Management 2000

Public Management 2000 will need to do much more if it is to perform more effectively in an increasingly difficult and challenging environment likely to emerge in the next decade. To make any appreciable difference, it must prepare itself now by internationalizing public service attitudes, adapting to the changing role of the state in society and assimilating the new public managerialism which is beginning to take hold in Western countries. Furthermore, it needs to be much less tolerant of public maladministration, it must improve its public relations image, and it should strengthen its commitment to public service. Above all, public managers must take their own professional commitments more seriously and their professional associations must play a bigger role in promoting better performance. But integrating science and practice will be worthless without professional integrity. Otherwise, Public Management 2000 will just follow Business Management 2000 and remain the poor relative doing an inferior job.

Public managers will look back on the 1980s with some nostalgia. Compared with the numerous challenges that will confront them long before the year 2000, the past decade will appear in retrospect to be a rather peaceful period of adjustment. True, they had to cope with a severe crisis in the downturn of public resources, the quest for external funds and internal economies, the demand for privatization and the divestment of state monopolies, and pressure for improved public sector productivity. In some parts of the world they had acute problems of political instability, civil war, insurrection, economic paralysis, foreign intervention and institutionalized corruption.

Those who look to the 1990s for relief have not had much cause for optimism. The new decade did not begin well. Two specific events stood out. One was the collapse of bureaucratic centralism and the disinte-gration of the East Bloc, presenting an ideological challenge to the Left when the ground was virtually cut from under its feet. The other was yet another Middle East crisis threatening world energy reserves, military confrontation and international intervention that changed the rules of the former world order.

Another ominous trend was the corruption revealed in the transaction of public affairs all around the world, ranging from the stock market scandals in the United States and Japan to illegal international trade in narcotics and armaments, from the collapse of unworthy banking houses to the kleptocracy of dictators. These undermined public confidence in public institu0tions and revealed how government and public admini-stration could not be trusted to protect public interests. Managerialism cannot do much against greed. As Scott and Hart conclude⁽³⁾:

Greed appears to be the hallmark of our times, when corporate raiders loot perfectly sound companies or raid government programs for no other reason than that they are there to be looted and raided. ⁽³⁾

All these problems crowd in on public management and make managing the public's business much more difficult and uncertain.

The 1990s will be volatile and no doubt there are more startling events in store as the world heads into the 21st century. Nothing can be taken for granted any more; there are few givens. Only brave or foolish persons can claim to predict the future, and they are likely to be wrong. Like everyone else, they will be caught off guard by any number of surprising and unexpected happenings, beyond current imagination. The only certainty is that the future will not resemble the present; it will not be a mere continuation of the past. Public sector managers more so than their private sector counterparts will just have to be ready for anything, particularly the hidden twists and turns and cope the best they can in the circumstances. But there is a world of difference between facing the future blind and ignorant or aware and wise (or at least clued-in) and perhaps prepared. If they do not start preparing themselves now, they will certainly be unprepared by the year 2000. One thing is clear -- unless public managers take themselves more seriously, their future will be determined largely by others and that usually means following the business route.     

Static law and dynamic administration: Marshall dimock's assault on the legal profession

This article examines Marshall Dimock's thought on the relation between public administration and law. The examination revolves around his book, Law and Dynamic Administration,but also incorporates insights from his many other works. Dimock treated the idea of rule of law as an important source of authority and guiding principles for both the public administrative and legal professions. He criticized the legal profession harshly for its tendency in this century to disparage and reject law as such a source. Its treatment of law has led to many abuses that affect the legitimacy and efficacy of all who govern in our society. Dimock hoped to reunify the fields with a common jurisprudence that is mindful of public, institutional needs. In the process, he pressed the point that public administrators should be legal artisans in their own right, contributing confidently to the content and processes of the law for public benefit.     

Searching for the best structure for American local government

Citizens, practitioners and academicians involved in local government have for decades debated the best structure for local public organizations; at the polar ends of this debate are those advocating rational administration and those advocating political responsiveness. The conventional wisdom equates rational administration with reformed structures like the council-manager plan and political responsiveness with structures which have an elected chief executive officer. The debate is unresolvable within this value-driven framework, and these ideological positions do not seem to be helping in the design of governmental structures which “work” in a practical and meaningful way. The paper argues for a “functional” model of local government structure based on how much citizens and administrators can know and oversee with competence. The analysis leads to a significant rethinking of the role of governing bodies, administrators, and the general management position in American local government.