NAME: SHRUTI AGARWAL

FATHERS NAME: SACHIN AGARWAL

BATCH: 2019-24

SEMESTER: 3RD

COURSE CODE: BL-3003

COURSE NAME: PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

ROLL NUMBER:

TOPIC: NEW PUBLIC MANAGEMENT

SUBMITTED TO; PROFF. OM KRISHNA

EMAIL ID: [email protected]

 NEW PUBLIC MANAGEMENT

INTRODUCTION

New Public Management is an extended form of NPM and it is policy management which is
used by the government since a very long time to bring modernisation to public sector it is an
approach to running organisations of public services they are also at both national and sub-
national levels. As per the hypothesis the greater wave of new public management will lead
to a greater cost-efficiency for governments and also on other objective and considerations it
does not have any negative effect.

The term „New Public Management‟ was coined by famous academics in Australia and UK
to describe approaches to make the public services more “business-like” and to improve
private sector which focuses more on services of customer, in NPM every citizen is viewed as
customer and every public servant are viewed as public manager. E- government full service
or some programs to central location are I some cases used by new public management
reforms to reduce costs.

New public management system also proposed a more decentralized control of resources and
exploring other service delivery models to achieve better results, including a quasi-market
structure where public and private service providers competed with each other in an attempt
to provide better and faster services. [For e.g. In UK the purchase and provision of healthcare
was split up between National Health Services or NHS and Government funded GP fund
holders, this increased efficiency as the hospitals now needed to provide low cost procedures
to win both patients and funds.)1

NPM reforms use approaches such as disaggregation, customer satisfaction initiatives, and
customer service efforts, applying an entrepreneurial spirit to public service, and introducing
innovations. The NPM system allows "the expert manager to have a greater discretion".2
"Public Managers under the New Public Management reforms can provide a range of choices
from which customers can choose, including the right to opt out of the service delivery
system completely".3

1
New Public Management Model
2
Farazmand, Ali (February 2, 2006). "New Public Management". Handbook of Globalization, Governance, and
Public Administration: 888.
3
Kaboolian, Linda (1998). The New Public Management: Challenging the Boundaries of the Management vs.
Administration Debate. Public Administration Review.
WHAT IS NEW PUBLIC MANAGEMENT?

Intellectuals of Public Administration are of course acquainted with New Public Management
and its mechanisms. The idea also rings a bell far beyond the confines of the discipline,
loaded with various meanings. New Public Management is tough to explain because, more
than just a concept, NPM is holiness or a set of doctrinal principles. The cause may be that, in
the beginning, it was ideologically or at least emotionally grounded on the perception that
public sectors, especially in Western democracies, had become too large and inefficient.
NPM is a very diffuse concept, and almost any reform of the public sector during the latest
decades has been regarded as New Public Management, even if it did not share its basic
assumptions. Additionally, NPM is related with many reforms that are not only distinct but
sometimes even inconsistent.4

Nevertheless, most of the academics decide on a common denominator description, as well as

in which the New Public Management intricate the elements are the slight definition of New
Public Management would be the “effort to device management thoughts from business and
private sector into the public services”5. Thus, New Public Management has a series of
familiar core characteristics, or themes6.

For some scholars, even some of the first ones using the term, New Public Management has,
for quite some time, become “middle‐aged” and generated adverse by products7. New Public
Management “has essentially died in the water”. Consequently, many scholars aim at
“transcending New Public Management” focusing, instead, on post New Public Management
reforms. Yet these post NPM reforms do not substantially differ from NPM they blend NPM
aspects like marketization, and the use of NPM style management tools with some Neo‐
Webern features like a renewed emphasis in impartiality, see, for example, Pollitt &
Bouckaert, 2017, or they build on some of the same elements complemented with the
reintegrating tendencies offered by digital era governance practices8 post New Public
Management represents a reaffirmation of old public administration values as well an attempt
to remedy some of the disintegrating tendencies associated with NPM, and not an
abandonment of NPM reforms. Post‐NPM is thus more a complement than an alternative to
NPM. It complements the specialization, fragmentation, and marketization characteristic of
4
(Dunleavy, Margetts, Bastow, & Tinkler, 2006).
5
Haynes, 2003, p. 9; Pollitt, 1993, p. 7
6
The effects of new public management on the quality of public services
7
Hood & Peters, 2004
8
Dunleavy et al., 2006
NPM reforms with more coordination, centralization and collaborative capacity. Therefore,
one should talk more of continuity rather than a clear break between NPM and post NPM
reforms9.

