Measuring New Public Management and Governance in Political Debate

Fattore, Giovanni; Dubois, Hans; Lapenta, Antonio

doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02497.x

Cited by 37 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 48 publications

(42 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In order to trace the administrative paradigms that the texts invoke, we developed a dictionary of core ideas and vocabularies that are characteristic for each paradigm, as well as a list of keyword examples for each core idea, much akin to prior research using a similar approach (see, for instance, the studies by Fattore, Dubois, & Lapenta, 2012;Höllerer, Jancsary, Barberio, & Meyer, 2014;Jones & LivneTarandach, 2008;Meyer & Hammerschmid, 2006;Suddaby & Greenwood, 2005). The dictionary was compiled by drawing on seminal publications on each of the three paradigms and on comparative work (Klijn, 2012;Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2011).…”

Section: Data Method and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Institutional Hybridity in Public Sector Reform: Replacement, Blending, or Layering of Administrative Paradigms

Polzer¹,

Meyer

Höllerer

et al. 2016

Research in the Sociology of Organizations

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Despite an abundance of studies on hybridization and hybrid forms of organizing, scholarly work has failed to distinguish consistently between specific types of hybridity. As a consequence, the analytical category has become blurred and lacks conceptual clarity. Our paper discusses hybridity as the simultaneous appearance of institutional logics in organizational contexts, and differentiates the parallel co-existence of logics from transitional combinations (eventually leading to the replacement of a logic) and more robust combinations in the form of layering and blending. While blending refers to hybridity as an 'amalgamate' with original components that are no longer discernible, the notion of layering conceptualizes hybridity in a way that the various elements, or clusters thereof, are added on top of, or alongside, each other, similar to sediment layers in geology. We illustrate and substantiate such conceptual differentiation with an empirical study of the dynamics of public sector reform. In more detail, we examine the parliamentary discourse around two major reforms of the Austrian Federal Budget Law in 1986 and in 2007/2009 in order to trace administrative (reform) paradigms. Each of the three identified paradigms manifests a specific field-level logic with implications for the state and its administration: bureaucracy in Weberian-style Public Administration, market-capitalism in New Public Management, and democracy in New Public Governance. We find no indication of a parallel co-existence or transitional combination of logics, but hybridity in the form of robust combinations. We explore how new ideas fundamentally build on -and are made resonant with -the central bureaucratic logic in a way that suggests layering rather than blending. The conceptual findings presented in our article have implications for the literature on institutional analysis and institutional hybridity.

show abstract

Section: Data Method and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Institutional Hybridity in Public Sector Reform: Replacement, Blending, or Layering of Administrative Paradigms

Polzer¹,

Meyer

Höllerer

et al. 2016

Research in the Sociology of Organizations

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This can be particularly useful to highlight the arguments present in the political discussion, together with the rhetoric accompanying reforms, and to overcome the well-known limitations (e.g. focus on literal contents of the documental source) of the mere content analysis (Fattore et al 2012). In this sense, political debates, laws and administrative documents incorporate the linguistic texts, social practices and socio-cultural contexts in which they are embedded and have been, thus, chosen as the basis of our analysis.…”

Section: Textual Analysis As a Methodology For Exploring Reformsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The contributions discussing NPM and GOV describe their main characteristics (Marsh and Rhodes 1992;Ferlie et al 1996;Pollit and Bouckaert 2004;Peters 2008) and identify (theoretically and empirically) their positive and negative effects (Dunleavy and Hood 1994;Lapsley 2008Lapsley , 2009Hood and Peters 2004), thus focusing on the contents of reforms, on their implementation, and the gaps therein. With some recent exceptions (Fattore et al 2012;Hyndman et al 2014), less attention has been given to how reforms ideas and values are made sense of and discussed by those responsible for designing, approving and translating them during the legislative process, and whether and how these ideas and values relate to each other. Moreover, from a methodological viewpoint, most contributions on reforms tend to adopt a comparative approach, laying their analysis on the grounds of historical explanations (Kuhlmann 2010;Ongaro 2011;Kickert 2005) or normative (Hood and Peters 2004;Marty et al 2006), descriptive and exploratory analyses (Pollitt and Bouckaert 2011;Cheung 2012).…”

Section: Public Administration New Public Management and Public Govementioning

confidence: 99%

“…to specific circumstances and into specific tools, systems and procedures. Moreover, we considered a setting, the Italian one, which is described as neo-Weberian implementer of NPM changes (Pollitt and Bouckaert 2011;Ongaro 2011;Fattore et al 2012, Capano, 2003 and where the intertwining of different administrative models appears to be particularly relevant.…”

Section: Insert Table 1 Herementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Studying administrative reforms through textual analysis: the case of Italian central government accounting

