Africa Development, Vol. XXVII, Nos. 3 & 4, 2002, pp. 17–47
© Council for the Development of Social Science Research in Africa, 2002
(ISSN 0850-3907)
Fashion, Learning and Values in
Public Management: Reflections on South
African and International Experience
Des Gasper*
Abstract
New Public Management (NPM) has shaken up sleepy and self-serving public
organisations. But it was spread like a religion: assumed to be modern, relevant
and universally superior, despite having relatively little empirical backing. NPM
has now lost much of its gloss, as experience of the massive transaction costs of
radical reforms and of their often unfulfilled prerequisites mounts. An untried
package was sold and bought. This paper looks for lessons. First, it discusses
implications for the types of independent thinking and training required for public
managers, including methods for thinking critically, caringly and creatively.
Second, it takes a case study, a 1990s phenomenon parallel to but rather different from NPM, South Africa’s ‘New Public Administration Initiative’ (NPAI).
The NPAI made the move from rule-following ‘administration’ to outcomesoriented ‘management’, abolished the division between white-oriented ‘Public
Administration’ and black-oriented ‘Development Administration’ and heavily
invested in reforming educational infrastructure for public and development
management, including for thinking independently, not swallowing packages
from abroad. NPAI, however, has had to reflect on its intellectual identity for
the longer-term, otherwise it may be sidelined or eaten by competitors, notably
plain ‘management’. This paper examines this rise of ‘management’ and its threat
to ‘public’ and ‘development’. It argues the need to strengthen the ‘public’ orientation by promoting a number of dimensions of that concept beyond merely
‘State’ and State-society interaction, and to keep alternative senses of ‘development’ and ‘management’ to the fore in order to prevent monopolisation of these
terms by the ideas of the corporate world.
Résumé
Le «New Public Management» (Nouvelle forme de gestion publique) (NPM) a
bouleversé les organisations publiques qui n’étaient pas dynamiques ni ouvertes.
* Associate Professor of Public Management and Dean, Institute of Social
Studies, The Hague, Netherlands.
Gasper2.p65
17
29/03/2004, 18:57
Africa Development, Vol. XXVII, Nos. 3 & 4, 2002
18
Il s’est répandu comme une religion, c’est-à-dire qu’il était supposé être moderne,
parfaitement adapté et d’une supériorité universelle, bien que ne disposant que
d’un très faible support empirique. Le NPM a désormais perdu de sa superbe, au
fur et à mesure qu’augmentent les énormes coûts de transaction induits par les
réformes radicales et leurs conditionnalités qui ne sont pas souvent remplies. Une
offre groupée a ainsi été commercialisée–et achetée. Cette communication cherche
à en tirer des enseignements. Tout d’abord, elle évoque les implications des formes
de réflexion et d’apprentissage autonomes exigées des administrateurs publics,
incluant les méthodes de réflexion critique, approfondie, responsable, et créative.
Ensuite, la communication introduit une étude de cas, celle d’un phénomène des
années 90 parallèle mais plutôt différent du NPM: le «New Public Administration
Initiative» d’Afrique du Sud (NPAI). Le NPAI a assuré le passage d’une
« administration » très attachée aux règles, à une forme de «gestion» privilégiant
le résultat; il a également aboli la division existant entre «l’Administration
publique» à dominante blanche et «l’Administration du développement»
principalement noire, et a grandement contribué à réformer les infrastructures
d’apprentissage pour la gestion publique et la gestion du développement,
comprenant les infrastructures permettant de réfléchir de manière indépendante,
et incitant à ne pas «avaler» passivement les contenus provenant de l’étranger. Le
NPAI a cependant eu à méditer sur son identité intellectuelle, dans le long-terme,
car autrement, il risquerait d’être écarté ou absorbé par ses concurrents, notamment
le système de gestion ordinaire. Cette communication analyse ce développement
de la «gestion» et la menace qu’elle représente vis-à-vis du «public» et du
«développement». Elle soutient qu’il existe un besoin de renforcement de
l’orientation «publique» en promouvant certaines dimensions de ce concept, audelà du simple «État» et de l’interaction État-société; cette contribution souligne
également le besoin de mettre en avant des conceptions alternatives du
«développement» et de la «gestion», afin d’éviter que ces termes ne soient
accaparés par les idées du monde de l’entreprise.
Introduction: ‘New Public Management’ and South Africa’s
‘New Public Administration’
For policymakers and senior managers, the difference between learning
by rote and learning to think independently is central. In rote learning we
learn how to exactly reproduce something. We copy. This is fine for some
purposes; we need to know exactly where the keys on the keyboard are,
otherwise we produce nonsense or type very slowly, and we must reproduce our signature consistently otherwise our cheques and credit card
payments may be rejected. But for most purposes in policy and senior
management we need to make intelligent judgments about cases that consist of a unique new set of circumstances, not completely the same as
anything we saw before. We have to think critically, to judge how far
previous examples or various general ideas are relevant to the new case.
Gasper2.p65
18
29/03/2004, 18:57
Gasper: Fashion, Learning and Values in Public Management
19
By ‘critically’ I mean relying on evidence, good logic and considered
values, not automatic opposition. A good critic gives both praise and criticism according to when they seem due. Automatic opposition is uncritical; so is automatically following fashion.
Let us look at the rise and spread of the doctrines and practice called
New Public Management (NPM). These emerged in the 1980s especially
in New Zealand, Australia and Britain and in sister forms in the United
States. They spread widely, especially in the 1990s, around many OECD
countries and from them to lower-income countries, not least in Africa,
partly through promotion by international agencies like the World Bank,
Commonwealth Secretariat and management consultancy groups. At one
stage, NPM’s proponents claimed to have intellectually defeated the older
public management and to be in the process of replacing it.
NPM has done a lot to shake up sleepy and self-serving public organisations, often by using ideas from the private sector. It provides many
options for trying to achieve cost-effective delivery of public goods, like
separate organisations for policy and implementation, performance contracts, internal markets, sub-contracting and much more (see Khandwalla
1999). It has a strong inter-organisational focus, as is needed in public
management. But it has been spread somewhat like a religion; it was assumed to be modern, relevant and superior, so there was no need felt to
prove that it suits the case concerned. To query this was held to show that
you were outdated and reactionary.
Christopher Pollitt records in his study, ‘Justification by Works or by
Faith?’, how thin was the empirical backing for NPM while it was being
evangelised worldwide. No thorough pilot studies had been done, let alone
studies giving clear lessons, based on consultation with medium and lowerlevel staff, or with customers about their experience in the experiments.
