Is the Certified Public Manager (CPM) program just “feel good” release time from the demands of the job or is there actual change in behavior that results from the program? This paper proposes to test the belief that education and training result in better management and administration by measuring the results of the Arkansas' Certified Public Manager training/education program. In a mail survey with a 30 percent response rate, approximately 80 percent of program graduates endorsed the overall program and indicated they commanded increased knowledge and skills in leadership, management development and program planning and evaluation since completing the program. Agencies who send managers to participate in the CPM program can expect to reap the intangible benefits of better management. In addition, implementation of the project plan that participants are required to complete as part of the CPM program typically saves the agency in excess of $6,000. The typical savings more than offsets registration fees of $2,175 per manager to complete full CPM certification in Arkansas.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AndersenDavid, AnandDesai, DavidDeShon and BrianFry, NASPAA Committee on Outcomes Assessment (1991). The NASPAA Alumni Survey Pilot: Design and Analyses.American Review of Public Administration21 (September): 205–236.
2.
BanC. and FaermanS.R. (1990). Issues in The Evaluation Of Management Training.Public Productivity and Management Review13 (Spring):271–286.
3.
Certified Public Manager Program (1996)). CMETS Evaluation Series Report No.1. Topeka, KS: KU Capitol Center.
4.
ClementRonald W. (1982). Testing The Hierarchy Theory Of Training Evaluation: An Expanded Role For Trainee Reactions.Public Personnel Management Journal11(February): 176–184.
5.
CobbDenise (2002). Personal interview, Office of Survey, Institute of Government, University of Arkansas at Little Rock (July 25).
6.
ConantJames K. and KarenLado (1991). The Certified Public Manager Program (CPM): A Cross-State Study.Prepared for the National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration's Annual Conference.Baltimore, MD (October 17–19).
7.
FaermanS.R. and BanC. (1993). Trainee satisfaction and training impact: issues in training evaluation.Public Productivity and Management Review16 (Spring): 299–314.
8.
FaermanSue R. and KaryD. Jablonka (1990). Outcome Assessment: A Tool for Enhancing Quality, Relevance and Accountability.International Journal of Public Administration12 (January/February):257–278.
HaysSteven W. and BruceDuke (1996). Professional certification in public management: a status report and proposal.Public Administration Review56 (May):425–432.
11.
IannaconeCarl (2002). Personal interview at meeting of Arkansas Chapter of American Society for Public Administration (September 27).
12.
JenningsEdward T.Jr. (1989). Accountability, Program Quality, Outcome Assessment and Graduate Education for Public Affairs and Administration.Public Administration Review49 (September/October):438–447.
13.
JohnsonH. John (1998). Training 101: Another Look at Employee Surveys.Another Look at Evaluating Training Programs: Fifty Articles from Training and Development and Technical Training; Magazines Cover the Essentials of Evaluation and Return-On-InvestmentKirkpatrickDonald L., editor. Alexandria, VA: ASTD. 139–141.
14.
KirkpatrickDonald L., editor (1998). Another Look at Evaluating Training Programs: Fifty Articles from Training and Development and Technical Training; Magazines Cover the Essentials of Evaluation and Return-On-Investment Alexandria, VA: ASTD.
15.
KirkpatrickDonald L. (1998a). Evaluating Training Programs: Evidence vs. Proof. Another Look at Evaluating Training Programs: Fifty Articles From Training and Development and Technical Training; Magazines Cover The Essentials Of Evaluation and Return-On-Investment Donald L. Kirkpatrick, editor Alexandria, VA: ASTD: 9–11.
16.
KirkpatrickDonald L. (1998b). Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels.San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. 2nd edition.
17.
LeeRobert D.Jr., (1991). The Use of Exit Interviews in Master's Programs of Public Affairs and Administration.American Review of Public Administration21 (September):183–195.
18.
MillerMelissa and VeraVogelsang-Coombs (1995). Advancing Excellence in Public Management through CPM Programs.Public Administration Times21 (October): 30–32.
19.
NowackKenneth M. (1998). Getting Them Out and Getting Them Back.Another Look at Evaluating Training Programs: Fifty Articles From Training and Development and Technical Training; Magazines Cover The Essentials Of Evaluation and Return-On-InvestmentKirkpatrickDonald L., editor. Alexandria, VA: ASTD:145–148.
20.
PaddockSusan C. (1997). Benchmarks In Management Training.Public Personnel Management26 (Winter):441–460.
21.
PaulKaren B. and DavidW. Bracken (1998). Everything You Always Wanted To Know About Employee Surveys.Another Look at Evaluating Training Programs: Fifty Articles From Training and Development and Technical Training; Magazines Cover The Essentials Of Evaluation and Return-On-InvestmentKirkpatrickDonald L., editor. Alexandria, VA: ASTD:149–153.
22.
PoisterTheodore H. (1991). Assessing MPA Program Outcomes: Current Practice and Policy Alternatives.American Review of Public Administration21 (September):169–181.
23.
PulleyMary Lynn (1998). Training 101: Navigating the Evaluation Rapids. Another Look at Evaluating Training Programs: Fifty Articles From Training and Development and Technical Training; Magazines Cover The Essentials Of Evaluation And Return-On-InvestmentKirkpatrickDonald L., editor. Alexandria, VA: ASTD: 21–25.
24.
SalantPriscilla and DonA. Dillman (1994). How To Conduct Your Own Survey. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
25.
SinkDavid W. (1991). Focus Groups As an Approach To Outcomes Assessment.American Review of Public Administration21 (September): 197–204.
26.
VanagunasStanley and JodyWebb (1994). Administrative Innovation and the Training of Public Managers.Public Personnel Management (Fall):437–446.
27.
VanWart Montgomery (1992). Connecting Management and Executive Development in the States.Public Productivity and Management Review15 (Summer):477–480.
