Overwriting New Public Management with New Public Governance in New Zealand's approach to health system improvement

Abstract

PurposeIn 2016, New Zealand's Ministry of Health introduced the System Level Measures Framework which marked a departure from health targets and pay-for-performance incentives towards an approach based on local, collaborative approaches to health system improvement. This exemplifies an attempt to “overwrite” New Public Management (NPM) institutional practices with New Public Governance (NPG). We aim to trace this process of overwriting so as to understand how attempts to change institutional practices were facilitated, blocked, translated and edited.Design/methodology/approachWe develop a conceptual framework for understanding and tracing institutional change towards NPG which emphasises the importance of discursive strategies in policy attempts to overwrite NPM with NPG. To analyse the New Zealand case, we drew on policy documents and interviews conducted in 2017–18 with twelve national key informants and fifty interviewees closely involved in local development and/or implementation of the SLMF.FindingsPolicy sponsors of collaborative approaches to health system improvement first attempted formal institutional change, arguing that adopting collaborative, quality improvement (NPG) approaches would supplement existing performance management (NPM) practices, to create a superior synthesis. When this formal approach was blocked, they adopted an approach based on informal persuasion of local organisational actors that quality improvement should supplant performance improvement. This approach was edited and translated by local actors, and the success of local implementation varied considerably.Research limitations/implicationsThis article offers a novel conceptualisation of public management institutional change, which can help explain why it is difficult to completely erase NPM practices in health.Originality/valueThis paper explores the rhetorical practices that are used in the introduction of a New Public Governance policy framework.

Instability in New Zealand’s Public Sector

“…Many of the assumptions about how public systems should be managed that flow from New Public Management are so entrenched in New Zealand's public sector culture that attempts to do things differently can be met with straightforward hostility (Tenbensel, Silwal andWalton, 2021, p.1054). This is unfortunate, as New Public Management, whatever its successes, is recognised as having a range of perverse outcomes at variance with its stated aims; even 'policy disasters' (Dunleavy et al, 2006, p.468).…”

Managing Affective Commitment to Change in Public Sector Organization of Pakistan: A Social Exchange Perspective

“…Under the New Public management (NPM) model, public sector organizations around the world has been experiencing immense organizational changes to redesign its functions (Tenbensel et al, 2021;Hood & Doxin, 2015;Kuipers et al, 2014). This revelation conventionally adheres to the system-theory view (Katz & Kahn, 1978), which suggests that dynamic environmental factors, such as technological advances (Dunleavy et al, 2006), shifting consumer preferences, and unstable financial conditions (Hendriks & Tops, 2003), pose ceaseless threats, forcing organizations to respond accordingly for a better chance of survival & success (Herrero-Luna et al, 2022).…”