Governments pushed ahead with massive changes on the basis of high
hopes, misleading comparisons, a few examples often heard of from
abroad, assurances from highly paid consultants and the views of some
top civil servants and politicians far from the delivery line.
By now, as experience mounts, NPM has lost much of its gloss. In
New Zealand, in many respects NPM’s furthest frontier, the costs of an
overly narrow approach to public management have been major and there
is considerable backlash. The picture of the public and semi-public utilities such as the railways in Britain—complex new organisational systems, lavish remuneration of managers and sometimes of investors and
often unimpressive, sometimes even disastrous, records of public service—means that copying British-style NPM has lost much of its credibil-
Gasper2.p65
19
29/03/2004, 18:57
Africa Development, Vol. XXVII, Nos. 3 & 4, 2002
20
ity. One previously strong proselytizer for NPM—including the lead author of the Commonwealth Secretariat’s lead publication on public sector
reform (Commonwealth Secretariat 1995)—now notes, for example, the
massive transaction costs of radical reforms, which can outweigh their
intended efficiency gains (Manning 2001: 301). In the South, the advocated reforms rested on tacit assumptions which were far less often fulfilled than in their OECD home: the existence of solid traditional public
sector management skills and routines within the state and of highly organised publics which could discipline it (Manning 2001: 303-5). Manning draws consolation from the argument that the amount of damage
which NPM admittedly did in some cases (298) cannot have been too
great since it has not in reality been widely implemented in developing
countries: ‘The excessive claims of NPM did little damage in the long
run, [but] this was more by luck than by judgement’ (308).
NPM was sold—and bought—as if it were a well-established package. It was sold—and bought—as if it was a consistent system, even though
it was a patchwork of different elements and tendencies, some, for example, market-based and some hierarchy-based; it assumed but did not cultivate public service commitment and loyalty. How can we do better than
too readily and unselectively swallowing new Northern nostrums? Good
public management requires thinking critically, thinking caringly, and
thinking creatively. It also involves learning how to learn, sometimes
unlearning whatever we should discard, and helping others learn. Section
2 looks at one system for more critical and creative thinking. Section 3
examines a complementary method, the careful dissection of key concepts, with special reference to the terms ‘public’ and ‘management’. I
will use examples from the story of ‘New Public Management’ and from
a different 1990s phenomenon, South Africa’s ‘New Public Administration Initiative’.
NPM and the interest in it were partly a reaction to failures. In Africa,
for example, public enterprises have presented in large part a picture of
inefficiency, losses, budgetary burdens and poor services (Gasper,
Schwella and Tangri 2002). Dominant foreign sources of capital and ideas
have demanded privatisation, as a general principle, insisting that it could
slash the government deficit and depoliticize business decisions. But apart
from job losses and fears among political leaders about losing patronage
opportunities, privatisation may have other dangers: non-indigenous control, given the weakness of local capital; continuing monopoly, given the
smallness of most markets; withdrawal of some services, at least at prices
accessible to ordinary people; and massive enrichment of tiny insider
Gasper2.p65
20
29/03/2004, 18:57
Gasper: Fashion, Learning and Values in Public Management
21
groups. Foreign profit-driven corporations might lack long-term loyalty
to local development, but the big private players have been backed by a
predominant market ideology, embodied in organisations like the IMF
and some major consultancy groups. The IMF, convinced of the ideology
and not hindered by much local knowledge, may automatically press to
privatize (Stiglitz 2002). Most countries have lacked the room for manoeuvre and the managerial and research capacity to effectively prepare
and defend their own agendas, defining and using a wider range of options. What is happening in South Africa in public management has much
interest then for other African countries, even when we take into account
the differences in conditions.
Amongst the promising examples in South Africa are the independent
lines it has evolved on reorganising state-owned enterprises, and its approach in education for public management.1
Government’s policy with regard to State Owned Enterprises is more properly referred to as a restructuring programme, and not in the more simplistic terms of privatisation. The programme was and remains designed around
a multiple array of strategies, or mixes of options, that are designed to
ensure the maximisation of [stakeholder] interests defined in economic,
social and development terms… (Ministry of Public Enterprises 2000).
For example, when Telkom was 30 per cent privatised this raised US $1.2
billion, part of which has been used to extend the network to rural areas
and townships. Telkom has made heavy net contributions to the public
finances, while massively extending access, as required in its licence. It
has moved from having one black manager for 60,000 employees in 1993,
to having 50 per cent black management (Gasper, Schwella and Tangri
2002; see also Horwitz 2001).
To progress with an agenda of public service and national development—for example, adopting privatisation where appropriate and not otherwise, and regulating it effectively—requires substantial resources of
national commitment and inspiration, of public service capacity, ideas
and ethics and a coherent ideology different from the fundamentalism of
the global market. When we look at the great success stories of East and
South East Asia, we see in every case that those resources were mobilised, invested in and used. For, who will regulate the regulators? What
will make and keep them—and the publicly-oriented but effective managers who are needed—trained, motivated and loyal? In the private, profitdriven sector, big money buys influence, seeks out good staff, invests
massively in their loyalty and skills and pays for research and for publi-
Gasper2.p65
21
29/03/2004, 18:57
Africa Development, Vol. XXVII, Nos. 3 & 4, 2002
22
cists to spread ideas. The public sector (including all publicly-oriented
organisations, not just state-owned ones) has to invest seriously and steadily in ideas, institutions and training if it is not to be dominated by forces
of private wealth.
In the early 1990s South African training and education for public
policy and public management were still parts of the apartheid world.
Starting with the New Public Administration Initiative (NPAI) of 1991,
exemplified in the deservedly influential 1991 Mount Grace conference
papers, great advances were made through the 1990s in reaching further
beyond only whites and in establishing post-apartheid programmes. Intellectually, this involved three moves: from ‘government’ thinking to
‘governance’ thinking, namely, societal management through the interaction of many agencies and social forces; from rule-following ‘administration’ to outcomes-oriented ‘management’; and from a detached ‘education’ separated from ‘training’ to more fruitfully interrelated streams of
work (Cawthra 1999; see also Swilling and Wooldridge 1997). A notion
of public management was created. In addition, the old division between
white-oriented ‘Public Administration’ and black-oriented ‘Development
Administration’ was abolished. Both had been devalued by their apartheid separation. In South African parlance, the ‘public and development
discipline’ was created. It has contributed substantially to South Africa’s
remarkable transition and its ability to think relatively independently and
effectively in public policy and management (see Wessels and Pauw 1999).
