MIXED SIGNALS? PUBLIC SECTOR CHANGE AND THE PROPER CONDUCT OF PUBLIC BUSINESS
| Author | ALAN DOIG |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.1995.tb00824.x |
| Published date | 01 June 1995 |
| Date | 01 June 1995 |
MIXED SIGNALS? PUBLIC SECTOR CHANGE
AND THE PROPER CONDUCT
OF
PUBLIC
BUSINESS
ALAN
WIG
What begun after the
1979
General Election as an exercise to reduce the public sector’s size
and cost developed during the
1980s
into continuous change to its organization, functions
and structure. Throughout this process it appeared that certain assumptions were made
about the presence and continuity of standards of conduct, the proper conduct of public
business and the sense of public service. Such assumptions appear to have been based on
a belief that these standards were general throughout the public sector and would be
maintained or adapted during change. Little attention was given to what comprises the
standards, how they are perceived and implemented across the public sector and who
monitors or polices them, particularly in times of change.
Various aspects of the changes, from devolved management to privatization, have
brought a number of new pressures and perspectives on the conduct of public business
which have led to cases involving failure to follow established procedures, the lack of
expertise, conflict of interest, mismanagement, and misconduct. Together various cases
have raised questions about dysfunctional consequences of change, the signals given
to
officials in terms of how change affects their functions, and the implications for the
continued adherence to and effectiveness of both standards of conduct and of the means
and procedures whereby probity and standards of conduct are maintained.
INTRODUCTION
In
December 1993 the Audit Commission published a report on probity
in
local
government beginning: ’fraud and corruption and the stewardship of private
and public sector accounts have never had a higher profile’ (Audit Commission
1993, p.1).
In
January 1994 the Committee of Public Accounts
(PAC)
took the
unusual step of issuing a general report summarizing its view that, on the basis
of several of
its
earlier reports, there had been
’a
number of
serious
failures
in
administrative and financial systems and controls within departments and other
public bodies, which have led to money being wasted
or
otherwise improperly
spent’. At a time of change, it argued,
Alan Doig
is
Professor
of
Public Services Management
in
the
Business
school at Liverpool
John
Moores
University
Public
Administration
Vol.
73
Summer 1995 (191-212)
0
Basil Blackwell Ltd. 1995,108 Cowley Road, Oxford
OX4
lp,
UK
and 238 Main
Street,
Cambridge,
MA
02142, USA.
192
ALANDOIG
it is important
to
ensure that proper standards are maintained in the conduct
of
public business
...
at
such
a
time it
is
even more essential to maintain honesty in
the spending
of
public money and to ensure that traditional public sector values
are not neglected in the effort to maximize economy and efficiency’
(PAC
1993-94a, pp. v,vi).
Twenty years after the warrant was issued for the appointment of the Royal
Commission on Standards of Conduct in Public Life which was to report that
’our evidence convinces us that the safeguards against malpractice in the public
sector are in need of review‘ (Royal Commission 1976, para. 41), honesty among
public officials and accountability in public life are again issues of official
concern. That they are reflects the tendency to treat such failures as episodic
-
and requiring
only
retrospective attention to deal with the specific activities
or
individuals involved
-
while making assumptions about a pervasive public
service ethical environment that not only provides consistently high standards
of conduct amongst public officials but also ensures that those standards are
maintained and continued during periods of change. The article first describes
this
traditional approach, and then proceeds to review the changes in adminis-
trative culture that took place during the 1980s, and their effects upon conven-
tional and newer methods of control and accountability. The main section of the
article documents learning processes
in
public agencies over the decade in eight
specific kinds of administrative change, and a concluding section attempts to
evaluate whether the problems are merely transitional, or have more fundamen-
tal causes.
FIRE-FIGHTING: THE TRADITIONAL APPROACH TO PUBLIC
SECTOR MALPRACTICE
The Royal Commission, established largely as a result of the Poulson case
(Tomkinson and Gillard 1980; Fitzwalter and Taylor
1981),
was one
of
several
official inquiries into cases of fraud, corruption and mismanagement’ between
the mid-1970s and mid-1980s; other major inquiries concerned the Property
Services Agency
(PAC
1983-84,1984-85; Department of Environment, Wardale
Report 1983; Alan Doig 1985) and the Crown Agents. The Tribunal of Inquiry
into the latter’s disastrous own-account forays into the property market with
private sector partners (Cmd
364,
1982) reported that the effective absence of
civil service norms and procedures
-
an earlier inquiry believed that the Crown
Agents had lost its sense of direction in the ‘spiritual
sense’
-
allowed it to
indulge in unacceptable organizational and personal activities while senior
officials exploited administrative secrecy
and
inertia, and weaknesses
of
ter-
ritorial responsibility, to deflect outside scrutiny (Moran 1986,
p.
91).
An
executive agency of the Department of the Environment, the Property
Services Agency
(PSA)
designed, managed and maintained buildings and prop-
erty for government departments. The lack of supervision of, and low priority
given to, the parts
of
the organization responsible for minor works and main-
Q
Basil
Blackwell
Ltd.
1995
To continue reading
Request your trial