Management Science in the Public Sector

Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_1331-1
  • 658 Downloads

Synonyms

Definition

Management science is an interdisciplinary field that develops and applies a wide variety of analytical concepts and tools to help decision-makers address complex challenges in organizations. Management science uses data and modeling to help decision-makers structure a problem within prescribed parameters to reach an envisioned goal, usually optimization of a desirable outcome like cost-effectiveness or minimization of an undesirable outcome like risk or loss.

Introduction

Management science draws on fields such as mathematics, statistics, decision theory, econometrics, operations research, game theory, industrial engineering, and systems theory, to name a few. This field has such extensive overlap with the field of operations research that the two are considered nearly synonymous. In fact, in the mid-1990s, the Operations Research Society of America merged with the Institute of...

Keywords

Supply Chain Supply Chain Management Private Firm Management Science Social Entrepreneurship 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Archibald RD (1987) Key milestones in the early PERT/CPM/PDM days. Proj Manag J 18(3):29–31Google Scholar
  2. Behn R (2001) Rethinking democratic accountability. Brookings Institution, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  3. Dees JG, Emerson J, Economy P (2001) Enterprising nonprofits: a toolkit for social entrepreneurs. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Dunn WN, Miller DY (2007) A critique of the new public management and the neo-Weberian state: advancing a critical theory of administrative reform. Public Organ Rev 7(4):345–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gore A (1993) “From red tape to results: creating a government that works better and costs less”. A report of the national performance review. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  6. Grimsey D, Lewis M (2002) Evaluating the risks of public-private partnerships for infrastructure projects. Int J Proj Manag 20(2):107–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hood C, Peters G (2004) The middle aging of new public management: into the age of paradox? J Public Adm Res Theory 14(3):267–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kearns K (1996) Managing for accountability: preserving the public trust in public and nonprofit organizations. Jossey-Bass, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  9. Letts C, Ryan W, Grossman A (1997) Virtuous capital: what foundations can learn from venture capitalists. Harv Bus Rev 75(2):36+Google Scholar
  10. Lu M, AbouRizk S (2000) Simplified CPM/PERT simulation model. J Constr Eng Manag 126(3):219–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Milward HB, Provan K (2000) Governing the hallow state. J Public Adm Res Theory 10(2):359–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Osborne D, Gaebler T (1992) Reinventing government. Addison-Wesley, ReadingGoogle Scholar
  13. Poluha RG (2007) Application of the SCOR model in supply chain management. Cambria Press, YoungstownGoogle Scholar
  14. Romzek B, Johnston J (2005) State social services contracting: exploring the determinants of effective contract accountability. Public Adm Rev 65(4):436–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Taylor FW (1914) The principles of scientific management. Harper Brothers, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Terry L (1998) Administrative leadership, neo-managerialism, and the public management movement. Public Adm Rev 58(3):194–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate School of Public and International AffairsUniversity of PittsburghPittsburghUSA