By the end of the decade, the ‘New Public Management’ promoted by
international agencies, and competition from international educational
providers, notably offering general management education, had arrived
in South Africa. The reactive vision of NPAI and the ‘public and development’ movement did not yet establish a sufficient approach. The jargon
terms ‘the public and development sectors’ and ‘the public and development discipline’ left much obscured. ‘Public and development’, that nounfree, adjective-heavy emergent field, had to reflect on its intellectual identity for the longer-term. Otherwise it could be sidelined or even eaten by
competitors, such as adjective-free, noun-heavy ‘management’. Terms for
the new movement have evolved, from ‘public policy and development
administration’, in the early 1990s, to ‘public and development management’ by the mid–1990s, with ‘policy’ and ‘administration’ trumped by
‘management’; and then to ‘public management’, with ‘public’ swallowing ‘development’.2 The danger is of ‘public’ itself being swallowed, leaving just ‘management’. Section 3 considers this rise of ‘management’ and
threat to ‘development’. I will argue for the need above all to retain and
Gasper2.p65
22
29/03/2004, 18:57
Gasper: Fashion, Learning and Values in Public Management
23
strengthen ‘public’, clarifying and promoting a number of dimensions of
the concept, beyond merely ‘State’ and State-society interaction; and also
for keeping alternative senses of ‘development’ and ‘management’ to the
fore, to prevent monopolisation of these terms by the ideas of the corporate world.
Critical and uncritical thinking
Learning in public management in the past: Nature and limitations
Christopher Hood has examined why and how administrative doctrines
often get adopted without a good basis of evidence. His book with Michael
Jackson called Administrative Argument suggests that, in the past, politically successful arguments about principles for administration have rarely
been based on extensive, reliable data or careful logic and comparison
with alternatives. More often they have relied on appeals to authority,
metaphors, proverbs and selected supportive examples. Yet as Herbert
Simon pointed out in his Administrative Behavior, for every one of these
administration proverbs there is a contradictory one, equally plausible,
that is ignored—until the next wave in administrative fashion when those
opposite views may become a new orthodoxy. Administrative Argument
catalogues 99 proverb-like doctrines in administration, about who should
do what or how, and discusses what influences which doctrines get picked
out and when. Simon wanted to establish administration on a more scientific basis, by precise large-scale testing of which doctrines work when
and where. But the record of that sort of work in academic public administration has been rather indecisive and short of influence, since it rarely
gives bold, inspiring, sweeping conclusions. Situations and criteria have
so many aspects, vary so much and keep on changing.
Far more influential, argue Hood and Jackson, have been approaches
which contain attractively-packaged sets of administration proverbs and
satisfy all or most of the following six requirements. First, they must pick
up a felt mood of the time. NPM matched a desire to ‘jack up’ the public
sector and cut costs. In some countries, for example, the swing voter group
was now relatively well-off and averse to more taxes.
Second, the approaches use persuasive metaphors and build on appealing and widespread ‘common-sense’ ideas. NPM stressed masterful
‘management’ (the word comes from the training of horses) rather than
more modest ‘administration’, and equated budget-cutting with fitness
and losing weight: ‘mean’ became redefined as ‘lean’. It relied on simple
pictures, provided by economists, that people are predominantly self-in-
Gasper2.p65
23
29/03/2004, 18:57
Africa Development, Vol. XXVII, Nos. 3 & 4, 2002
24
terested, restless calculators oriented to financial incentives. Only vivid
simple images are likely to capture the imagination of enough people to
be remembered and used. This is how business management ‘gurus’ work.
Metaphors also genuinely help people to think and to be more creative.
Third, they should be stated in general terms which allow different
groups to interpret the package differently, in line with their concerns.
NPM’s ‘performance’ talk could appeal both to cost-cutters, interested in
financial performance, and to quality-raisers.
Fourth, the approach promotes the private interests of some influential groups while declaring that it serves the public good. NPM schemes,
for example, have involved not just well-intentioned copying of a current
fashion but sometimes large rewards for top public officials, who have
moved towards private sector-type remuneration packages and who, after
leaving the public sector, have frequently entered interested-party private
companies.
Fifth, examples and comparisons, but only selected ones which support the pre-set conclusions, are used to give reasoned support. The examples often come as easy-to-remember stories, parables of failure or
success, like we see in much management-guru literature. NPM presented
inspirational stories: of the bad old ways and the shining modern alternative. It ignored cases which didn’t fit.
Sixth, the approach is proposed in a forceful, dramatic way, which
induces people to accept its story and conclusions even in the absence of
solid evidence, for example, by insisting that a crisis demands immediate
action. At a time of fear of being out-competed by Japan and others, the
ideas which Tom Peters’ famous In Search of Excellence (1982) put forward from study of a few successful American companies (most of which
had collapsed ten years later) had considerable impact, even in public
management and other countries.
These six factors help explain, propose Hood and Jackson, how
packages of ideas from business management and economics—NPM drew
from both sources—have often become more influential in public
management than ideas from the public administration discipline itself,
which were more complex, unmarketed and harder to use. Economicsbased reasoning has had the added advantage that, given its boldly
oversimplified picture of people’s motives, it builds impressive-looking
mathematical models of behaviour which give definite predictions. This
provides a direction and a feeling of decisiveness. But the oversimplification is dangerous.
Gasper2.p65
24
29/03/2004, 18:57
Gasper: Fashion, Learning and Values in Public Management
25
How might we do any better to think independently, yet influence and
motivate? One lesson, especially from the study of public administration,
is the importance of being empirical, case-specific and respecting complexity. From the history of ideas and administration we see the need for
sensitivity to key concepts and how they have emerged. Another lesson,
not least from economics, is the power of a systematic approach to thinking. And from business management, especially, we can draw a lesson
about the power of metaphors and stories, for seeing new angles, communicating and persuading. How can we combine these requirements? I will
make some suggestions and will indicate in particular how a fairly simple
system of argument analysis can often help.
A system for thinking critically
In a classic study on Towards a Philosophy of Administration, Christopher
Hodgkinson showed how administration consists in large part of the clarification, testing, communication and follow-up of evaluative statements.
Hence strong skills for handling language and logic and discussing values are essential. Systems of pat answers inhibit us from thinking and
learning. We need methods that help us to identify and check meanings
and assumptions and to construct and assess counterarguments.
