Origin and theoretical basis of new public management

https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7494(01)00041-1Get rights and content

Abstract

The article describes the characteristics of New Public Management (NPM) and gives a cursory overview of the development of the behavioral-administrative sciences and their relation to NPM. A descriptive model of the behavioral-administrative sciences is developed that pits three internally consistent scientific worldviews that are incommensurable to each other. From this, the theoretical origins of NPM can be traced to a variety of theoretical perspectives. Although the special mix of characteristics of NPM is new, it does not represent a paradigm change. Indeed, it is improbable that there will ever be one paradigm for the behavioral-administrative sciences; and without an accepted paradigm, a paradigm change is not really possible.

Introduction

From where does New Public Management (NPM) come? The conventional wisdom holds that NPM has its origins in public-choice theory and managerialism Aucoin 1990, Dunsire 1995, Lueder 1996, Naschold et al 1995, Reichard 1996, Schedler 1995. Does this formula fit, and is it exhaustive? Moreover, is NPM really new? Finally, does NPM represent a paradigm change, as some writers claim Aucoin 1995, Borins 1994, Kamensky 1996, OECD 1995, Osborne and Gaebler 1993, Reinermann 1995?

To answer these questions, I describe the development of administrative thought in the U.S., the home of public-choice theory and managerialism. I focus on the U.S. because it dominates theoretical developments in the behavioral-administrative sciences, owing in part to the sheer size of its academic establishment, its diversity, and the richness of its approaches. On the presumption that the attempts of practitioners, consultants, and scientists to reform administrative organizations and delivery systems are influenced by their disciplinary socialization and training, this survey will examine whether theoretical concepts other than public choice and managerialism have influenced NPM.

Section snippets

Characteristics of new public management

The NPM movement began in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Its first practitioners emerged in the United Kingdom under Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and in the municipal governments in the U.S. (e.g., Sunnyvale, California) that had suffered most heavily from economic recession and tax revolts. Next, the governments of New Zealand and Australia joined the movement. Their successes put NPM administrative reforms on the agendas of most OECD countries and other nations as well (OECD, 1995).

Only

The development of administrative thought in the United States

The conscious study of public administration in the U.S. began in a time when its public administration was in a state of disrepute. In the late 19th century, the administrative mechanisms in the U.S. were dominated by the spoils system—administrative positions were distributed to those who contributed to the victorious party’s electoral success. Administrative personnel, therefore, changed frequently. Incompetence, inefficiency, and corruption were common Weber 1956, Van Riper 1987, Stone and

New public administration and its successors

Classical and neoclassical public administration were challenged not only by public-choice theory. Even in the heyday of neoclassical public administration, some voices dissented from the dominant stream of behavioral and positivist research. In matters of management, the human-relations school, based on the concept of Maslow’s self-actualizing man, sought to put humans at the center of management (McGregor, 1960): people should get opportunities to develop themselves and to live a healthy life

A descriptive model of the behavioral-administrative sciences

In the United States, the behavioral-administrative sciences are a melee of approaches and disciplines. Some disciplines (i.e., public choice) are relatively unified. Others (i.e., public management) are heavily fragmented. Some disciplines (i.e., public choice and new public administration) have some significant conflicts in their basic approaches. Others (public administration and public management) use compatible approaches but are in competition for students, audiences, and research funds.

The theoretical basis of new public management

As I have already argued, New Public Management has many components. But what are the theoretical bases for these components? What ideas have influenced the inventors of the reforms that were later labeled NPM (or Reinventing Government)? First, I examine the undisputed characteristics of NPM, then the debatable ones.

Budget cuts need no explanation. All types of scholars (except perhaps those with an emancipatory worldview) would recommend budget cuts in times of money shortages. Privatization

Is new public management really new? Does it reflect a paradigm change?

From the analysis above, I can offer a number of additional hypotheses about New Public Management.

Hypothesis 2: Many of the theoretical origins and influences on NPM are not new.

Some can even be traced back to the Progressives and are almost a hundred years old. This finding, however, must be qualified.

Hypothesis 3: The mix of reforms that make up New Public Management is certainly new.

Although some individual characteristics are rather old, these elements have never before been organized (as

The inevitable linkage between politics and administration

From these findings, I offer two more conclusions: Hypothesis 8: Decisions about administrative structures are political questions and are closely related to political philosophy.

Hypothesis 9: NPM is a mix of values that seems to fit the current situation and solve current administrative problems as well as possible, but it will not last forever.

There will come other problem situations and there will come new reform waves that will reform NPM-oriented structures.

All this should not be

Acknowledgments

During three years of research I received help, interesting comments, and other support from various sources. I want to thank here all the people who contributed to my thoughts—especially Sandy Borins, who gave me not only lessons in canoeing but in NPM, too. I also want to thank Bob Behn, Laura Florl, Mark Green, and Fred Thompson for their help in making this paper publishable.

