New Public Administration Flashcards
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
*Concerned with social equity, equality, representative bureaucracy, participation, democracy more so than convention and rules.
According to Fry and Raadschelders (2008, Pages 318-320), Dwight Waldo financed the Minnowbrook Conference in 1968. The conference was in reference to the social and political ferment of the late 1960’s and early 1970’s. NPA supported the taking of an activist role by the public administrator in pursuit of social equity. Political participation was viewed as a means to dispersin power (decentralization) and increasing citizen involvement in government.
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
STORY-The bedrock of NPA began being laid down in the 1940’s and 1950’s. Due to WWII many white men went off to fight. Blacks and other minorities were accepted into the workforce because of the shortage of white men. After the war ended, white soldiers returned home and tok the jobs. Blacks and other minorities became disposable-became marginalized. Different high-profile judicial rulings such as Plecey vs. Ferguson and Brown vs. The Board of Education stated “separate but equal.” Blacks developed a social unrest. In 1964, the Civil Rights Act was passed banning discrimination. Dwight Waldo proposed a change in PA. NPA emphasized social equity, democracy, and representativeness.
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Frederickson, H. George (1996)- Comparing the Reinventing Government Movement with the New Public Administration
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Frederickson, H. George (1996)- Comparing the Reinventing Government Movement with the New Public Administration
According to Frederickson (1996), the need for change is the dominant theme in both NPA and NPM. Both NPA and NPM call for decentralization, flatter hierarchies, contracting out. While NPA is more institutional, NPM is more de-institutionalized. Advocates of each paradigm were disappointed with the status quo and called for change.
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Frederickson, H. George (1996)- Comparing the Reinventing Government Movement with the New Public Administration
Q: How and when did NPA emerge?
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Frederickson, H. George (1996)- Comparing the Reinventing Government Movement with the New Public Administration
Q: How and when did NPA emerge?
A: New Public Administration, which sought to dispel the politics-administration dichotomy by arguing that administrators should make policy, traces its origins to the first Minnowbrook Conference held in 1968 under the patronage of Dwight Waldo. The 1960s in the USA was a time of unusual social and political turbulence and upheaval (racism, poverty, Vietnam War). In this context, Waldo concluded that neither the study nor the practice of public administration was responding suitably to the escalating turmoil and the complications that arose from those conditions. Other scholars were Frank Marini, Mathew Crenson, Orion White.
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Frederickson, H. George (1996)- Comparing the Reinventing Government Movement with the New Public Administration
Q: How and when did NPA emerge?
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Frederickson, H. George (1996)- Comparing the Reinventing Government Movement with the New Public Administration 2nd Answer
Q: How and when did NPA emerge?
A: According to Frederickson (1971), NPA adds social equity to the classic objectives of PA- Frederickson (1971) states that the classic objectives and rational of PA is the efficient, economical, and coordinated management of public services with the focus being on top-level managers (e.g. city managers) or auxiliary staff (budgeting, systems analysis planning, personnel, purchasing etc). The rational for PA is always to be more efficient, economical, and better coordinated management. This still holds true within the NPA movement. However, NPA asks whether these Classical PA tenets enhances social equity? To say that a service is is efficient and economical still begs the questions: Well-managed for whom? Efficient for whom? Economical for whom?
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Q: How and when did NPA emerge?
Q: How and when did NPA emerge?
- Denhardt (201, 108) states that when it comes to NPA, “public administration must be drawn away from narrow studies of administrative procedures to a broader concern for the way in which policies are shaped, confirmed, and managed in a democratic society.”
- Denhardt (2011, 109) states that NPA advocates are not antipositivist or antiscientific but merely interested in using scientific and analytical skills to understand the impact of various policies and to explore new ways of satisfying client demands.
A commitment to social equity attempts to find organizational forms which exhibit capacity for continued flexibility or routinized change. Traditional bureaucracy has demonstrated capacity for stability, control, etc. NPA searches for changeable structures and advocates for modified bureaucratic-organizational forms. Decentralization, devolution, projects, contracts, sensitivity training, responsibility expansion, client involvement are all essentially counter-bureaucratic notions that characterize NPA. These concepts are designed to enhance both bureaucratic and policy change and thus to increase possibilities for social equity.
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Q: How are NPA and NPM similar?
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Q: How are NPA and NPM similar?
A: According to Frederickson (1996), both emphasize responsiveness (though in different ways and different words) and empowerment of individuals. NPA emphasizes responsiveness to the social ills of the day, empowerment of minority citizens, and worker/citizen participation in decision making. NPM emphasizes empowerment of citizen customers as well as the empowerment of public administrators.
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Q: How are NPA and NPM similar?
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Q: How are NPA and NPM similar?