The following system uses two tables for analysis. The first table is
for examining carefully the components and meanings in a statement or
text. Only if we have clarified meanings are we ready to check logic. The
second table is for then formulating the structure of the argument, to see
how and how well the components fit together.3
Just as we normally miss some errors when we proofread our own
work, we normally miss many significant aspects when routinely reading
a complex text. Often, our minds too readily repeat the old scenarios with
which we are familiar, rather than freshly and precisely examine what
lies in front of us. In the first part of the system we therefore look closely,
line-by-line and word-by-word, at the selected text or key extract. We
place it in the first column of a table and divide it into sections. This helps
us to get close to a position and examine all its parts in detail and yet keep
a critical distance, so as to be able to think about it in a detached way.
In the second column of this table one identifies and comments on key
words and phrases. Some people say ‘New Public Management’ was in
fact largely old private management, which is often different from what
successful modern private sector companies try for. Bringing business
practices into public administration has been tried since the late nineteenth century, and many NPM components, like performance-related pay,
Gasper2.p65
25
29/03/2004, 18:57
Africa Development, Vol. XXVII, Nos. 3 & 4, 2002
26
were widespread much earlier. Hood and Jackson suggest that NPM presented itself as ‘New’ in order to divert attention from the mixed record
of previous attempts on the same lines and to why attempts had declined.
One important guideline is to examine the major figures of speech, the
cases where words are not used with their literal meaning. Some figures
are found on the surface. (The previous sentence is itself a figure of speech,
a metaphor.) Some lie deeper, more subtly ingrained (notice the metaphors in both these clauses), such as the original analogy of ‘management’ to close manual control, of animals.
Another guideline is to identify language which gives or suggests praise
or criticism, because it often points towards the conclusions of the text.
Sometimes we can usefully invest in making a third column, in which one
takes the key words and phrases and rewords them more neutrally or with
an opposite evaluative direction. Thinking about alternative choices of
words helps to clarify the conclusions towards which the actual choice of
words led, and it helps one to find possible counterarguments, other ways
of viewing the same situation, against which the text should be compared
when we judge it overall.
In the final column, one then identifies the main conclusions and assumptions of the text, both the stated ones and those which are unstated
or hinted at. So, overall, the first table can look like this:
Table 1: A format for systematic investigation of a text’s meanings
and main components
The text
Comments
on meanings
A rewording of
key components
to test meanings
Main conclusions
and assumptions
identified in the text
Section 1
Section 2
....
The second part of the method takes the results from the first table: the
identified meanings, components, assumptions and conclusions. In a second table we then lay out for each important conclusion the basis on which
it is proposed—the asserted or assumed data and principles—and the
Gasper2.p65
26
29/03/2004, 18:57
Gasper: Fashion, Learning and Values in Public Management
27
possible counterarguments. The possible counterarguments (rebuttals) can
either be direct doubts about the identified data and principle(s), or other
doubts or exceptions concerning the claim. They provide the seeds of
possible alternative positions, either as revisions of the original position
or as radically different.
Table 2: A format for synthesis of a text’s propositions and
investigation of their cogency
I Claim
[this conclusion],
Given this Data
(empirical facts)
and this Principle
(or Principles =
general, theoretical
and/or value
statements);
Unless (/except
when) one or
more of these
counterarguments
applies
Conclusion 1
Data 1.1, (1.2, …)
Principle 1.1, (1.2, …)
Rebuttal 1.1, (1.2, 1.3, …)
Conclusion 2
Data 2.1, (2.2, …)
Principle 2.1, (2.2, …)
Rebuttal 2.1, (2.2, 2.3, …)
....
....
....
....
The system is presented in more detail in Gasper (2000b) through an
examination of texts from Southern African policy debates. The procedure typically generates significant added insight about what a text says,
and provides a basis for evaluating and when necessary, changing it. For
example, Gasper (2003) analyses the section on corruption in the important mid-1990s study with which the Commonwealth Secretariat launched
its publications series for improving public service management. Sentence-by-sentence and sometimes word-by-word examination takes us
behind the screens of euphemism in international agency discourse and
shows the tensions in the negotiated text. It reveals how, behind diplomatically general formulations, low-income countries were treated as empirically different (supposedly more corrupt and in need of systemic and
cultural change) yet on the other hand subjected to the same policy approach as specified for high-income countries: an economic perspective
that focused on altering the balance of prospective risks and rewards attached to corrupt behaviour.
Here we look further at the same Commonwealth Secretariat publication, not this time at a single passage but a series of passages and at the
messages on public sector management from the document as a whole.
Gasper2.p65
27
29/03/2004, 18:57
Africa Development, Vol. XXVII, Nos. 3 & 4, 2002
28
The Commonwealth Secretariat’s advocacy of public sector
reform—and privatisation
Under the carefully edited surface of From Problem to Solution (Commonwealth Secretariat 1995) lay mixed messages. Some parts of the study
were oriented to privatisation and were in tension with other parts which
believed instead in internal public sector reform. This emerges from studying the whole report with an eye for key passages, which one finds particularly near its beginning and end; and by then analysing the identified
passages parallel to each other, as shown in Table 3. The table probes the
meanings conveyed by terms, including in its third column, by re-wording to see what difference the actual choice of words made. Some
rewordings used in the table are intensifications or clarifications of the
position in the text but some are doubts and proto-rebuttals.
The mixed messages could reflect the involvement of different editorial hands, with some coming in at a later stage to counteract or tone
down the strong criticisms of government activity, as in the sections of
the study which are examined in Table 3. We find, however, still a main
message, re-emerging in key passages towards the end of the document
(51, 53, 67) where the recommended roles of the various different policy
options are stated in relation to each other. While many policy measures
are presented in the report, often in detail, ultimately privatisation seems
to receive pride of place: both in the short term by being the first option to
consider, before others, and in the long run as the assumed final option to
which governments will be forced to turn, as the others arguably become
less and less effective.
Due to length limitations, I have not presented a second table containing a synthesis of the identified components into a tidied set of explicit
propositions and possible counter-arguments. Interested readers may like
to undertake that exercise for themselves and to read Manning’s (2001)
partial retraction of From Problem to Solution’s recommendations after
more exposure to experience of how the proposed solutions could generate major new problems.
Gasper2.p65
28
29/03/2004, 18:57
Gasper: Fashion, Learning and Values in Public Management
29
Table 3: Examination of the Commonwealth Secretariat’s
published position on public sector management
The Texts
(extracts from
Commonwealth
Secretariat 1995)
Comments on
Meaning and
Style
Possible
Alternative
Wordings
Identification of
Text’s
Conclusions and
Assumptions
From Problem
To Solution
[Title of the report]
1. Meaning: not
just a diagnosis
of weaknesses
but an
identification of
cures.
