Rescuing Publicness From Organization Studies (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Publicness of Public Administration
Public administration theory has always struggled to find a clear-cut understanding of the publicness of public administration. There are at least five different approaches to distinguish public from private organizations. A closer examination shows that these five approaches are based on two conceptual versions of the publicness of public administration. The first conceptual version derives its understanding of publicness from "public goods," whereas the second conceptual version involves the publicness of the "public interest." These two versions are derived from two contravening ontological descriptions of publicness that have been developed in modern political theory. Both of these ontological descriptions have to be acknowledged as constitutive for understanding the publicness of public administration: Public administration can be seen as the empirical manifestation of the confrontation of these two meanings, which implies that "public administration" is constituted by an inconsistent conceptual framework. Downloaded from 1. The generic approach, which assumes that public and private organizations do not differ significantly. 2. The economist core approach, which is the dominant approach to public organizations. This outlook is based on a distinction between the state and the market, which are featured as realms in which economic goods are produced. 3. The political core approach, which claims that public organizations have a political influence and therefore should be dealt with as political entities. 4. The normative approach, which is an extension of the political core approach. Unlike the political approach, the normative approach does not neutrally observe the political role of public organizations but emphasizes this role and tries to make use of it to fulfill the "public interest." 5. The dimensional approach, which employs both the political approach and the economist approach.
Comparing Public and Private Management: Theoretical Expectations
This article presents a theoretical assessment of how the impact of management might differ in public versus private organizations. It essentially seeks to reframe the debate from ''are public organizations are different from private organizations?'' to ''is the impact of management action the same in both sectors?'' We start with a series of assumptions based on a set of relevant variables and then using an existing theory of management derive how management might have more or less impact in the public sector compared to the private sector.
Bringing Public Organization and Organizing Back In
Organization Studies, 2011
Since the late 1990s social science-based studies have allocated much less attention to public organizations. Based on the sixth Organization Studies summer workshop, this introductory paper suggests a diagnosis of such a decline as well as a research agenda. It lists some fundamental issues still to be explored such as publicness and governance. It also considers how social science-based organizational knowledge might be extended to various empirical objects and fields in public domains and set-ups such as inter-organizational arrangements, hybrid organizations, multi-stakeholder arenas, hybrid organizing, and transnationalization processes, that usually are covered by scholars -economists, historians, anthropologists, management academics, etc. -who are not using organizational theory lenses.
Understanding and managing public organizations (fourth edition
that public organisations have a distinctive character that is different from that of private organisations. The analysis of public organisations can be broken down into a network of interrelated components. These components include 'the organisation's environment, strategy-and decision-making processes, goals and values, culture, structure, power relationships, tasks and communication processes' (p. 15). Rainey attempts to effectively integrate these components into a comprehensive framework. Indeed, Rainey offers a holistic organisational framework for the analysis of the public organisation and, as such his framework draws organisational theory, public policy theory and on organisational management literature as well as empirical research.
Public Management: Old and New
Discussion of public management reform has been riveted by claims that a new paradigm, a business-like New Public Management, is replacing traditional, bureaucratic government on a global scale. By examining the evolution of managerial structures, practices, and values in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States, Public Management: Old and New reveals how public management reform in any country is inevitably shaped by that country's history.
Researchers have explored the subject of public management for more than a century. Methods and insights have gradually evolved and remarkable progress has been made in researchers' efforts to build solid empirical findings on this subject. The book Public management, organizations, governance and performance (2011) by Laurence J. O'Toole and Kenneth J. Meier " presents a perspective, a model and a large set of empirical findings ". The authors investigate the effectiveness of management in the public sector. Over the eight chapters of the book, they develop a systematic theory on how effective public managers are in shaping policy results and then test aspects of this theory using a wide range of evidence, including a data set of 1.000 public organizations. The book is based on a different approach, avoiding the population ecologists and the managerialist approaches. The analysis attempts to demonstrate that managerial influences on public program performance are multiple and statistically significant. The
Developing organizational leaders to manage publicness: A conceptual framework
Journal of Public Affairs Education, 2018
Students enrolled in programs accredited by the Network of Schools of Public Policy, Affairs, and Administration (NASPAA) are increasingly seeking careers outside of classic government organizations. Considering the diversity of job placements with respect to sector (i.e., government, private for-profit, nonprofit), public affairs students may benefit from in-course instruction that aims to develop management competencies that are applicable to any sector. Educating students on publicness theory, specifically managing to achieve public outcomes (i.e., managing publicness), may position these current and future organizational leaders to identify and effectively manage certain structures and institutions in their organization and the external environment. Accordingly, this study provides a conceptual framework in the form of a research-intensive assignment that will equip public affairs students with a working view of how publicness applies to their organizations. By engaging in this research, students acquire practical tools that allow them to consider publicness in their management strategies and decisions regardless of their sector of employment.