-According to Frederickson (1996), values of empowerment in both NPA and NPM were somewhat similar. In NPA, workers/citizens should be empowered to participate in organizational decision making (in NPA). In NPM, customers should be empowered to make choices in the services they desire. Citizen choice in NPA is like customer-driven government in NPM. Both perspectives call for the extensive use of surveys, hearings, customer (citizen) councils, and the use of a range of feedback mechanisms such as suggestion boxes and program evaluations so what agency decisions (with regard to the polity) can be made with regard given to the polity.
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Q: How are NPA and NPM similar?
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Q: How are NPA and NPM similar?
-FOR EXAMPLE, with regards to decentralization, “public managers interested in accountability and high performance began to restructure their bureaucratic agencies, redefine their organizational missions, streamline agency processes, and decentralize decision making” (Denhardt, 2011, 142).
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Q: How are NPA and NPM different?
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Q: How are NPA and NPM different?
A: Firstly, NPA and NPM advocates different objectives. NPA emphasizes social equity and NPM emphasizes business sector values.
According to Frederickson (1996), the fundamental difference between NPA and NPM has to do with the role of citizens versus customers. Much of the NPA literature is tied to the conception of citizenship, or a vision of the informed, active citizen participating beyond the ballot box in a range of public activities with both elected and pointed public servants. It assumes that individuals have more than self-serving interest if government and public administration.
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Q: How are NPA and NPM similar?
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Q: How are NPA and NPM similar?
According to Frederickson (1996), NPM states that the empowered customer makes individual (or family) choices in a competitive market thus breaking bureaucratic monopoly. The public official is to develop choices for empowered choice makers rather than build a community. The reinvention perspective is compatible with both the American commitment to business values and the modern political interest in less government.
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Q: How are NPA and NPM similar?
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Q: How are NPA and NPM similar?
-NPM seems to want to do away with the red tape and bureaucratic constrains that stifle and frustrate public administrators (Osborne and Gaebler, 1992; Frederickson, 1996; NPR, 1993)
-On the other hand, NPA does not want to do away with bureaucracy structures because according to Frederickson (1996, 264), NPA advocates understand that solutions to bureaucratic problems are often surprisingly bureaucratic or organizational in character.
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Q: What is meant by NPM’s focus on the customer?
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Q: What is meant by NPM’s focus on the customer?
A: One way is in the depiction of citizens as customers (Osborne and Gaebler, 1992). Public agencies should provide citizen/customers with information so that they may make choices on the public services that is best for them individually or for their respective families. According to Frederickson (1996), the metaphor borrows from the public choice model where the empowered customer makes individual/family choices in a competitive market. The value of individual satisfaction is deemed to be more important than achieving collective democratic consensus. Osborne and Gaebler states that there should be a preference for government to respond to the short-term self-interests of isolated individuals (customers) rather than one that supports the pursuits of public interests publicly defined through a deliberative process (citizens). Public agencies should provide customers with choices. Because customers pay for government services, they should receive the best services.
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Q: What is meant by NPM’s focus on the customer?
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Q: What is meant by NPM’s focus on the customer?
According to Osborne and Gaebler, customer-driven government must listen carefully to their customers and offer customer resources to use in selecting their own service providers. An EXAMPLE is the voucher system provided by
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Q:What is meant by NPA’s focus on the citizen?
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Q: What is meant by NPA’s focus on the citizen?
A: According to Frederickson (1996), the fundamental difference between NPA and NPM has to do with the role of citizens versus customers. Much of the NPA literature is tied to the conception of citizenship, or a vision of the informed, active citizen participating beyond the ballot box in a range of public activities with both elected and pointed public servants. It assumes that individuals have more than self-serving interest if government and public administration.
(Groaneveld and Van de Walle (2010)-Civil unrest, a changing political and social landscape, a racial divide, and inner city poverty all gave rise to New Public Administration (NPA) and the belief that public servants should undertake a more active value-driven role on behalf of poor and disadvantaged groups.
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Lowi, Theodore, J. (1969)- The End of Liberalism: The Indictment
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Lowi, Theodore, J. (1969)- The End of Liberalism: The Indictment
Interest group liberalism trumps true democracy and trumps true democracy, therefore solutions like representative bureaucracy may be needed to offset its effects.
The vast expansion of government in the 1960’s took place due to the political system acquiescing to the interests of organized groups in societies that were able to impose their views on government (Denhardt, 2008). Government in turn created agencies to carry out the interests of those groups that it (government) took responsibility for.
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Lowi, Theodore, J. (1969)- The End of Liberalism: The Indictment
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Lowi, Theodore, J. (1969)- The End of Liberalism: The Indictment
Interest groups are a bad because they operate under the guise of democracy when truthfully they are only pursuing their own interests. Thus they are not a true representation for democratic wants. Being that they possess resources, they are powerful. Interests groups therefore negates true democratic power because they overshadow/overpower the voices of those who do not hold their own views and continually relegates some population group segments as marginalized. Therefore, solutions such as representative bureaucracy might be needed.
