"Law" versus "Performance" as Objective Standard

Abstract

1. Ronald Moe, Exploring the Limits of Privatization, Public Administration Review, vol. 47 (November/December 1987), p. 45. 2. I use the term publicness as, essentially, the flip side of privatization. Publicness is not a mellifluous term, but it probably beats publicization. 3. B. Bozeman, All Organizations Are Public (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1987). 4. I was flattered to embody the prevailing orthodoxy (and only six months after publication!) until I consulted my personal, autographed copy of Ambrose Bierce's Devil's Dictionary for Public Administration. Orthodox is defined as out of touch with contemporary trends. 5. Moe, ibid., pp. 453-454. 6. Moe, ibid., p. 453. 7. Moe, ibid., p. 458. 8. Indeed, this is the problem that motivated All Organizations Are Public. Consider the similarity of Moe's assessment and the following All Organizations excerpt: Rarely is the allocation of goods and services determined by evidence that a function is better managed in one sector than the other.... There is no reason why ideology and economic theory should have hegemony over such decisions. Managerial and organizational issues may be just as important (p. 4). 9. Moe, p. 456. 10. Moe, op. cit., p. 453. 11. See B. Bozeman and M. Crow, U.S. RD M. Crow and B. Bozeman, A New Typology for RD Technology Competitiveness Act of 1987, House Committee on Science, Space and Technology (H.R. 2916), August 4, 1987. 14. Moe's term, p. 456.