Public administration and public management are engaged in a struggle for control in the arena of public service. At first glance, the contest seems to be between ministering, justice, duty, and practicality on the one side and results, efficiency, objectivity, and science on the other. When a critical theory based on feminism is applied, however, each of the sides is also seen to be covertly at war with itself: each advocating a “hard” approach yet showing itself dependent on an unacknowledged but constitutive “soft” factor. As an alternative to continuing the conflict, the author advocates a regrouping of both camps around the idea of publicness.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allison, G. (1997). Public and private management: Are they alike in all unimportant respects? In J. Shafritz & A. Hyde (Eds.), Classics of public administration (4th ed., pp. 383-400). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace.
2.
Behn, R. D. (1991). Leadership counts: Lessons for public managers from the Massachusetts Welfare, Training, and Employment Program. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
3.
Behn, R. D. (1998). What right do public managers have to lead? Public Administration Review, 58, 209-230.
4.
Cook, B. J. (1998). Politics, political leadership, and public management. Public Administration Review, 58, 225-230.
5.
Derrida, J. (1976). Of grammatology (G. C. Spivak, Trans.). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. (Original work published 1967)
6.
DiIulio, J. J., Jr. (1990). Leadership and social science. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 9, 116-126.
7.
Drucker, P. F. (1954). The practice of management. New York: Harper and Bros.
8.
Fondas, N. (1997). Feminization unveiled: Management qualities in contemporary writings. Academy of Management Review, 22, 257-282.
9.
Foucault, M. (1979). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison (A. Sheridan, Trans.). New York: Viking. (Original work published 1975)
10.
Gilbreth, L. M. (1914). The psychology of management: The function of the mind in determining, teaching and installing methods of least waste. New York: Sturgis and Walton.
11.
Hearn, J. (1992). Men in the public eye: Critical studies on men and masculinities. London: Routledge.
12.
Hood, C. (1998). The art of the state: Culture, rhetoric, and public management. Oxford, UK: Clarendon.
13.
Jacques, R. (1996). Manufacturing the employee: Management knowledge from the 19th to the 21st centuries. London: Sage.
14.
Johnson, B. (1987). A world of difference. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
15.
Keller, L., & Spicer, M. (1997). Political science and public administration: A necessary cleft? Public Administration Review, 57, 270-271.
16.
Levine, C. H. (1986). The federal government in the year 2000: Administrative legacies of the Reagan years. Public Administration Review, 46, 195-206.
17.
Lynn, L. E., Jr. (1994). Public management research: The triumph of art over science. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 13, 231-259.
18.
Lynn, L. E., Jr. (1996). Public management as art, science, and profession. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.
19.
Lynn, L. E., Jr. (2001). The myth of the bureaucratic paradigm: What traditional public administration really stood for. Public Administration Review, 61, 144-160.
20.
Mainzer, L. C. (1994). Public administration in search of a theory: The interdisciplinary delusion. Administration & Society, 26, 359-394.
21.
McSwite, O. C. (1997). Legitimacy in public administration: A discourse analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
22.
Messerschmidt, J. W. (1995). Managing to kill: Masculinities and the space shuttle Challenger explosion. Masculinities, 3(4), 1-22.
23.
Morgan, D., Bacon, K. G., Bunch, R., Cameron, C. D., & Deis, R. (1996). What middle managers do in local government: Stewardship of the public trust and the limits of reinventing government. Public Administration Review, 56, 359-365.
24.
Mosher, F. C. (1982). Democracy and the public service (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
25.
Mumby, D. K., & Stohl, C. (1991). Power and discourse in organization studies: Absence and the dialectic of control. Discourse and Society, 2, 313-332.
26.
Murphy, C. D. (1917). Living up to your employment system. In A. W. Shaw Company (Ed.), Handling men (pp. 16-21). Chicago: A. W. Shaw Co.
27.
Nelson, J. A. (1996). Feminism, objectivity and economics. London: Routledge.
28.
Noble, D. F. (1977). America by design: Science, technology and the rise of corporate capitalism. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
29.
O'Toole, L. J. (1997). Treating networks seriously: Practical and research-based agendas for public administration. Public Administration Review, 57, 45-52.
30.
Person, H. S. (1926a). Basic principles of administration and management: Major problems of management. In H. C. Metcalf (Ed.), Scientific foundations of business administration (pp. 234-254). Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins.
31.
Person, H. S. (1926b). Basic principles of administration and management: The management movement. In H. C. Metcalf (Ed.), Scientific foundations of business administration (pp. 191-203). Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins.
32.
Person, H. S. (1926c). Basic principles of administration and management: Scientific management. In H. C. Metcalf (Ed.), Scientific foundations of business administration (pp. 204-207). Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins.
33.
Peters, B. G. (1988). Comparing public bureaucracies: Problems of theory and method. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
34.
Rodgers, R., & Rodgers, N. (2000). Defining the boundaries of public administration: Undisciplined mongrels versus disciplined purists. Public Administration Review, 60, 435-445.
35.
Rorty, R. (1998). Feminism and pragmatism. In Truth and progress: Philosophical papers (Vol. 3, pp. 202-227). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
36.
Sayre, W. (1958). The unhappy bureaucrats: Views ironic, hopeful, indignant. Public Administration Review, 18, 239-245.
37.
Sheldon, O. (1923). The philosophy of management. London: Sir Isaac Pitman and Sons.
38.
Stivers, C. (1996). Refusing to get it right: Citizenship, difference, and the refounding project. In G. Wamsley & J. Wolf (Eds.), Refounding democratic public administration (pp. 260-278). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
39.
Stivers, C. (2000). Bureau men, settlement women: Constructing public administration in the Progressive Era. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
40.
Stivers, C. (2002). Gender images in public administration: Legitimacy and the administrative state (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
41.
Strom, S. H. (1992). Beyond the typewriter: Gender, class, and the origins of modern American office work. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
42.
Violi, P. (1992). Gender, subjectivity and language. In G. Bock & S. James (Eds.), Beyond equality and difference: Citizenship, feminist politics, and female subjectivity (pp. 164-176). London: Routledge.
43.
Waldo, D. (1968). Scope of the theory of public administration. In J. C. Charlesworth (Ed.), Theory and practice of public administration (pp. 1-26). Philadelphia: American Academy of Political and Social Science.
44.
Whicker, M. L., Strickland, R. A., & Olshfski, D. (1993). The troublesome cleft: Public administration and political science. Public Administration Review, 53, 531-541.
45.
Willard, H. L. (1917). The knack of holding your men. In A. W. Shaw Company (Ed.), Handling men (pp. 58-63). Chicago: A. W. Shaw Co.