*See page 131 of Denhardt (2008) book.
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Lowi, Theodore, J. (1969)- The End of Liberalism: The Indictment
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Lowi, Theodore, J. (1969)- The End of Liberalism: The Indictment
WIKIPEDIA- Interest group liberalism is Theodore Lowi’s term for the clientelism resulting from the broad expansion of public programs in the United States, including those programs which were part of the “Great Society.”
Published in 1969, Lowi’s book was titled The End of Liberalism, and presented a critique of the role of interest groups in American government, arguing that “any group representing anything at all, is dealt with and judged according to the political resources it brings to the table and not for the moral or rationalist strength of its interest.” Lowi’s critique stood out in sharp contrast to theories of pluralism, championed by Robert Dahl and others, which argued that interest groups provide competition and a necessary democratic link between people and government.
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Lowi, Theodore, J. (1969)- The End of Liberalism: The Indictment
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Lowi, Theodore, J. (1969)- The End of Liberalism: The Indictment
WIKIPEDIA-Classical pluralism is the view that politics and decision making are located mostly in the framework of government, but that many non-governmental groups use their resources to exert influence. The central question for classical pluralism is how power and influence is distributed in a political process. Groups of individuals try to maximize their interests. Lines of conflict are multiple and shifting as power is a continuous bargaining process between competing groups. There may be inequalities but they tend to be distributed and evened out by the various forms and distributions of resources throughout a population. Any change under this view will be slow and incremental, as groups have different interests and may act as “veto groups” to destroy legislation that they do not agree with. The existence of diverse and competing interests is the basis for a democratic equilibrium, and is crucial for the obtaining of goals by individuals
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Kingsley, Donald J. (1944)-Representative Bureaucracy: An Interpretation of the British Civil Service
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Kingsley, Donald J. (1944)-Representative Bureaucracy: An Interpretation of the British Civil Service The term representative bureaucracy was coined by Kingsley in a period before the New Public Administration emerged. Kingsley stated that the decisions emerging from bureaucratic agencies will more nearly approximate the wishes of the public if the staffs of those agencies reflect the demographic characteristics of the general population. Kingsley (a British writer) emphasized the reduction of bureaucratic dominance by an elite (upper & middle) class in Britain. When applied to the American experience, representative bureaucracy emphasized race, gender, and ethnic background (Denhardt, 2008).
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Kingsley, Donald J. (1944)-Representative Bureaucracy: An Interpretation of the British Civil Service
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Kingsley, Donald J. (1944)-Representative Bureaucracy: An Interpretation of the British Civil Service
Representative Bureaucracy and Cooptation (Selznick, 1949) is similar in that they both admonish democracy. However, representative bureaucracy differs from cooptation (Selznick, 1949) in that one does not want to gain consent of the entire demographic polity. In addition, cooptation does not make a distinction among demographic segments. Assumes that there is no disparity among demographic segments-indiscriminate. On the other hand, representative bureaucracy (unlike cooptation) implies advocating on behalf of a particular group.
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Kaufman, Herbert (1969)-Decentralization and Political Power
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Kaufman, Herbert (1969)-Decentralization and Political Power
*Proposes that PA has promoted three incompatible values—representativeness, neutral competence, and executive authority.
The administrative history of government has over time witnessed a shift in emphasis on the three values of representativeness, political neutral competence, and executive leadership. Discontent/frustration among various groups and the feeling that they are inadequately represented by the government machinery drive the pursuit of any one of these values at a particular point in time. Despite any one of these values taking precedence, the other two are never completely disregarded. Additionally, regardless of how rigorously one of these values is enacted, it is never enacted to the extent that it’s most staunch advocate would prefer. Executive institutions of government is still highly fragmented despite efforts to strengthen neutral competence and executive leadership. Moreover, the ubiquity of the bureaucracy in people’s everyday lives create a feeling of helplessness and the inability to have their voices heard and enacted from government.
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Kaufman, Herbert (1969)-Decentralization and Political Power
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Kaufman, Herbert (1969)-Decentralization and Political Power
Most importantly minority segments of the population feel that that political, economic, and social systems have not delivered to them fair share of the system’s benefits and rewards because they feel that they cannot obtain in a fair share through the way that current political institutions are constituted. The government system in its current configuration results in broad policies being made by elected officials which in turn results in the ability of officials and lower level employees to use discretion in policy enactment. Policies are sometime not enacted as individuals perceive because bureaucracies are stuck in their ways and too stubborn to change or because individuals/groups are often too optimistic.
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Kaufman, Herbert (1969)-Decentralization and Political Power
NEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Kaufman, Herbert (1969)-Decentralization and Political Power
Solution 1: Since administrative agencies make a greater number of decisions that directly affects individual citizens, it is important that they increase representativeness by placing advocates of these minority groups in decision-making positions within the agency or on boards/commissions that make decisions that affect these groups