2. Connotation:
that there is a single
shared problem and
a single shared
solution—even
though some parts
of the report rebut
this.
From Problems
to Solutions
Assumption: This
report reveals the
single shared problem
and single shared
solution.
Within a few decades,
1. Within a few decades
government expenditures since what? Implicitly,
had acquired a
the independence of
reputation worldwide,
former Imperial
with a few notable
possessions.
exceptions, for poor
2. Only a few
products, services and
exceptions
attitudes. (p.4)
—is this true?
It is truer for
ex-colonies, but
still overstated.
Background: The
existence of a
Management
Division of the
Commonwealth
Secretariat (CS)
encourages the idea
of important
commonality in
problems and
solutions in member
countries.
One or two
generations after
independence, the
public sector
throughout excolonies is known
for poor
performance.
Assumptions on
audience:
- The primary
function
of the report is to
channel ideas from
North to South,
without being so
crude as to say so
openly.
-While the rich North
is unlikely
to pay much
attention to the
CS, the poor South is
both problematic
and open to
influence,
especially if neither
point is too openly
stated.
Gasper2.p65
29
29/03/2004, 18:57
Africa Development, Vol. XXVII, Nos. 3 & 4, 2002
30
Table 3: Continued
The Texts
(extracts from
Commonwealth
Secretariat 1995)
Comments on
Meaning and
Style
Possible
Alternative
Wordings
Identification of
Text’s
Conclusions and
Assumptions
Traditionally, the
shortcomings of the
public service have
been seen as
organisational problems
capable of solution by
appropriate applications
of political will,
powerful ideas, and
managerial
determination.
Recent years have
seen a new problem
identified – government
itself. (p.6)
‘have been seen as’
is used to record the
traditional view;
more emphatic
and supportive is
the term ‘identified’,
used for the new view.
Later the ‘new
problem identified’
is specified as
government overambition, but
here it is introduced
in a more dramatic and
anti-government way, as
‘government itself’.
The traditional view
sees public sector
problems as
soluble. The
stronger new view
sees them as
inherent to
government. [Hence
privatisation would
be the main line
of response, rather
than public sector
reform – contrary
to the focus of
most of the report;
see the extract.
(Implied)
Conclusion:
Our starting point
presumption should
be that government
is a problem not
a solution.
It has been argued
1. ‘with increasing
Governments are
with increasing force
force’ implies strength, doing too much
that it is the overnot just intensity, of
that they are
ambitious scale of
argument; so support is unfit to do.
government, seeking
implied for this view.
to intervene and provide
An opposed view is
services in areas where
reported on p.8 in
it has no proven track
sceptical fashion.
record of success, that
2. ‘a new problem’ has
is the problem.
quickly been turned into
(p.6 continued)
‘the problem’: as in the
report’s title.
The overriding concern ‘Overriding concern’
with economic growth
- Is this true? Note
has led to a re-focusing
the emergence also
and narrowing of
of e.g.‘Human
national goals,
Development’
suggesting that there
- ‘Overriding concern’
must also be a reby whom? Business
focusing and narrowing sectors?
of government
‘Must be’: no choice
institutions and
left.
responsibilities.
(p.6 continued)
Gasper2.p65
30
Implied conclusion:
Governments are doing
too much that they are
unfit to do.
[Remarks: if
governments work only
in areas of already
proven success, they
will never find new
ones.]
In some economi- Implied conclusion:
cally regressing
governments must do
countries, govern- less.
ments have felt
obliged to concentrate on a few economic issues.
Business sectors in
many countries
would like government to do that
29/03/2004, 18:57
Gasper: Fashion, Learning and Values in Public Management
31
Table 3: Continued
The Texts
(extracts from
Commonwealth
Secretariat 1995)
Comments on
Meaning and
Style
Possible
Alternative
Wordings
Identification of
Text’s
Conclusions and
Assumptions
…Despite consensus
on the need for change,
there continues to be
controversy on the
appropriate role
of the state (p.6, later).
The fact of controversy
weakens the earlier
claim of an ‘overriding
concern’; as we will
see on p.8.
Not everyone agrees Conclusion: People
with the business
understand tha the old
sectors.
situation must be
changed, but some
remain confused by
old arguments for it.
New Roles – Concerns The subsection records In some countries,
Implied Conclusion:
For Change
doubts raised in the
leaders afraid of
arguments reducing
In some countries,
‘South’ about New Public change defend their the role of
concern has been
Management. However, traditional policies,
government are
expressed that the
the title seems to reduce by arguing that these weak.
extensive changes in
the doubts to worries
policies have been
the role of government over change, mere con- poorly implemented
currently being
servatism. The doubts are and could be handled
considered are not
attributed to ‘The
better
always based on a
political leadership’
sufficient awareness of [with the earlier ‘some
local conditions. The
countries’ now identified
political leadership of
as ‘some developing
some developing
countries’], as if the
countries have argued
doubts are not shared
that failures in develop- by many others too.
ment planning are not
because of the level of
state intervention but
because of its nature…
in not allowing for popular participation, in not
addressing the unique social environments, and in
not encouraging transparency
and accountability (p.8).
Government was not in ‘The argument runs’:
error in setting itself
distanceis taken from
its tasks, the argument this position, in conruns, it failed in the
trast to the way in
manner in which it
which the opposed
sought to undertake
position was prethem. It is the style of
sented earlier (it
management and
‘has been argued
not the role of govern- with increasing force’)
ment which is the problem.
Gasper2.p65
31
Old arguments
for extensive
government involvement in economic
and social management continue to
be recited-regardless
of the worlwide record of poor performance...
29/03/2004, 18:57
Africa Development, Vol. XXVII, Nos. 3 & 4, 2002
32
Table 3: Continued
The Texts
(extracts from
Commonwealth
Secretariat 1995)
Comments on
Meaning and
Style
Possible
Alternative
Wordings
Identification of
Text’s
Conclusions and
Assumptions
Against that background, pressure to
review and reduce
the role of government may appear to
threaten a system
in which there is
already insufficient
experience, inadequate resources and
a volatile political
environment and
could be destabilising;
incremental improvement of the basics
may be more pertinent.
