INTRODUCTION: ADMINISTRATIVE REFORM IN GREECE,ITALY, PORTUGAL AND SPAIN

This symposium presents an overview of the state and administrative reforms in Southern Europe. The papers are written by scholars who are not only celebrated in their field, but also native to the country they write about. The report on Greece is by Dimitri A. Sotiropoulos and Calliope Spanou of Athens University. Edoardo Ongaro of Bocconi University Milan reports on Italy. In the case of Portugal, the reporter is José Magone, himself Portuguese and now working at the Berlin School of Economics. Reform in Spain is covered by Carlos Alba and Carmen Navarro of the Autonomous University Madrid.     

DISTINCTIVENESS OF ADMINISTRATIVE REFORM IN GREECE,ITALY, PORTUGAL AND SPAIN. COMMON CHARACTERISTICS OF CONTEXT,ADMINISTRATIONS AND REFORMS

This article, the final part of the symposium, concentrates on the common characteristics of Southern European states and administrations that can explain the distinctiveness of the reforms there. First, we briefly consider the theoretical aspect of the country papers, that is, historical institutionalism. We then briefly review some common features of contextual factors such as welfare state, economy and civic culture. This is followed by a discussion of some typical characteristics of Southern European administrations: legalism, politicization and clientelism. Finally, we discuss some common features of reform in Southern Europe. Reform in the region encompasses not only new public management; other reforms have also occurred. However, political polarization means these countries lack the stability necessary to implement and carry out reform effectively. In terms of improvement in quality, efficiency and client orientation of public service provision, the far‐reaching politicization of the civil service gives a distinctive twist to any such claims.     

NEW PUBLIC MANAGEMENT FOR THE ‘CLASSICAL CONTINENTAL EUROPEAN ADMINISTRATION’: MODERNIZATION AT THE LOCAL LEVEL IN GERMANY,FRANCE AND ITALY

The article is aimed at analysing New Public Management (NPM) reforms at the local level in Germany, France and Italy. The case selection is justified by the fact that these three ‘classical’ Continental European countries have largely been missing from comparative administrative research thus far. The article focuses on local governments, since in all three countries these are considered the NPM forerunners and are acknowledged to be more advanced in reform implementation than are upper levels of government. Against this background, the purpose of this contribution is twofold. On the one hand, we wish to show to what extent and with what effects the NPM agenda has been taken up at the local level in Continental Europe. On the other hand, taking a comparative perspective over time, we wish to ask whether or not there has been increasing convergence or divergence between the three countries as a result of these reforms.     

THE ODYSSEY OF ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS IN GREECE, 1981–2009: A TALE OF TWO REFORM PATHS

In Greece, two distinct reform paths led to institutional building and economic managerial types of reform. These two reforms, with the exception of the period 1996–2004, when both institutional and economic reforms were attempted, did not attract the same degree of attention. Institutional reforms were more successful than attempts at managerial reforms; reform implementation on the other hand varies. Economic and managerial reforms can be observed with regard to economic competition, the opening up of the market, and reducing the size of public sector, all areas where pressure from the EU has been stronger. Decentralization reforms were more important politically than administratively. Citizens' rights and service delivery were conceived as reforms of democratization and modernization rather than as managerial reforms. ‘Agencification’ amounted to circumventing existing ministerial structures. Change was incremental, and reforms were minimally guided by the New Public Management paradigm, because of little emphasis on changes imbued by managerial and economic values. Reform dynamics benefited not only from outside pressures but also from the operation of internal, ‘modernizing’ forces.     

THE DIFFICULT TRANSFORMATION OF STATE AND PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION IN PORTUGAL. EUROPEANIZATION AND THE PERSISTENCE OF NEO‐PATRIMONIALISM

Portugal has been characterized by a late discontinuous democratization process. This contribution discusses the case of state and public administration reform in Portugal by using approaches from democratization, modernization and Europeanization theories. In order to understand the Portuguese case, the concept of ‘neo‐patrimonialism’ is used. We characterize Portuguese public administration as still having ‘neo‐patrimonial’ features, and therefore is still in transition from old closed‐minded practices such as particularistic decision making or clientelistic relationships to new open‐minded ones. The ‘new’ governance agenda combines new public management instruments and a growing flexibilization of public administration towards networks with non‐statal actors and has certainly led to some improvement in the quality of the services associated with public administration. Although is still too early to assess, top‐down and horizontal Europeanization processes, particularly since the late 1990s, may have contributed to a more reflexive approach in moving towards a more endogenous strategic vision based on the needs of the Portuguese state and public administration.     

‘LEADERISM’: AN EVOLUTION OF MANAGERIALISM IN UK PUBLIC SERVICE REFORM

This paper argues that ‘leaderism’– as an emerging set of beliefs that frames and justifies certain innovatory changes in contemporary organizational and managerial practice – is a development of managerialism that has been utilized and applied within the policy discourse of public service reform in the UK. The paper suggests that ‘leaderism’ is an evolution of entrepreneurial and cultural management ideologies and practices. An analysis of the articulation of leaderism with public service reform in the UK is presented. The paper problematizes the construals of leadership contained within these texts and reflects on their promotion of leadership as a social and organizational technology. ‘Leaderism’ is argued to be a complementary set of discourses, metaphors and practices to those of managerialism, which is being utilized in support of the evolution of NPM and new public governance approaches in the re‐orientation of the public services towards the consumer‐citizen.     

NEW PUBLIC MANAGEMENT IN PUBLIC SECTOR ORGANIZATIONS: THE DARK SIDES OF MANAGERIALISTIC ‘ENLIGHTENMENT’

For many years the proponents of New Public Management (NPM) have promised to improve public services by making public sector organizations much more ‘business‐like’. There have been many investigations and empirical studies about the nature of NPM as well as its impact on organizations. However, most of these studies concentrate only on some elements of NPM and provide interesting, but often anecdotal, evidence and insights. Perhaps exactly because of the large amount of extremely revealing and telling empirical studies, there is, therefore, a lack of a systematic identification and understanding of the nature of NPM and its overall relevance. This paper contributes to a systematic identification and understanding of the concept of NPM as well as its multi‐dimensional impact on public sector organizations. First, the paper aims at (re‐) constructing a comprehensive taxonomy of NPM's main assumptions and core elements. Secondly, the paper tries to provide a more comprehensive and meta‐analytical analysis of primarily the negative consequences of NPM‐strategies for public sector organizations as well as the people working in them.