Public Sector Management - Literature review Example

Introduction

There is a visible transformation in the management of public sector all over the world. These have resulted in the change in the relationship between the organizations and the society. Traditionally, public management have always been practically and theoretical, but the adoption of new forms of public management resulted to the systematic roles in the public sector. These have led to the change in the ways public managers approaches the challenges faced in the public sector.

Bureaucracy serves as the first step in which the organizations and any large institutions allow the non-elective bodies in making critical decisions in the management of the public sector organizations. The procedures are set up for the managers to follow and act as the example to the organization clients, the principles of the organizations are strictly adhered to boost the operation. The motivation of the public sector employees and finally, the management, should adhere to the professional bureaucracy (Donaldson, 2012).

Management of public sectors generally concerns with the governance of the policies and the programs of the organization to realize their goals and regulate the behavior of other employees. Management of public sector does include the managerial policies, which involved the desire of achieving the objectives of the organization with maximum efficiency, and they are responsible for the results attained (Buchanan and Gordon, 2011).

Managerial Roles

The kind of people hired the organizations to depend entirely on their mission; different professionals attract a wide range of people that needs to be managed to achieve the goals of the organizations. Generally, the managers differ in terms of education and the path they undertake to the position of managing, these has led to the criticism in the manner in which the public sector recruits the managers as they lack the broad vision of seeing and implementing the policies of the organizations (Buchanan and Gordon, 2011). The managers are important components in the system of the public sector, they deserve scrutiny when recruiting, and praise when they achieve the goals.

The public sector management requires the managers in implementing the law, carry out the programs of the organizations, ensure the services are delivered and manages the resources that keep the public sector going. Public managers’ poses the desire of achieving the goals of the public sectors drives the public managers to work as strategist and entrepreneurs, stewards of the public interest, champions of effectiveness, masters of improvement and public reflective practitioners (Gore, 2014).

Strategists and Entrepreneurs

Public managers need to strategize on the emerging needs and demands, come up with new opportunities for the organizations and reposition the stand of the organizations to be more effective. The problems that compete on the public agendas like risks, failures and breakdown, need the public managers to act often in addressing them by coming up with the laws and programs of the organizations. Managers develop skills and disciplines in understanding the causes of the organizations by setting the priorities into action and strategically use analytic techniques like forecasting and cost-benefit analysis (Elmore, 2014; Quigley and Scotchmer, 2012).

Stewards of Public Interest

Public managers contribute to the need for the public to their day to day activities, analyze the nature of public problems and set the options for addressing through fairness and balancing in decisions in competing and conflicting interest of the publics, opening public participation in making policies affecting the public and use of funds and resources prudently and effectively. The public managers are considered as trustworthy and ethical agents; they administer the public's interest with the mind of performing (Cook, 2014).

Champions of Effectiveness

Public managers advocate for the creation and measurement of the results of the public sector; they use performance-based management skills to ensure that the resources of the organizations are used effectively. In addition, production of useful results and quality services will help the organization achieve their mission. Public managers’ critical skills include the ability to identify, use of performance indicators appropriately and design methods of advancing the mission of the organization. The champions of public managers are able to increase the performance approaches of the organizations (Boston et al., 2014).

Masters of Improvement

Public managers are comfortable with the surprises that arise in the day-to-day running of the organizations, act on the functions in a range of significant changes and plan for the future of the organization. It turns a problem into an asset and develops programs and models that can enable the organization to adjust into any circumstance that can arise and produce valuable results. Additionally, the managers are the proponents of quantitative and analytic of any management assets that help in reducing uncertainty in the decision-making process; this enhances the effectiveness of executive decision-making in an organization (Boston, 2014, 56).

Public Reflective Practitioners

The effectiveness of public managers involves continuous examination of the current practices, reviews of organization procedures and policies to make sent to the organizations. Look for new ideas and approaches that are essential for improving the applicability and potentiality of improving effectiveness. They cultivate an active dialogue with the academicians, which play a role in managers improving the academicians’ relevance, and the academicians improve managers’ effectiveness.

Strategies and Concerns of Managers to Achieve Excellence

Public managers desire for their organizations to move from strategizing to executing. These can be achieved through the implementation of the strategies organization policies to meet the goals and mission (Buchanan and Gordon, 2011). The effectiveness of public managers depends on the concentration of supervision functions of the organization by planning and scheduling work, coordinating the activities of the organization and provision of necessary supplies, equipment and offering technical assistance.