(later on p.8)
‘may appear to threaten’,
and ‘may be more
pertinent’: again we
find a distanced,
somewhat sceptical
reporting of this
viewpoint—but it is
included, not ignored,
even if rather as an afterthought or response to
comments
...—together with
new arguments
that changing the
role of government
would be destabilising, given all the
problems that make
government’s
performance so weak!
Where there is no
strategic reason why
an activity should be
privatised, corporatisation or contracting
out should be considered.
(p.51)
The recommended
sequence of discussion
is: first consider
privatisation. ‘Strategic
reasons’ can be
political too.
First, consider
privatisation:
that is the proper
starting point for
discussion.
The reasons for government involvement in
management have
not disappeared.
The lack of domestic
private capital, the
risk of foreign domination of the economy...
(p.8 contd.)
Gasper2.p65
32
29/03/2004, 18:57
Gasper: Fashion, Learning and Values in Public Management
33
Table 3: Continued
The Texts
(extracts from
Commonwealth
Secretariat 1995)
Comments on
Meaning and
Style
Possible
Alternative
Wordings
Identification of
Text’s
Conclusions and
Assumptions
In some limited situations where contracting out is not feasible
because of market
weaknesses or political restrictions, the development of internal
markets is being
explored with, as yet,
uncertain results. (p.53)
Similarly, where there
is not full privatisation
of management, privatisation of supply (‘contracting-out’) is the
presumed most plauble solution.
If not privatising,
then consider
contracting-out to
the private sector.
Only in a few cases
are other possibilities
worth considering.
Implied Conclusion:
In the short run,
privatisation is the
base case, the
reference point; and in
the long run,
privatisation is the
road ahead
This increasingly
And therefore the
diverse public service
case for privatisation
will be less and less
will increase, accoramenable to hierarding to this study.
chical management
or to control by ever more
detailed contractual
relationships (p.67).
But in the long
run corporatisation
or contracting out
will be less and less
satisfactory.
Analysing key terms: Meanings of ‘Public’, ‘Management’
and ‘Public Management’
An essential part of critical thinking is the thoughtful re-investigation of
key terms. None is more key in public policy, administration and management than ‘public’ itself, yet its meaning is subject to much confusion.
In almost the same breath we say ‘public’ for ‘State’, as in ‘the public
sector’, and then discuss how this public sector deals with those outside
it, ‘the public’. Despite its claim to newness, NPM showed too little thought
here, due to its reliance on a generalised model of the market and on the
conventional economics conception of public goods. More reflective positions may well vary from country to country. One cannot draw an answer from off a foreign shelf (Ngema 2002). In South Africa the meaning
of ‘public’ has for historic reasons its own special confusions. There appears no consistent stance on whether the public sector is more than the
State sector and whether it includes NGOs and CBOs (Community based
organisations) or not; hence, the occasional addition to ‘public sector’ of
the phrase ‘and development sectors’.
Gasper2.p65
33
29/03/2004, 18:57
Africa Development, Vol. XXVII, Nos. 3 & 4, 2002
34
Different understandings of what is feasible and desirable for a political community lead to different delineations of the public sphere. We will
see limitations of the neoclassical economics concept of ‘public good’
(non-rivalrous and non-excludable goods) for discussing the choices involved. For public administration we need rather to consider public goods
as identified priorities within a political community, whose supply is to
be promoted through some form of ‘public action’. State action is only
one such form: the State is (in principle) merely a tool of a political community, one available tool amongst others. Ideals of ‘public service’ and
public-spiritedness are critically important for this operation of community and State. Shrinkage of the notion of ‘public’ to that in neoclassical
economics matches a domination of the political community by wealth.
Conceptions of ‘Public’ Reflect Conceptions of Political Community
‘Public’ comes from the Latin publicus, derived in turn from pubes meaning adult (cf. ‘puberty’). It now has a complex of meanings (Oxford English Reference Dictionary 1996) including three uses as an adjective: (1)
‘of or concerning the people as a whole’, (2) ‘of or involved in the affairs
of the community’, and (3) ‘provided by or concerning local or central
government’ (as in ‘the public sector’; but not provided just for government itself, instead provided with an orientation to the whole public; similarly, public goods are not only provided by the State). In addition there
are two meanings as a noun: (1) the community in general, and (2) a
section of the community having a particular interest or some special
connection.
Conceptions of ‘public’ reflect theories of what is a political community and of how it can and should perform. The term ‘the community’
becomes dangerous when given a Gemeinschaft interpretation requiring
a whole shared culture. It is dangerous because it is used to exclude. ‘Public’ requires rather a Gesellschaft interpretation, of citizens living together
and cooperating according to common rules. It is a reference to a political
community, not to cultural homogeneity. The perception in some recent
‘New Public Management’ of citizens as only customers is another dangerous reduction.4
Let us identify alternative criteria for using the term ‘public’, and some
of the issues which arise:
1. Non-profit. Many public agencies, with public purposes according to other
criteria in this list, operate on a profit basis.
Gasper2.p65
34
29/03/2004, 18:57
Gasper: Fashion, Learning and Values in Public Management
35
2. Inter-organisational: The public arena is characteristically multi-actor, multijurisdiction, multi-authority. This is a secondary characteristic, a consequence
of more central features.
3. That which is managed or held in common. This criterion seems more central,
but omits one basic feature of the term, its critical, normative, force. People
declare that issue X is a matter of public concern, i.e. should be subject to
community attention and steering even if it presently is not, and conversely
that issue Y is not, i.e. should not be, a matter for public concern even if it is
presently subject to community regulation.
4. That which should be managed in common. This fourth criterion is therefore
essential, as partner to the third. Questions arising include: ‘Should’ by what
criteria? In common amongst whom? Managed in which respects? By which
modalities? The remaining three criteria represent lines for discussing the
question of what should be in the public arena.
5. Everything in a polity that is not ‘private’. By itself this criterion gives no
answers but provides a line for thought and critique. Feminists have noted, for
example, how the costs borne by women have often been treated as ‘private’
and hence not a topic for public discussion or action.
6. Activities or matters which affect other people, especially otherwise than
through markets. Which effects are considered significant in type or quantity,
which affected groups are considered significant and as judged by whom?
These notions vary and evolve. Activities which only benefit oneself are in
this conception not considered ‘public’.
7. Activities or matters which harm other people. In this narrower interpretation,
behaviours should be treated as part of the ‘private’ sphere as long as no one
is harmed.
One finds all these criteria and more mentioned in public policy texts,
typically without being distinguished (e.g. the opening pages of Parsons
1995). Yet they do not all move together, and hence the field is not one
with tidy, clear or agreed boundaries.
