Public Administration 

About: Public Administration is an academic journal published by Wiley-Blackwell. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Government & Public sector. It has an ISSN identifier of 0033-3298. Over the lifetime, 2878 publications have been published receiving 102360 citations.

A public management for all seasons

Abstract: This article discusses: the doctrinal content of the group of ideas known as ‘new public management’(NPM); the intellectual provenance of those ideas; explanations for their apparent persuasiveness in the 1980 s; and criticisms which have been made of the new doctrines. Particular attention is paid to the claim that NPM offers an all-purpose key to better provision of public services. This article argues that NFM has been most commonly criticized in terms of a claimed contradiction between ‘equity’ and ‘efficiency’ values, but that any critique which is to survive NPM's claim to ‘infinite reprogrammability’ must be couched in terms of possible conflicts between administrative values. The conclusion is that the ESRC'S Management in Government’ research initiative has been more valuable in helping to identify rather than to definitively answer, the key conceptual questions raised by NPM.

The joint‐decision trap: lessons from german federalism and european integration

Abstract: Compared to early expectations, the process of European integration has resulted in a paradox: frustration without disintegration and resilience without progress. The article attempts to develop an institutional explanation for this paradox by exploring the similarities between joint decision making (‘Politikverflechtung’) in German federalism and decision making in the European Community. In both cases, it is argued, the fact that member governments are directly participating in central decisions, and that there is a de facto requirement of unanimous decisions, will systematically generate sub-optimal policy outcomes unless a ‘problem-solving’ (as opposed to a ‘bargaining’) style of decision making can be maintained. In fact, the ‘bargaining’ style has prevailed in both cases. The resulting pathologies of public policy have, however, not resulted either in successful strategies for the further Europeanization of policy responsibilities or in the disintegration of unsatisfactory joint-decision systems. This ‘joint-decision trap’ is explained by reference to the utility functions of member governments for whom present institutional arrangements, in spite of their sub-optimal policy output, seem to represent ‘local optima’ when compared to either greater centralization or disintegration.

What's measured is what matters: targets and gaming in the English public health care system

Abstract: In the 2000s, governments in the UK, particularly in England, developed a system of governance of public services that combined targets with an element of terror This has obvious parallels with the Soviet regime, which was initially successful but then collapsed Assumptions underlying governance by targets represent synecdoche (taking a part to stand for a whole); and that problems of measurement and gaming do not matter We examine the robustness of the regime of targets and terror to these assumptions using evidence from the English public health service on reported successes, problems of measurement, and gaming Given this account, we consider the adequacy of current audit arrangements and ways of developing governance by targets in order to counter the problems we have identified

'Accountability': an ever-expanding concept?

Abstract: The scope and meaning of ‘accountability’ has been extended in a number of directions well beyond its core sense of being called to account for one’s actions. It has been applied to internal aspects of official behaviour, beyond the external focus implied by being called to account; to institutions that control official behaviour other than through calling officials to account; to means of making officials responsive to public wishes other than through calling them to account; and to democratic dialogue between citizens where no one is being called to account. In each case the extension is readily intelligible because it is into an area of activity closely relevant to the practice of core accountability. However, in each case the extension of meaning may be challenged as weakening the importance of external scrutiny

The Competent Boundary Spanner

Abstract: Inter-organizational frameworks of intervention dominate the resolution of complex societal problems facing the UK and many other countries. Strategic alliances, joint working arrangements, networks, partnerships and many other forms of collaboration across sectoral and organizational boundaries currently proliferate across the policy landscape. However, the discourse is positioned at an institutional and organizational level, and comparatively little attention is accorded to the pivotal role of individual actors in the management of inter-organizational relationships. This paper attempts to redress this balance by focusing on the skills, competencies and behaviour of boundary spanners. A critical review of the relevant literature, both from an institutional and relational perspective, is undertaken. This is complemented by some new empirical research that involves an engagement with groups of particular types of boundary spanner using a combination of surveys and in-depth interviews. Finally, a discussion makes connections between the existing literature and the research findings and offers suggestions for future areas of enquiry.