References (112)

  • J.A. Anderson

    Public policy-making

    (1975)
  • G. Andersson

    Kritik und wissenschaftsgeschichte—Kuhns, Lakatos’ und Feyerabends kritik des kritischen rationalismus

    (1988)
  • P.H. Appleby

    Toward better public administration

    Public Administration Review

    (1947)
  • P.E. Arnold

    Reform’s changing role

    Public Administration Review

    (1995)
  • K.J. Arrow

    Social choice and individual values

    (1951)
  • P. Aucoin

    Administrative reform in public managementparadigms, principles, paradoxes and pendulums

    Governancean International Journal of Policy and Administration

    (1990)
  • P. Aucoin

    The New Public ManagementCanada in comparative perspective

    (1995)
  • B. Barber

    Starke demokratieUeber die teilhabe am politischen

    (1994)
  • R.D. Behn

    Public managementshould it strive to be art, science, or engineering

    Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory

    (1996)
  • S. Borins

    SummaryGovernment in transition—A new paradigm in public administration

  • S. Borins

    The New Public Management is here to stay

    Canadian Public Administration

    (1995)
  • J. Boston et al.

    Public managementthe New Zealand model

    (1996)
  • B. Bozeman

    Introductiontwo concepts of public management

  • B. Bozeman

    Theory, ‘wisdom,’ and the character of knowledge in public managementa critical view of the theory-practice linkage

  • J.M. Buchanan

    The limits of libertybetween anarchy and leviathan

    (1975)
  • J.M. Buchanan

    Liberty, market and statepolitical economy in the 1980s

    (1986)
  • J.M. Buchanan et al.

    The calculus of consentlogical foundations of constitutional democracy

    (1962)
  • T. Burns et al.

    Mechanistische und organische systeme des managements

  • E. Buschor

    Introductionfrom advanced public accounting via performance measurement to New Public Management

  • A.K. Campbell

    Old and New Public Administration in the 1970s

    Public Administration Review

    (1972)
  • J.S. Coleman

    Foundations of social theory

    (1990)
  • T.L. Cooper

    An ethic of citizenship for public administration

    (1991)
  • H. Demsetz

    Toward a theory of property rights

    American Economic Review

    (1967)
  • M. Douglas et al.

    Risk and culturean essay on the selection of technological and environmental dangers

    (1982)
  • A. Downs

    An economic theory of democracy

    (1957)
  • A. Downs

    Inside bureaucracy

    (1966)
  • P.F. Drucker

    The practice of management

    (1954)
  • P.F. Drucker

    The age of discontinuity

    (1968)
  • A. Dunsire

    Administrative theory in the 1980sa viewpoint

    Public Administration

    (1995)
  • R. Egger

    The period of crisis1933 to 1945

  • E.J. Eisenach

    The lost promise of progressivism

    (1994)
  • R.J. Ellis et al.

    Culture and the environment in the Pacific Northwest

    American Political Science Review

    (1997)
  • C.T. Fox et al.

    Postmodern public administrationtoward discourse

    (1995)
  • R.T. Golembiewski

    Organization development in public agenciesperspectives on theory and practice

    Public Administration Review

    (1969)
  • A. Gore

    The new job of the federal executive

    Public Administration Review

    (1994)
  • V.A. Graicunas

    Relationship in organization

  • S.M. Greenhouse

    The planning-programming-budgeting systemrationale, language, and idea-relationships

    Public Administration Review

    (1966)
  • B.M. Gross

    The new systems budgeting

    Public Administration Review

    (1969)
  • L. Gulick

    Notes on the theory of organization

  • J. Habermas

    Communication and the evolution of society

    (1979)
  • M.M. Harmon

    Normative theory and public administrationsome suggestions for a redefinition of administrative responsibility

  • M.M. Harmon et al.

    rganization theory for public administration

    (1986)
  • F.A.von Hayek

    The constitution of liberty

    (1960)
  • F.A.von Hayek

    Freiburger studiengesammelte aufsaetze

    (1969)
  • G.T. Henry

    Program evaluation

  • N. Henry

    Paradigms of public administration

    Public Administration Review

    (1975)
  • C. Hood

    A public management for all seasons?

    Public Administration

    (1991)
  • J.M. Kamensky

    Role of the ‘reinventing government’ movement in federal management reform

    Public Administration Review

    (1996)
  • H. Kaufman

    Administrative decentralization and political power

    Public Administration Review

    (1969)
  • M. Kelly et al.

    Policy analysis in the post-positivist eraengaging stakeholders in evaluating the economic development districts program

    Public Administration Review

    (1993)
  • Cited by (475)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text