Beyond “progressivism”: A new “global paradigm” in public management?

International Journal of Phytoremediation

Volumn 19, Issue 2, 1996, Pages 151-177

  Hood, Christpher ^a  

^a LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84937271319     PISSN: 15226514     EISSN: 15497879     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01900699608525090     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Osborne, D., and Gaebler, T., 1992. Reinventing Government, 325–328. Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley.
2. Aucoin, P., 1990. Administrativ Reform in Public Management. Governance, 3 April: 115–137.
3. 1993. Creating a Government that Works Better and Costs Less: Report of the National Performance Review, 6Washington: US Government Printing Office.
4. Douglas, M., 1987. How Institutions Think, 95–96. London: Routledge.
5. Hood, C., and Jackson, M.W., 1991. Administrative Argument, Aldershot: Dartmouth. Hants
6. Douglas, M., 1982. In the Active Voice, London: Routledge.
7. Barker, Rodney. 1984. “ The Fabian State ”. In Fabian Essays in Socialist Thought, Edited by: Pimlott, Ben. Vol. 27-38, 34London: Heinemann. A recurring metaphor, used, among others, by Beatrice Webb The notion is that public servants should “love the state as priests love the church” (as Sir Arthur Helps once put it: see Schaffer, Bernard. The Administrative Factor, Frank Cass., London, 1973, p. 39) and not as stockbrokers love the stock exchange.Heinemann, London
8. Indeed, it is strange that Osborne and Gaebler do not discuss the German model against their claim to have identified a new "global paradigm", since German public administration seems to represent a more extreme development of progressive public administration than anything attempted in the United States even in the heyday of faith in science and professional expertise.
9. Goodsell, C.T., 1985. The Case for Bureaucracy: A Public Administration Polemic, Chatham, New Jersey: Chatham House.
10. To suggest that reform efforts typically aim to reduce the relative importance of general procedural rules in public administration is not to say that the volume of all rules will thereby decrease. On the contrary, what often results is greater specification and documentation of expected standards and more "paperwork" in that sense. The point remains that such specifications are developed service by service or contract by contract, in contrast to the general regulations and conditions applying to all units in a uniform and inclusive public service. The analogy is more with individualized marriage contracts than uniform standard marriage contracts.
11. Pollitt, C., 1993. Managerialism and the Public Services, Oxford: Blackwell. 2nd ed Hood, C. “A Public Management for All Seasons?” Public Administration 69 (Spring 1991): 3-19
12. Douglas, M., 1990. Risk as a Forensic Resource. Daedalus, 119 Fall: 1–16. Journal of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences
13. Goodsell, C.T., 1993. Reinvent Government or Rediscover it?. Reinventing Government Public Administration Review, 53 January: 85–87. February review of Osborne and Gaebler's
14. Spann, R.N., 1981. Fashions and Fantasies in Public Administration. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 40 March: 12–25.
15. Painter, M., 1990. “ Values in the History of Public Administration ”. In Public Administration in Australia: A Watershed, Edited by: Power, J., 75–93. Sydney: Hale and Iremonger.
16. Breyer, S.G., 1993. Breaking the Vicious Cycle: Toward Effective Risk Regulation, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
17. Rhodes, R.A.W., 1987. Developing the Public Service Orientation. Local Government Studies, 13 May: 63–73. Stewart, J. and Clarke, M. the Public Service Orientation: Issues and Dilemmas, Public Administration 65 (Summer 1987): 161-178
18. Cohen, M.D., March, J., and Olsen, J., 1972. A Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17 March: 1–25.
19. Self, P., 1993. Government by the Market?, London: Macmillan.
20. Martin, S., 1983. Managing Without Managers, Beverly Hills: Sage.
21. Sawer, M., 1989. “ Efficiency Effectiveness…and Equity? ”. In Corporate Management in Australian Government: Reconciling Accountability and Efficiency, Edited by: Davies, G., 138Melbourne: Macmillan.
22. Jones, J.M., 1980. Organizational Aspects of Police Behaviour, Farnborogh: Gower. Egalitarians may fear that, contrary to the orthodox “Chicago theory of government”, remote bureau production will tend to lead to excessive budget-cutting, privatization and corporatization as “bureau-shaping” senior public servants seek to practise “management avoidance” by externalizing responsibility and blame to others. (see Dunleavy, P. J. Democracy, Bureaucracy and Public Choice, Heme1 Hempstead, Harvester Wheatsheaf, Heme1 Hempstead, 1991). The analogy is with the well- known tendency of police to practise “patrol avoidance” in favour of more congenial work with colleagues back at police HQ in spite of the official “beat ideology” typically proclaimed by police chiefs
23. Thompson, M., Ellis, R., and Wildavsky, A., 1990. Cultural Theory, 98Westview, Boulder.
24. Hood, C., 1995. The New Public Management in the 1980s: Variations on a Theme?. Organizations Accounting and Society, forthcoming
25. Hay, R., 1989. The European Commission and the Administration of the Community, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Community.
26. Mueller, H.E., 1984. Bureaucracy Education and Monopoly, Berkeley: California University Press.
27. Hood, C., 1990. Beyond the Public Bureacracy State? Public Administration in the 1990s. Inaugural Lecture, LSE16 January: 7
28. Leibenstein, H., 1976. Beyond Economic Man, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
29. For example in the handling of riots in private prisons; we can recall that it was the 1857 Indian Mutiny which ended the rule of the East India Company and its replacement by state organization.
30. Bryson, J., and Crosby, B., 1992. Leadership for the Common Good: Tackling Public Problems in a Shared-Power World, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
31. Stewart, J., 1993. Defending Public Accountability. Demos Quarterly, Winter
32. Teubner, G., 1987. “ Juridification: Concepts, Aspects, Limits, Solutions ”. In Juridification of Social Spheres, Edited by: Teubner, G., 3–48. Berlin: de Gruyter.
33. Jacob, J., 1991. Lawyers Go to Hospital. Public Law, Summer: 255–281.
34. Austin, J.L., 1962. Sense and Sensibilia, 3London: Oxford University Press.