New Public Management (NPM) may be described as the changing process of public services’ culture from a rules/procedures-based structure to an entrepreneurial/performance-based orientation. This new public management focuses on the principles behind the 5Es: economy, efficiency, effectiveness, excellence and enterprise (Hazlett and Hill, 2000), and as highlighted by Van Gramberg and Teicher (2000), in such a context, private sector management practices, underpinned by HRM concepts, and a focus on entrepreneurship, efficiency and quality are being progressively imported into the public sector.
In this panorama, could the development and implementation of TQM-based strategies in public organizations contribute to such purposes? What benefits may be reached?
NPM, a reform model, mostly used by OECD countries in 1990s, aims at making public service like those of private firms. Countries, such as Australia, New Zealand have made some achievements and my research on NPM applicability in developing countries showed a mixed result. TQM, a management philosophy that keeps customer service at the center, and revolve around the development of system, processes, and people with commitment, communication and building culture; would be useful for NPM applicability. However, the public service bureaucracy, system and processes are deep rooted on feudalism, centralization, centralized power, low motivation, status quo rather than initiating change. This makes the task of TQM implementation in public service very hard. Commitments on the part of the bureaucratic leaders to re-invent the public service is a must if private based philosophies are to be implemented in the public service.
Enter your answer
I agree with the outline of what has been happening outlined above by Binod. I would also add that TQM and ideas from 'lean' management have already been introduced in the UK and the US. Of course, there were problems with the bureaucratic model that NPM aims to replace for ideological reasons linked to the neoliberal policies of privatisation and a refusal to accept that public services and a welfare state have been historically in the developed countries certainly introduced as a response to market failures. My view is that NPM is not some kind of objective solution but an ideological attempt to deny the social and economic failures of neoclassical economics.
No one could deny there have been problems with the bureaucratic model but the solution is not NPM which creates more problems for society and for basic democratic institutions like education and healthcare. Studies of problems with NPM, lean and TQM in the public services show that these are flawed concepts and practices.
Here are some references on this latter point.
Gill-McLure,W. (2007)‘Fighting Marketization: An Analysis of Manual Municipal Labor in the UK and the US’, Labor Studies Journal, Spring issue, 41-59
Jill Esbenshade, Matt Vidal, Gina Fascilla, Mariko Ono. (2016) Customer-driven management models for choiceless clientele? Business process reengineering in a California welfare agency. Work, employment and society 30:1, pages 77-96.
Freedom from Command and Control: Rethinking Management for Lean Service 1 by John Seddon (ISBN: 0001563273276)
However, we do need more studies of NPM in developing and emerging economies to see the specific problems there and how these have played out.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Political Science