Abstract
True, there is a defined (if unwieldly) set of ideas that usually gets conjured up whenever NPM is the topic of discussion: competition between public and private service providers; decentralization and delayering of government bureaus; more choice for citizens; benchmarking and output measurements; performance contracts and other financial incentives for public servants; creation of inter-nal markets; and assimilation; within the public sector, of private-sector management techniques including better risk-management. Yet despite this emergent consensus on NPM's specific content, several scholars have concluded that NPM embodies radically different, indeed conflicting goals (Kettl 1995, 14) or that it dis-plays a disparate, and at times contradictory, set of traits.... Indeed, sometimes the new public management seems like an empty canvas: you can paint on it whatever you like. There is no clear or agreed definition of what the new public management actually is .. . (Ferlie et al. 1996, 10). These statements imply that, notwithstanding the agreed-upon specifics, NPM seems prey to a lack of clarity at a more theoretical level.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.