PRACTICAL APPLICABILITY OF NEW PUBLIC MANAGEMENT

The principles of New Public Management are applicable in a lot of situations. To put firstly,
they are applicable in Breaking up monolithic bureaucracies into agencies which involves
splitting between a small strategic policy core and many large operations arms of government
with enlarged managerial autonomy then Agencies are needed to demeanour their relations
with each other and with the central departments on a contractual basis.

In principle these agencies have a superior managerial flexibility in allocation of human

resources in return for grander liability for the results. United Kingdom, Australia and New
Zealand provide some of the best examples of these agencies. The development of executive
agencies has been accompanied by the delegation of authority to the senior management in
public agencies hence giving top management liberty to manage with the indistinct
responsibility and the accountability.

Secondly, there is devolving budgets and financial control. This involves creating budget
centers or spending units. This entails giving managers increased control over budgets for
which they are accountable.

Singapore for example has already started a process of devolving financial management as a
preface for creating the self-directed agencies. From 1996 ministries and departments were
allocated on functional budgets based on target output. Ghana on the other hand boarded on a
public financial management that involved financial devolvement10.

THE NEW PUBLIC MANAGEMENT: THE PARADIGM OF THE 1980S AND 1990S

Since the rise of public administration as a self-governing division of science, it has been
affected by both politics and law, particularly administrative law. The stress on
administration in the classical public administration (CPA) model supports this thesis.
However, in the 1980s, the arena of public administration is ruled by the theories and
approaches of business science. In this period, prominence was located on management and

9
Lodge & Gill, 2011
10
New Public Management Research Paper
its role in the field of public administration, whereby the boundaries between the public and
the private sector become uncertain. With the disappearance of the differences amid the two
sectors, and within the structure of the market metaphor in the public sector, the approach to
managing the state as a process became popular (Box, 1999, pp. 19-20). In this context, the
1980s saw principles such as entrepreneur-ship, privatisation, customer orientation, and
private sector management techniques combined into the public sector. Thus, a second
example emerged in the field of public administration, spoken through the word New Public
Management. While NPM shelters a extensive range of techniques and viewpoints targettig at
incapacitating the inadequacies triggered by the CPA model, many different concepts have
also been established by public administration academics and researchers are used in
literature to imply NPM: public management (Perry & Kraemer, 1983), supply-side
management (Carroll et al., 1985), managerialism (Pollitt, 1990), post-bureaucratic
management (Kernaghan, 1993), entrepreneurial government (Osborne & Gaebler, 1992),
and market-based public administration (Lan & Rosenbloom, 1992). Although all of these
concepts are used to describe the outmoding of CPA and the transformation in contemporary
public administrations, NPM remains the most commonly used term in the paradigmatic
frame-work.11

CONCLUSIONS

On the one influence, the survey of studies on the effects of NPM on the quality of the
delivery of public policies collected in this Special Issue draws a more enhanced picture than
the conventional anti or pro managerial rhetoric prevailing both in academic and
practitioners' debates. On the other, we have learned several lessons out of the empirical
evidence presented in the different articles.

In other words, the Nordic cases show that respecting core public values like neutrality and
fairness not only is not unsuited with including the managerial values like efficiency and
effectiveness, but they may be balancing. This is in line with the findings by Ongaro (2009)
who observed a process of sedimentation in Southern European countries whereby newer
managerial reforms complement older administrative traditions already in place. NPM
reforms may indeed have been less fundamental or revolutionary than initially expected (or
feared), and managerial reform has found its place within the framework the traditional state

11
Why the New Public Management is Obsolete: An Analysis in the Context of the Post-New Public
Management trends.
apparatus (Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2017). With transparency (instead of hiding, e.g., contracts
with service providers) and with political consensus (instead of, for instance, rejecting
managerial reforms for ideological reasons), one can have the best of both worlds: an
impartial administration that treats all citizens (and providers) equally, and, at the same time,
an efficient delivery of public policies. There is similar evidence elsewhere, for instance
when the contributions to this issue found that checks and balances make PPPs successful, or
that managers with a private sector background bring new managerial innovations, yet do so
with respect for traditional public values12.

12
The effects of new public management on the quality of public services