Value and Ethics of the Organization

Public managers’ leads in demonstrating the values and ethics that includes the codes and personal behavior, they then help in integrating into the organization practices. According to Cook (2014), "political and activist orientation" should be distinguished from public management; in making his claim, the managers should not mix their orientation in politics to influence the outcome of the decision in the organizations. Nelson (2015) offer the following conception:

“In traditional conceptions of public administration,' the fundamental responsibility of public managers was to develop efficiently … Inevitable and desirable that public managers should assume responsibility for defining the purposes they seek to achieve, and therefore to participate in the political dialogue about their purposes and methods.”

Strategic Thinking

These can be attained by application of innovation through analysis of ideas; the managers frame issues through a legitimate method and provide quality judgment and policy advice to the organization board. In addition, managers can help in setting up necessary goals with a broad perspective and long term timelines and able to teach and learn from others for the organization to improve, public managers require extensive policing (Buchanan and Gordon, 2011).

Management Excellence

The role of the managers is to deliver through action management, employees’ management, and financial management. They can achieve by leading the organizational changes that can help in maximizing the results, the creation of structures and system that suits the objective of the organization and fulfill the obligation of the management accountabilities (Nelson, 2015).

Leadership and City Manager

Their difference that exists between the city manager and the leadership cannot be seen, and these can lead to the conflict of roles by the two different bodies. Generally, the city managerial position needs training how to handle and manage the issues affecting the city while the leaders do not to have the skills and competence in running the city. Leadership is considered as an influence and the ability to obtain followers; city manager should show the results and desire to perform before being appreciated (Buchanan and Gordon, 2011).

City managers develop the capacities and the abilities to achieve the goals of the city by organizing and creation of working environment while the leaders focus on aligning the citizens. City managers act in an orderly manner when a problem arises by seeking orders, taking control and offering resolution while the leadership tolerates chaos and lack the structure of handling issues. Additionally, city manager helps in overseeing the local policies of the peoples and advice on appropriate ways of handling day-to-day activities while the leadership is an elective position who acts on his/her instincts, does not need anyone to control on the way they operate.

Difference between a Leader and a Manager

It is argued that leaders is narrower and has more limited functions that the managers, subsequently, the process of changing from a leader to a manager means that major changes to functions must be undertaken. The two words have close meaning but in terms of responsibilities, they perform different roles. The oxford dictionary defines leaders as those who manage the affairs while the managers’ takes control of the affairs (Nelson, 2015).

The Latin origin of the words poses a significant difference with the word leaders coming from Minor meaning “to serve and later to govern” while managers come from Manus meaning taking control by hand, these meanings gives the leaders responsibilities of following instruction and service while the managers involve achievement of results and taking responsibilities. Generally, leaders carry out the policies derived from others in accordance with procedures while the managers ensure the transaction of policies into action and within the office management, (Jensen, 2014, pp. 310-332).

The leaders focus on the process, procedures and priorities while managers involve much more, they focus on achieving the results and taking responsibilities of doing so. Similarly, in the public domain, the word manager is predominantly used making the word leader losing its use, an example was the use of “principal officers”, “finance officers” or “assistant directors”. Now they are “managers” (Nelson, 2015, p. vii).

Wilson (2012) argues that ‘leaders involves the use of managerial, political, and legal theories and processes to fulfill legislative, executive and judicial governmental mandates for the provision of regulatory and service functions for the society as a whole or for some segments of it.' These makes it a compressive different between the leaders and the managers as they are considered political offices, unlike the managers who aims at fulfilling the goals of the organization rather than pleasing the masters.

Conclusion

Public management research and practice have not lost sight, the ideas matters, and they have consequences. Unfortunately, little is known about how to ensure that public management remains accountable and faithful to democratic values of the organizations. Scholars have offered principles to guide the discretionary decision making of public managers, though it is not clear whether they will faithfully adhere to such principles, these will make it hard if the principles don't adhere to the mission of the organization and the perception of the sole managers in handling them. Generally, human beings are more than rational when handling issues in the public domain; they need lessons and training to help in ensuring the goals of the organization. The roles of the managers remain distinguished as they work on ensuring that public gets the best from them. These roles include; the desire of achieving the goals of the public sectors drives the public managers to work as strategist and entrepreneurs, stewards of the public interest, champions of effectiveness, masters of improvement and public reflective practitioners (Gore, 2013). Additionally, there is different between the leadership and the managers, managers’ needs to undergo training and they are mainly focused on achieving the results, as they are held responsible while leadership is more of political position.