Public management
Pro Research Analysisby 
Searched over 200M research papers for "public management"
Consensus Meter
Public Management: Evolution, Challenges, and Future Directions
Differences Between Public and Private Management
The debate on the differences between public and private management has been ongoing, with critics of New Public Management (NPM) arguing that business practices should not be transferred to the public sector due to significant differences between the two types of organizations. Empirical studies have shown that public organizations tend to be more bureaucratic, and public managers are generally less materialistic and have weaker organizational commitment compared to their private sector counterparts. However, the evidence is often derived from studies with narrow measures and lacking control for other variables, making it unclear whether the distinctiveness of public agencies is overstated or understated.
The Scope and Methods of Public Management Research
Public management research (PMR) has made significant strides over the past three decades in understanding the performance of public organizations. However, there are concerns that PMR may be neglecting critical questions about the development of major state institutions and focusing too much on issues pertinent to advanced democracies. This has led to debates about the relevance of PMR to public discussions on government roles and the capacity of public institutions to address emerging challenges.
New Public Management: Doctrinal Content and Criticisms
New Public Management (NPM) emerged in the 1980s, advocating for the application of private sector management practices to the public sector. NPM has been criticized for its potential conflicts between administrative values, particularly between 'equity' and 'efficiency'. Despite its criticisms, NPM has been influential in shaping public management reforms, although its importance may have been exaggerated. The shift from traditional public administration to public management has been characterized by a focus on managerial responsibilities and results-oriented approaches.
Managerialism vs. Traditional Public Administration
The debate over managerialism in public administration has been particularly contentious in countries like Australia. While some argue that managerialism represents a necessary reform to an outdated model of public administration, others caution against the uncritical adoption of private sector practices. The consensus is that a distinctive form of public management should be developed, recognizing the unique challenges and responsibilities of the public sector.
The Evolution and Future of Public Management
Over the past 30 years, public management has evolved significantly, moving away from rigid bureaucratic models to more flexible and results-oriented approaches. This transformation has been driven by the need for public managers to be personally responsible for delivering results, with different countries implementing reforms in their own ways. The future of public management is expected to involve public managers playing a decisive role in building collaborative capacities and governing creatively while adhering to rules. Ingenious civil servants will be crucial in devising new mechanisms to address future challenges.
Conclusion
Public management has undergone substantial changes, driven by the need for more efficient and effective public service delivery. While the adoption of private sector practices has been contentious, the evolution towards a more managerial approach in the public sector is evident. Future public managers will need to be innovative, adaptable, and collaborative to navigate the complexities of modern governance and address emerging challenges effectively.
Sources and full results
Most relevant research papers on this topic