Skip to main content
Log in

Ideas in Public Management Reform for the 2010s. Digitalization, Value Creation and Involvement

  • Published:
Public Organization Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the three key ideas for an agenda for the public sector that are emerging as dominant ideas in the 2010’s in the literature on public organizations. The paper examines a select number of self-styled conceptual alternatives from the literature on public management to what has been the dominant paradigm in recent years, the New Public Management (NPM). “Self-styled” means that they explicitly present themselves as alternatives to NPM and address the shortcomings in NPM to promote alternative conceptualizations. They include Digital-Era Governance, Public Value Management (PVM), Collaborative Governance, also known to some as the New Public Governance (NPG). The paper takes each of these as broad categories, and proposes that each shelters sub-categories of ideas. DEG: transparency, social media and shared service centers. PVM: strategy-making, performance governance, and innovation and strategic HRM. NPG: networks and collaboration, public-private partnerships and new ways of engaging active citizens. The paper sees these ideas as competing for dominance in the public organization literature as they are new drivers for reforms. Together they form the building blocks of how public management reforms can be build. The paper also recognizes that there are disagreements between them. The paper suggests that these tensions must be addressed if the reform movement is going to be coherent.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agranoff, R. (2007). Managing Within Networks. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Agranoff, R. (2012). Collaborating to Manage. A Primer for the Public Sector. Washington D.C: Brookings.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alford, J., & O’Flynn, J. (2007). From New public management to public value: paradigmatic change and managerial implications. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 66(3), 353–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alford, J., & O’Flynn, J. (2009). Making sense of public value: concepts, critiques and emergent meanings. International Journal of Public Administration, 32, 171–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amirkhanyan, A. (2010). Monitoring across sectors: examining the effect of nonprofit and forprofit contractor ownership on performance monitoring in state and local government contracts. Public Administration Review, 70(5), 742–755.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barzelay, M. (2001). The New Public Management. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Behn, R. (2007). What All Mayors Would Like to Know About Baltimore’s CitiStat Performance Strategy. Washington D.C: the IBM Center for Business of Government.

  • Bennington, J., & Moore, M. (2011). Public Value. Theory and Practice. London: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borins, S. (2008). Innovations in Government. Brookings: Washington D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryson, J. M. (2004). Strategic Planning for Non-Profit Organizations. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. (2002). Ideas, politics, and public policy. Annual Review of Sociology, 28, 21–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. (2004). Institutional Change and Globalization. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, T., & Lægreid, P. (Eds.). (2011). The Ashgate Research Companion to New Public Management. Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, D., Christensen, T., Lægreid, P., & Midtbø, T. (2012). Cross-border coordination activities in central government—combining organizational conditions and individual features. Public Organization Review, 12(4), 367–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, J., Newman, J., et al. (2007). Creating Citizen-Consumers. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coglianese, G. (2009). The transparent president? the Obama administration and open government. Governance, 22(4), 529–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Considine, M. (2006). Making Public Policy. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeSeve (Ed.). (2011). Managing Recovery. An Insider’s View. Washington DC: IBM Center for Business of Government.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donahue, J., & Zeckhauser, R. (2011). Collaborative Governance. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunleavy, P. (2011). The Vulnerability of the British State. Deeper lessons from urban riots. The blog on British Politics and Policy at LSE http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/2011/08/10/vulnerability-of-the-british-state/#more-13374. Accessed 29 August 2011.

  • Dunleavy, P., et al. (2006a). New public management is dead. Long live digital Era governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16, 467–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunleavy, P., et al. (2006b). Digital Era Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Durant, R. (2000). Whiter the neo-administrative state? toward a polity-centered theory of administrative reform. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(1), 79–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farazmand, A. (2012). Sound governance. Engaging citizens through collaborative organizations. Public Organization Review, 223–241.