Definitions of the field(s) of public policy and public administration
reflect contested ideas about the functioning and ordering of societies:
about the capacity of markets; about duties to and for others; about the
degree of sustainable public-spiritedness; about the capacity of States or
other non-market action; and hence about the degree to which non-market action should be legitimated by extension of the label ‘public’. In
market-based social philosophies there is a large private sphere; to operate outside the market is only justified if it remedies culpable harm to
others who are recognised as juridically distinct and important; public
benefit is seen only as the sum of the private benefits of separate indi-
Gasper2.p65
35
29/03/2004, 18:57
Africa Development, Vol. XXVII, Nos. 3 & 4, 2002
36
viduals; and the public sphere is only to provide a frame for markets and
to remedy the (supposedly) exceptional market failures, typically by action that is itself organised on (quasi-) market principles. Public service
becomes conceived purely on a supplier-customer model: to deliver contractually specified services (Swilling and Wooldridge 1997).
If instead we consider that duties are more extensive, markets frequently unsatisfactory, public-spiritedness sustainably high, and nonmarket action often efficacious, then the label ‘public’ will be extended
broadly. Public administration can be seen as broader than government
administration, for: ‘Public is a pre-governmental concept which broadly
describes the full range of human collective activities which are outside
of our private homes and distinct from the market of the private pursuit of
gain’ (Frederickson 1996: 299). This differs significantly from the modern economics concept of public goods.
Public Goods
Mainstream economics has focused on the market, and requires goods
that are rivalrous and excludable in order for its predictive and prescriptive
claims to have more plausibility.5 The neo-classical theory of public goods
then only offers a definition by contrast. Public goods are defined as
problem cases: goods which are non-rivalrous and/or non-excludable. The
pure public good (or bad) is both. It affects others, not only the producer
and buyer, and the others cannot (feasibly) be excluded, nor does their
‘participation’ reduce the effects on both producer and buyer. This
combination makes ‘free-riding’ by all possible and inhibits funding and
hence provision of the good. Such a definition is not sufficient for
understanding the public sphere and its constructed nature. It can be used
to reduce public action to what neo-classical economics understands.
First, which ‘others’ are considered is a matter for political choice.
For long in South Africa, blacks were excluded from the polity and were
likely to be not counted for many purposes. In some cases, foreigners are
not counted. Who is considered ‘the public’ depends on the context and
prevailing values. Economics’ utilitarian formation makes it potentially
consistent with including all races, but its reliance on the market leads it
typically towards counting only those with money to make themselves
heard.
Second, being non-rivalrous and non-excludable does not make a good
publicly available; non-excludability often makes that more difficult. What
makes such a good publicly available, and hence a public good in the
ordinary sense of the term, is (a) a decision that it is important, and then
Gasper2.p65
36
29/03/2004, 18:57
Gasper: Fashion, Learning and Values in Public Management
37
(b) some form of public action. What is chosen for actual public provision is influenced by ideas about what should be publicly provided, including about what are merit goods. In all countries and times this covers
far less than all non-excludables; it also includes some excludables. Education and health care are both rivalrous and excludable services, yet both
may be provided by public agents to be accessible to ordinary people,
often at a subsidized price, because they are seen as deserving priority as
merit goods and because their ‘consumption’ brings important favourable
external effects.
Let us take a further example: public spaces. They belong to the family of what Joseph Raz and John Gray call ‘inherently public goods’,
which
…do not necessarily satisfy the technical requirements of an economic
public good…[but] are ingredients in a worthwhile form of common life.
Consider public parks in the context of a modern city [DG: a facility especially valued by many poorer people]…There are, of course, no insuperable technical obstacles to turning urban parks into private consumption
goods…[But] Public spaces for recreation and for lingering, whether streets,
squares or parks, are necessary ingredients in the common life of cities, as
conceived in the European tradition and elsewhere. Where such public
places atrophy or disappear, become too dangerous or too unsightly to be
occupied… the common life of the city has been compromised or lost.
This is a nemesis, long reached in many American urban settlements and
not far off in some British and European cities, which market institutions
can do little to prevent. It is only one example…of the indifference of
market institutions to inherently public goods (Gray 1993: 134).
So we have various types of definition of public goods:
• analytic: as in economic theory, to discuss what it considers to be exceptions
as seen from its intellectual starting point, the model of the well-functioning
market;
• descriptive: goods/services provided by public agents; or guaranteed by public bodies; or provided with a full or partial public subsidy; and;
• prescriptive: goods/services which should be provided/guaranteed/ subsidised
by public bodies.
Wuyts et al. (1992) do not adopt the neoclassical economics definition.
Drawing on de Swaan (1988), they emphasise not merely that a good is
hard to provide via markets, but the aspects of prioritisation and public
action, including the processes of debate about what are to be accepted as
public problems, what are the boundaries and responsibilities of the po-
Gasper2.p65
37
29/03/2004, 18:57
Africa Development, Vol. XXVII, Nos. 3 & 4, 2002
38
litical community, and hence what are public needs and ‘public goods’.
These debates vary across time and place, as seen in Wuyts’s contrasting
histories of the extension of water and sewer networks in nineteenth century European cities and twentieth century Johannesburg. Richer groups
in Europe’s expanding cities, increasingly residentially secluded by income, paid private entrepreneurs who installed water and sanitation systems for their neighbourhoods. Eventually these public goods were extended by legislation and State subsidy to low-income areas, given the
richer groups’ wish to eliminate epidemics that endangered and inconvenienced them too, and the growth of concern from increasingly organised medical and State bureaucracies and general public opinion. In South
African cities, richer groups ‘solved’ the problem of unsanitary low-income areas not by extending public provision to them, but from the 1930s
onwards, by forced removal of their populations to remote townships. It
was bus transportation, to ensure timely arrival of black labour each day
to the ‘white’ areas, which became a State-recognised public good and
recipient of subsidies.
In the USA, whereas shared public spaces in cities can be neglected,
the provision of security and countering of crime have emerged as
prioritised public goods. Tax-breaks and public funds are channelled to
these sectors, whose products are increasingly commodities for sale by
private suppliers. These booming new industries have a vested interest in
the reproduction of classes of criminals and prisoners. The USA now has
two million persons in prisons, often privately run.
Which are ‘public agents’ and ‘public bodies’? Families, numerous
sorts of association, and NGOs/PVOs (private voluntary organisations)
have a proven ability to make major direct contributions to quality of life.
