The New Public Management - Literature review Example

The study acknowledges that different authorities on matters public management have different views on challenges facing public management. Kaboolian (1998) points out that, management scholars have different views concerning the differences between public management and public administration. The author uses the term “new public management” to refer to a number of public sector reforms being carried out in a number of developed countries in Europe and North America. Kaboolian (2012) notes that it would be difficult to tell whether the reforms taken in public sector management across countries can be termed as a paradigm shift.

He points out that there ought to be a scientific study to ascertain whether the changes can really be termed as a paradigm shift in the true scientific sense. Kaboolian, (1998), notes that most countries are using the market as a model for administrative relationships. He notes that there are three factors that are influencing reforms in public management all across the board. These are transaction cost economies, public choice model and the principal agent-theory. The study notes that, although the amount and the depth of reform being carried out differ from one country to the other, almost all countries carrying out the reforms have similar goals.

“While reform movements are different in depth and scope and success by the country they are remarkably similar in goals,” (Kaboolian, 1998, p. 190). The study also found almost all the parties were utilizing similar technologies in carrying out the reform. All management reforms aim to improve the responsiveness of the public service to the needs of the public. Kaboolian (1998) calls for a separation between policymaking and service delivery. Another article on public management, titled “Public Management and Government Performance: An International Review” assess the popularity of measuring performance in public management among various governments around the world.

In the article Forbes (2005) notes that governments are more interested in performance as opposed to the implementation of policy goals. Generally, most governments have taken a performance orientation. Countries in the European Union, for instance, have taken to performance-oriented working methods. They see those methods as being more efficient to contemporary ones. Forbes (2005) however noted that much attention gives to a performance by policymakers came at a cost. The relationship between management and performance was regarded as seriously as it ought to be.

Most studies focused on performance while ignoring the role of management in ensuring performance. “Fortunately, public management scholars have begun to devote greater effort to determining how best to measure and achieve improved performance Very little was being done to verify claims of a relationship between performance and management,” (Forbes, 2005, p. 3). Forbes also notes more efforts were being made to find the best ways to attain high performance in public management and the best ways to measure that performance.

Forbes (2005) notes that the rule of law is an important aspect of public management. This is true of all aspects of law, including the making of the laws, adjudication of the laws as well as the strengthening of the institutions that are charged with implementing those laws. He points out that, for good performance to be achieved, there has to be direction and coordination of individuals involved in realizing the performance.