This article begins with an examination of the design of the United States governmental system – ‘separated institutions sharing powers’ – and the lack of attention that the framers of the American Constitution gave to the administrative arm of the state. Because of the separation of powers and the lack of attention given to the administrative arm, the bureaucracy that eventually developed in the USA has become contested ground. The article provides a brief introduction to the New Public Management, especially as it has been attempted in the USA, and the issues involved in applying the New Public Management in that country. General issues about New Public Management are raised, particularly about the problems of applying private sector solutions to pubic management. The article concludes that the design features that make the United States system resemble a market, and the unclear role of administration in the system, make it difficult to successfully apply many features of the New Public Management.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Aberbach, J. D. (1990), Keeping a Watchful Eye: The Politics of Congressional Oversight ( Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press ).
2.
Aberbach, J.D. and B.A. Rockman (2000), In the Web of Politics: Three Decades of the U.S. Federal Executive ( Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press ).
3.
Aberbach, J.D. and B.A. Rockman (2000a), ‘Senior Executives in a Changing Political Environment’, in The Future of Merit , ed. J.P. Pfiffner and D.A. Brook ( Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press and Woodrow Wilson Center Press ).
4.
Allison, G.T. (1999), “Public and Private Management: Are They Fundamentally Alike in All Unimportant Respects?” In Public Administration: Current IssuesSixth Edition, ed., F.S. Lane ( Boston: Bedford/ St. Martin’s ).
5.
Argesta, R.J. (2001), ‘Arbitrary outsourcing’, GoveExec.com. July 9. (http//www.govexec.com/news/).
6.
Aucoin, P. (1990), ‘Administrative Reform in Public Management: Paradigms, Principles, Paradoxes and Pendulums’ , Governance, Vol 3, No 2, pp. 115-137 .
7.
Barzelay, M. (2001), The New Public Management: Improving Research and Policy Dialogue ( Berkeley: University of California Press ).
8.
Baumgartner, F. and B.D. Jones (1993), Agendas and Instability in American Politics ( Chicago: University of Chicago Press ).
9.
Boston, J. , J. Martin , J. Pallot and P. Walsh (1996), Public Management: The New Zealand Model ( Auckland: Oxford University Press ).
10.
Bush, G. (2001), ‘Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies’, July 11, http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/07/20010711-1.html.
11.
Campbell, C. (2001), ‘Juggling Inputs, Outputs, and Outcomes in the Search for Policy Competence: Recent Experience in Australia’ , Governance, Vol 14, No 2, pp. 233-252 .
12.
Dahl, R.A. (1976), Democracy in the United States Promise and Performance ( Chicago: Rand McNally ).
13.
Friel, B. (2001), ‘OMB chief presses outsourcing, management cuts’, GovExec.com. February 23 (http://www.govexec.com/news).
14.
Friel, B. (2001a), ‘The Daniels Decree’, GovExec.com, July 1, (http://www.govexec.com/news).
15.
General Accounting Office, U.S. (1999), Managing for Results: Opportunities for Continued Improvements in Agencies' Performance Plans (GAO/GGD/AIMD-99-215).
16.
General Accounting Office, U.S. (2001), Managing for Results: Using GPRA to Assist Oversight and Decisionmaking. Statement of J. C. Mihm before the Subcommittee on Government Efficiency, Financial Management and Intergovernmental Relations, Committee on Government Reform ( House of Representatives . GAO-01-872 T).
17.
Gore A. (1993), Creating a Government That Works Better & Costs Less: The Report of the National Performance Review ( New York: Plume ).
18.
Government Performance and Results Act (1993), Sec. 4; amendment to chapter 11 of 31 (U.S. Code sec. 1115, Performance Plans).
19.
Hamilton, A. , J. Jay and J. Madison (1937), The Federalist Papers ( New York: The Modern Library ).
20.
Hood, C. (1990), ‘De-Sir Humphreyfying the Westminster Model of Bureaucracy: A New Style of Governance?’ , Governance. Vol 3 No 2, pp. 205-214 .
21.
Kaufman, H. (1977), Red Tape: Its Origins, Uses, and Abuses ( Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution ).
22.
Kettl, D. (1997), ‘The Global Revolution in Public Management: Driving Themes, Missing Links’ , Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, Vol 16, No 3, pp. 446-462 .
23.
Kettl, D. (1998), Reinventing Government: A Fifth-Year Report Card ( Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution ).
24.
Kettl, D. (2000), The Global Public Management Revolution: A Report on the Transformation of Governance ( Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press ).
25.
Kettl, D. (2000a), ‘Has Government Been “Reinvented”?’, Testimony before the Committee on Rules, U.S. House of Representatives; Committee on Governmental Affairs, United States Senate, May 4 (www.brook.edu/Views/Testimony/Kettl/20000504.htm).
26.
Kingdon, J. (1984), Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies ( Boston: Little, Brown ).
27.
Long, N. (1949), ‘Power and Administration’ , Public Administration Review, Vol 9, pp. 257-264 .
28.
Miller, G. and A.B. Whitford (2001), ‘Trust and Incentives in Principal-Agent Negotiations: The “Insurance/Incentive Trade-Off” , Paper presented at the 59th Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association (Chicago, Illinois), April19-22 .
29.
Neustadt, R. (1990), Presidential Power and the Modern Presidents ( New York: The Free Press ).
30.
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) (2001), ‘Improving Government Performance’, The Budget for Fiscal Year 2002 (http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2002/bud01.htm).
31.
Peckenpaugh, J. (2001), ‘Bush administration blasts proposed freeze on contracts’, GovExec.com, June 29 (http//www.govexec.com/news/).
32.
Peters, B.G. and V. Wright (1996), ‘Public Policy and Administration, Old and New’, in A New Handbook of Political Science, ed. R. Goodin and H.-D. Klingemann ( New York: Oxford University Press ).
33.
Schick, A. (1996), The Spirit of Reform: Managing the New Zealand State Sector in a Time of Change. A Report Prepared for the State Services Commission and The Treasury ( New Zealand. Wellington: State Services Commission ).
34.
Volcker Commission (1989), Leadership for America: Rebuilding the Public Service ( Lexington: D.C. Heath and Company ).
35.
Wilson, J.Q. (1975), ‘The Rise of the Bureaucratic State’, Public Interest, Vol 41, pp.77-103.