Liguori

Steccolini

Rota

2016

International Review of Administrative Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article contributes to the literature on public sector reforms by proposing textual analysis as a useful research strategy to explore how reform archetypes and related ideas are deployed in the parliamentary debate and regulations advancing reforms. Public Administration (PA), New Public Management (NPM) and Public Governance (GOV) can be depicted as three different archetypes providing characteristic administrative ideas and concepts and related tools and practices, which lead reforms. We use textual analysis to look into more than 20 years of Italian central government accounting reforms and investigate how the three administrative archetypes have evolved, intertwined and replaced each other. Textual analysis proves a useful tool through which to investigate reform processes and allows us to show that in neo-Weberian countries, such as Italy, NPM and GOV, far from being revolutionary paradigms, may represent fashionable trends that have not left significant traces in the practice and rhetoric of reforms. Points for practitioners In contexts based on civil law traditions, the introduction of new reforms appears to be slow and difficult, and is often more successful when it respects extant PA systems, which remain well rooted in the public sector. Decision-makers may want to keep this into consideration when proposing or implementing new changes. From an organizational point of view, this underlines the importance of reassuring civil servants and politicians of the consistency of the ‘new’ proposed models with those they have been accustomed to, and of using the traditional language of PA to explain and introduce new ideas and tools and make them more acceptable. However, this has to be balanced by an actual change in the old systems and routines, using continuity to bring about change and avoiding the re-enactment of merely formalistic approaches.

show abstract

“…Posteriormente, o fim da chamada "Era de Ouro" foi marcado pelo esgotamento do Welfare State, nos países desenvolvidos, e pela crise fiscal dos Estados nacionais, nos países em desenvolvimento, dando ensejo ao aparecimento da New Public Management (BARZELAY, 2001;BEVIR;RHODES;WELLER, 2003;FATTORE;DUBOIS;LAPENTA, 2012), no final da década de 1970, paradigma importado do setor privado com o objetivo de flexibilizar o Estado em um momento de crescente globalização internacional.…”

unclassified

Participação eletrônica e suas relações com governo eletrônico, efetividade governamental e accountability

Braga

Gomes

2016

Organ. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ResumoN o alvorecer do século XXI, os modelos tradicionais já não conseguem dar respostas satisfatórias às demandas da sociedade, precipitando uma nova reinvenção do Estado. Esse período corresponde, por um lado, à emergên-cia de modernas Tecnologias de Informação e Comunicação (TIC), ubíquas e interativas. Por outro lado, essa fase é marcada pela crescente fragmentação do poder estatal, em paralelo com o aumento proporcional de regimes democráticos no mundo. Nesse contexto, emerge a "Governança Responsiva", modelo orientado por princípios de responsabilização, transparência e participação, no qual a efetividade se vincula a seu atributo-chave: a responsividade. Portanto, torna-se fundamental aprofundar o entendimento dessa mudança de paradigma, em particular no que tange ao papel desempenhado pelo governo. O presente artigo tem como objetivo analisar as relações entre a participação eletrônica e três aspectos-chave: governo eletrônico, efetividade governamental e responsabilização dos agentes públicos (accountability). Para tanto, lançou-se mão de uma abordagem dedutiva e objetiva da qual derivou uma estratégia de trabalho de natureza quantitativa, com emprego do método de análise bivariada denominado correlação linear de Pearson. Em suma, constatou-se que altos índices de desenvolvimento do governo eletrônico estão correlacionados a altos índices de participação eletrônica. Além disso, verificou-se que quanto mais elevado o nível de participação eletrônica, mais elevado o nível de efetividade governamental e também de responsabilização dos agentes públicos. electronic ParticiPation and its relationshiP with e-government, government effectiveness and accountability Palavras AbstractA t the dawn of the XXI century, traditional models are no longer able to give satisfactory answers to the society demands, precipitating a new reinvention of the State. This corresponds, on the one hand, to the emergence of modern Information and Communication Technologies (ICT), ubiquitous and interactive. On the other hand, this phase is marked by the increasing fragmentation of State power in parallel with the proportional increase of democratic regimes around the world. In this context emerges the "Responsive Governance", a model driven by principles of accountability, transparency and participation, where effectiveness is linked to its key attribute: responsiveness. This article aims to analyze the relations between

show abstract

Measuring New Public Management and Governance in Political Debate

Cited by 37 publications

References 48 publications

Institutional Hybridity in Public Sector Reform: Replacement, Blending, or Layering of Administrative Paradigms

Institutional Hybridity in Public Sector Reform: Replacement, Blending, or Layering of Administrative Paradigms

Studying administrative reforms through textual analysis: the case of Italian central government accounting

Participação eletrônica e suas relações com governo eletrônico, efetividade governamental e accountability

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About