CHANGE IN THE MANAGEMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.1992.tb00952.x |
| Author | KIERON WALSH,JOHN STEWART |
| Published date | 01 December 1992 |
| Date | 01 December 1992 |
CHANGE
IN
THE
MANAGEMENT
OF
PUBLIC
SERVICES
JOHN
STEWART
AND
KIERON
WALSH
This article identifies the main themes in recent changes in public sector management and
shows the extent of the challenge to past organizational assumptions. While recognizing
the objectives of the changes could bring benefits if realized, it argues that there are a
series
of
issues that are unresolved. The language
of
consumerism, the development of
government by contracts, the form of performance management and the use
of
quasi-
markets are seen as creating problems. These are seen
as
deriving from
an
attempt to apply
approaches drawn from the private sector
to
the public domain. It is argued that they
need to be balanced by approaches that recognize the values
of
the public sector.
INTRODUCTION
All
parts
of
the public sector in Britain face, or have faced, major management
change. Many of the changes have been initiated by the government, although
some of them, are the result
of
independent initiatives, for example, by local
authorities. The changes
are
a response by government to wider
social
and economic
changes and an expression of developing ideas and ideologies. John Major, when
Chief Secretary to the Treasury, in a lecture for the Audit commission entitled
‘Public Service Management
-
the Revolution in Progress’, stated:
My theme is the impact of general economic developments on public service
management
-
the changes they make necessary in the public services, the
opportunities they offer public service providers, and the benefits they
will
deliver
for the wider community, both as taxpayers and as users.
He argued that the change within the public services
. .
.is nothing less than a revolution in progress. Because it has been gradual,
and has involved a high degree of co-operation by staff, it has not had the
acknowledgement it deserves. Nor has the staff for their part in it. But it is
a revolution, nonetheless, and its impact is dramatic (Major 1989, p.
1).
Whether the developments are
so
great as to call them a revolution may be
subject to debate. Certain
of
the changes have been carried into practice but some
have proved difficult to implement. We accept, however, that the nature
of
public
John Stewart is Professor
of
Local Government Administration and Kieron Walsh is Professor
of
Public
Sector
Management in the School
of
Public Policy at Birmingham University.
Public Administration
Vol.
70
Winter 1992
(499-518)
0
1992 Public Administration
ISSN
0033-3298 $3.00
500
JOHN
STEWART AND KIERON WALSH
service management is changing and we will argue that, while some of the changes
strengthen it, others create major problems because they involve the adoption of
models based on the private sector
-
and often over-simplified private sector models
-
without regard to the distinctive purposes, conditions and tasks of the public
sector. This has meant that, in some cases, the practical impact has been small.
As Johan Olsen, writing about Scandinavian experience, has argued
Possibly private sector models have had more impact on how we talk about
the public sector than on how it works. In a period where the private sector
is assumed to be modem and the public sector is old-fashioned, it is tempting
for the public agencies to change their basis of legitimacy.
The image presented of the private sector is seldom based on empirical
observations of how this sector actually works. Rather it is taken from how
introductory text books in business administration say it should work (Olsen
1987,
p.
3).
The public service, it seems, can only retain legitimacy by changing the way
that it is managed, or appears to be managed, to reflect ideas about what con-
stitutes good management, which will typically be based on private sector ideas.
In many cases, as Meyer and Rowen
(1977)
argue, the change will be ritualistic.
Moreover, because it is difficult to measure objectively the performance of the
public service there is a tendency to imitate those organizations that are seen,
whether rightly or wrongly, as effective (Dimaggio and Powell
1985).
The result
is
that change is not introduced to solve speclfic problems, but to express ideological
commitment. The use of market and private sector management methods has been
identified as a general solution to public sector problems. But the introduction of
private sector approaches itself introduces new problems and issues. The public
realm must act to reconcile,
if
only formally, conflicting interests and values, to
pursue multiple purposes, and to enable accountability. The mechanisms of private
sector management will not easily adapt to these demands and purposes.
It
is the
identification of the problems resulting from the use of new, private sector based
models
of
public service management that provide the main focus
of
the article.
THE
MAIN
STEPS
TO
CHANGE
Each of the parts
of
the public sector in Britain has been subject to investigation
or legislation which has led to management or organizational change and some
other parts have been privatized in the
full
sense of the term. The sale of nationalized
industries or of council houses involve a transfer of assets from the public sector
to the private sector with, at best, a regulatory role retained by the public sector.
That privatization process has, however, only been taken a certain way and has
inherent limitations. Madsen Pine, Director of the Adam Smith Institute,
acknowledges that:
'It
is also recognised that privatisation in Britain is nearing the
end
of
its initial agenda' and that:
There is scope for directing attention to those services which governments have
preferred to keep within the public sector, and to asking if ways can be found
to make these services
in
tum direct their output to the satisfaction of the wants
To continue reading
Request your trial