  • Ferlie, E., Pollitt, C., & Lynn, L. (2005). The Oxford Handbook of Public Management. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Fountain, J. (2001). Building the Virtual State. Washington DC: Brookings.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fredericksson, H. G. (2005). Whatever Happened to Public Administration? Governance, Governance Everywhere. In E. Ferlie, C. Pollitt, & L. Lynn (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Public Management (pp. 282–304). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fung, A., Graham, M., & Weil, D. (Eds.). (2007). Full Disclosure. The Perils and Promise of Transparency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halligan, J., & Bouckaert, G. (2009). Performance and Trust: Developmental Paths and Optiional Directions. In P. G. Roness & H. Sætren (Eds.), Change and Continuity in Public Sector Organizations (pp. 257–277). Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodge, G., & Greve, C. (2007). Public-private partnerships. An international performance review. Public Administration Review, 67(3), 545–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodge, G., Greve, C., & Boardman, A. (Eds.). (2010). International Handbook on Public-Private Partnerships. Chelthenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hood, C. (1991). A Public Management for All Seasons? Public Administration, 69(1), 3–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hood, C. (2010). Reflections on Public Service Reform in a Cold Fiscal Climate. London: The 2020 Public Services Trust.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hood, C., & Heald, D. (Eds.). (2006). Transparency: The Key to Better Governance? Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hood, C., & Jackson, M. (1991). Administrative Argument. Aldershot: Darthmouth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamarck, E. (2007). The End of Government as We Know It. Lynn Rienner: Making Public Policy Work. Boulder.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamensky, J. (2010). Obama’s Performance Revolution. PA Times, 33(2), 11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamensky, J. (2011). The Obama performance approach. Public Performance and Management Review, 35(1), 132–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kettl, D. F. (2001). Putting performance management to work in federal government. La Follette Policy Report, 12, 8–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kettl, D. F. (2002). The Transformation of Governance. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kettl, D. F. (2009). The Next Government of the United States. How Our Institutions Fail Us and How to Fix Them. New York: W.W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klijn, E.-H., & Koppenjan, J. (2004). Managing Uncertanties in Networks. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landsbergen, D., & Park, J. (2011). Managing Network Communications Through Social Media. Paper presented to the Public Management Research Conference in Syracuse, New York 2–4 June 2011. Paper available at http://www.maxwell.syr.edu/deans.aspx?id=77309416873

  • Lynn, L., Heinrich, C. & Hill, C. (2003). Improving Governance. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  • Margetts, H. (2010). Digital Era Governance—in an Age of Austerity. Lecturer on 6 October 2010 in Catalonia, Spain. Accessed on YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eig-QpqWwWQ

  • Mayer-Schönberger, V., & Cuckier, K. (2012). Big Data. A revolution that will transform the way we live, work and think. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGuire, M., & Agranoff, R. (2011). Networking the Shadow of Bureaucracy. In R. Durant (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of American Bureaucracy (pp. 372–395). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mergel, I. (2012). Social Media in the Public Sector. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, M. H. (1995). Creating Public Value. Strategic Management in Government. Harvard: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, M. H. (2000). Managing for value. Organizational strategy in profit, nonprofit and governmental organizations. Non-Profit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 29, 183–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newman, J., & Clarke, J. (2009). Publics, Politics and Power. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Flynn, J. & Wanna, J. (Eds.) (2008). Collaborative Governance. A New Era of Public Policy in Australia? Canbera: The Australian National University E-Press. Available at http://epress.anu.edu.au.

  • O’Leary, R., & Bingham, L. (Eds.). (2009). The Collaborative Public Manager. New Ideas for the 21st Century. Washington D.C: Georgetown University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Obama, B. (2009). Memorandum 09–12 on Transparency and Open Government. 21 January 2009. Washington D.C.: Office of Management and Budget.

  • OECD. (2005). Modernising Government. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2008). Public-Private Partnerships. In Search of Value and Risk Sharing. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2010a). Value for Money: Public Administration after “New Public Management”. Paris: OECD.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2010b). Making Reform Happen. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2011). Open Government. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, S. (Ed.). (2010). The New Public Governance? London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pedersen, O. K. (2011). Konkurrencestaten [The Competition State]. Copenhagen: Hans Reizels Publisher.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, B. G., Pierre, J., & Randma-Liiv, T. (2011). Global financial crisis, public administration and governance: do new problems require new solutions? Public Organization Review, 11(1), 13–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2011). Public Management Reform. A Comparative Analysis (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Radin, B. (2006). Challenging the Performance Movement. Washington DC: GQ Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, A. (2006). Dashed Expectations: Governmental Adaption to Transparency Rules. In C. Hood & D. Heald (Eds.), Transparency: The Key to Better Governance? (pp. 107–125). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romzek, B., & Johnston, J. M. (2005). State social services contracting: exploring the determinants of effective contract accountability. Public Administration Review, 65(4), 436–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skelcher, C. (2005). Public-Private Partnerships and Hybridity. In E. Ferlie, C. Pollitt, & L. Lynn (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Public Management (pp. 347–370). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Streeck, W., & Thelen, K. (Eds.). (2005). Beyond Continuity. Institutional Change in Advanced Political Economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Talbot, C. (2010). Theories of Performance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Dooren, Wouter, B., Geert, & Halligan, J. (2010). Performance Management in the Public Sector. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, D. M. (2011). The Next Wave. Using Digital Technology to Further Social and Political Innovation. Washington D.C: Brookings.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. (2011). World Wide Governance Indicators. Available at http://govindicators.org.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carsten Greve.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Greve, C. Ideas in Public Management Reform for the 2010s. Digitalization, Value Creation and Involvement. Public Organiz Rev 15, 49–65 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-013-0253-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-013-0253-8

Keywords

Navigation