‘New Public Management’, knowledge management, and knowledge workers, the wider implications of these themes for policy innovation and strategy in HE and the public sector more generally are considered, developing a critical response to recent approaches to managing public services, and practical suggestions for improvements which could be made to the training and support of senior and middle managers in universities.
Rosemary Deem, Sam Hillyard, and Mike Reed
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- September 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199265909
- eISBN:
- 9780191708602
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199265909.003.0001
- Subject:
- Business and Management, Knowledge Management
This chapter has five purposes. First, to provide a general theoretical orientation and framework to analyse changes in UK higher education at the institutional, organizational, and individual ...
More
This chapter has five purposes. First, to provide a general theoretical orientation and framework to analyse changes in UK higher education at the institutional, organizational, and individual academic and manager-academic levels. Second, to provide an analytical narrative about the emergence and subsequent development of ‘New Managerialism’ (NM). Third, to review the discursive strategies and control technologies embodied in different formulations of NM and New Public Management (NPM). Fourth, to identify and assess the endemic contradictions, tensions, and conflicts within and between these discursive strategies and control technologies, as well as their broader implications for longer-term institutional change and organizational innovation. Fifth, to provide an initial interpretation of the process of ‘hybridization’ in public services domains and organizationals, and its wider significance for the development of universities as ‘knowledge-intensive organizations’.Less
This chapter has five purposes. First, to provide a general theoretical orientation and framework to analyse changes in UK higher education at the institutional, organizational, and individual academic and manager-academic levels. Second, to provide an analytical narrative about the emergence and subsequent development of ‘New Managerialism’ (NM). Third, to review the discursive strategies and control technologies embodied in different formulations of NM and New Public Management (NPM). Fourth, to identify and assess the endemic contradictions, tensions, and conflicts within and between these discursive strategies and control technologies, as well as their broader implications for longer-term institutional change and organizational innovation. Fifth, to provide an initial interpretation of the process of ‘hybridization’ in public services domains and organizationals, and its wider significance for the development of universities as ‘knowledge-intensive organizations’.
