-Account for the rise of New Public Sector Management.
-What are some of the implications involved in moving away from a system of Public Administration to Public Sector Management? Answer:
According to Collier’s Dictionary, the definition of ‘reform’ is “to make a change for the better in, correct what so wrong with (something), especially by removing defects or abuses”. Also, administration (noun) is to act or method of managing or directing, or group of persons empowered to manage, direct operate and execute government affairs. Johns and Saks (1946) definition of management is the art to direct, guide or to control the affairs of an organization, such as tasks, time, projects or resources. Organization (noun) is social inventions for accomplishing common goals through group effort. The administrative system existed in ancient and this model has been undergoing changes which represent a paradigm shift (reform) from old to new operations of delivery of goods and services to the public. Public Administration refers to the institutions, systems and procedures which employed by the state or government to deliver public goods and services. Public Administration as academic discipline became evident by Wilson (1887) by identifying it as “the detailed and systematic execution of public law”. Its emergence in the nineteenth century was due to a series of developments under five broad phases or paradigms from 1900 to 2000. Both public and private sectors provide goods and services to the entire country, but their functions, goals and interests differ substantially. The former looks at the macro needs of the country and the latter, the micro needs. Public Administration did achieved some success (within a stable environment) with a number of the features identified from the phases or paradigms which were strict hierarchical legal framework; accountability in administrative matters; concept of impersonality and equity; maximum efficiency and responsive to public demands. The First Phase (1900-1926) – administration under formal control and political leadership contributed to the strict hierarchical legal framework, where theorists from Goodnow to White championed for administration to be based on factual and scientific principles by ensuring implementation of policies are free from subjectivity and maintaining maximum efficiency and effectiveness. Therefore, matters of policy and strategy were the functions of the politicians whereas the administrations would carry-out instructions (policies). The first paradigm shift to public administration had an issue of interference in the workings of the administration by the politicians (a plural society as Trinidad and Tobago there was no clear dichotomy between politics and administration) where public demanded better mechanisms of accountability in administrative matters. The Second Phase (1927-1937) – administration underwent further shifts with the introduction of new ideas by some theorists, to name a few. Taylor and Weber focused on scientific method, Follett and Mayo focused on humanistic relation, Gulick and Urwick along with Simon highlighted on principles of administration. The emphasis was on the one-best-way of applying the administrative principles within an organization by increasing productivity and responsive to public demands. Public Administration was operating within a closed model organization contributing to the concept of impersonality and equity. The Third Phase (1938-1950) – move to re-establish the linkages between public administration and political science. Also, there was focus upon comparative and development administration. The behaviour of politicians and administrators needed to be combined for organizations to grow. Where politicians promised higher levels of service provision in return for votes and administrators were encouraged to increase their share of budgets rather than saving money. For example, in Trinidad and Tobago increased...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document