Further, for State action to be beneficial, broader public action of various
types is necessary: to generate the State action, discipline it and complement it. Thus the conception of public action covers more than action by
the State. For Mackintosh (1992) it is purposive collective action, not all
of which will be publicly beneficial. For Dreze and Sen it is instead action for public benefit, which can be done by various agents and private
agents too. Often, even typically, it will involve various organisations.
We arrive at a broader conception of governance: the ‘array of ways in
which interplay between the State, the market, and society is ordered’
(‘Insights’ no.23 1997; IDS Sussex).
‘Public’ refers to a series of contrasts with the untrammelled market,
not only the issues of ownership or profit-orientation: in the criteria used,
going beyond considering only market and market-equivalent impacts; in
Gasper2.p65
38
29/03/2004, 18:57
Gasper: Fashion, Learning and Values in Public Management
39
the greater scope of effects considered, concerning types of effect and the
greater range of affected people considered; in the greater range of people
to be involved in discussion and decision-making, within an arena for
debate of matters of common concern, not an army or only a market; and
thus overall in the broader range of values advocated, including public
spirit and concern for others, not only self-interest and (at best) agreementfollowing. All of these extensions will be at risk if public management
veers away from emphasising and understanding the concept of ‘public’
and the processes that define and constitute a public, a political community,
and becomes instead more exclusively and conventionally managerial.
Balancing ‘Management’ with ‘Development’ and ‘Policy’
In contrast to the term ‘public’, the historical origins of the term ‘management’ are in the training of horses.6 ‘Management’ was however a
consciously imported term in the South African ‘New Public Administration Initiative’, and by the mid-1990s had even substantially displaced
‘administration’. ‘Public Management’ was widely adopted, partly to assert
a chosen focus within public administration, and partly to assert difference
from more traditional schools and departments.
Internationally, there is considerable confusion over the term ‘public
management’ and no consistent usage internationally—hence in fact no
consistent differences in usage between it and ‘public administration’.
Kettl and Milward’s state-of-the-art survey of public management reveals
many different definitions.7 In reality ‘public management’ is a name
adopted by almost any new stream in public administration that reacts
against the conventional shape which the field had acquired: State-centred, organisation-focused, maintenance-oriented. ‘Public management’
is then used to at least suggest results-orientation, plus implicitly—but
not always in practice—flexibility about means, and therefore sometimes—but regrettably far from always—foci on State-society issues and
societal self-management too. It is certainly broader than market-inspired
‘New Public Management’, some of which seemed to be dated private
management, imported to discipline a sector of which less was expected
(Pollitt 1993, 1995).
The term ‘management’ brought the connotation of private sector knowhow, can-do spirit, and delivery of results. The danger of the term in the
past quarter-century has been the ideology that there is a universally valid
‘management’, adopted from a particular narrow vision of Anglo-American private sector practice, which should be imposed on all sectors and
all countries: ‘managerialism’. Pollitt provides an excellent diagnosis and
Gasper2.p65
39
29/03/2004, 18:57
Africa Development, Vol. XXVII, Nos. 3 & 4, 2002
40
critique. In South Africa, a depoliticised conception of ‘management’ fitted well with the adaptation by governing elites from the late 1970s onwards to the national and international opposition to the apartheid system, by transference of more and more functions and responsibilities outside the State (Tapscott 1995, 1997).
Public administration itself has existed throughout its modern era, the
past century, at the intersection of political science and generic management, and been widely considered as a sub-discipline of one or both. It
can perhaps better be understood as an inter-disciplinary field—a field at
the crossroads of several disciplines and a set of practical demands—
which in comparison to general management requires stronger involvement also from law, economics, history and some other disciplines too.
For example for Erwin Schwella, public administration is a domain of
study to which many approaches can validly be taken, including economics perspectives, legal perspectives, management perspectives and policy
perspectives. He sees public management as then a sub-focus within public administration (Schwella 1999).
There is no need for full consensus on disciplinary identity and location: there are many legitimate intellectual bases, from various disciplines
and the schools within them. There is room for different specialisations
and niches within public administration, and we gain through competition of ideas. A danger exists, however, given the ambiguity of ‘management’, of a narrowing of the whole field if ‘public management’ is used to
mean both 1) a new-look, more relevant successor to public administration, which hence dominates whole departments and curricula and funding, and also 2) just one possible legitimate emphasis within public administration. For if public management is one possible emphasis, then it
cannot sustain monopoly claims. And if it were a broad successor to public administration, then it must provide space for various foci, including
for example a policy-level focus.
‘Development’ was another conscious NPAI importation to old South
African public administration. The 1991 Mount Grace Declaration called
for ‘an explicit developmental focus’, and ‘a more relevant approach to
the issues of governance in a developing society’. It redefined SA as a
developing society, the large majority of whose population lived in absolute poverty; so it merged public administration and development administration (Fitzgerald 1995). Public management for a developing country
like South Africa, fast undergoing massive changes of many types, cannot work well by copying nostrums from public management in the rich
Gasper2.p65
40
29/03/2004, 18:57
Gasper: Fashion, Learning and Values in Public Management
41
North. The South African constitution of 1996 requires the public service
to be development-oriented (Section 195(1)).
Some will feel that the role of the two terms is different: ‘public’ as
more about the field for management, ‘development’ as more about its
purposes and philosophy. Although the separation of ‘public’ and ‘development’ may seem untidy to some, these are adjectives not different territories, and the ‘public and development’ label raises questions which give
entry points for necessary discussion. The arguments for retention of the
‘development’ title take it as a guiding interdisciplinary perspective about
secular change and possible progress/regress, not as a set of separate and
second-class studies. It became a tainted term in South Africa through its
association with the 1950s Bantustans policy of ‘separate development’.
Later the strategy of broader black pacification and cooptation through
ameliorative programmes from the late 1970s used the banner of ‘development’ as a supposedly neutral, consensual, economically obligatory
approach (Tapscott 1995, 1997). ‘Development’ was there seen as economic development plus its socio-political requirements, for the good of
all, as determined by development economist experts. Yet this past history provides important counter-opportunities now. ‘Development’ can
also function as an explicit, vital banner for emphasising the interests of
the poor majority. Claims that it is for the general good, or even good for
all, establish an arena for raising the questions: Who benefits? Management for whom, by whom, and with whom? This questioning is vital in a
massively divided society which can easily drift away from any priority
to the have-nots, through incorporation of a minority of them. The governing political movement in South Africa represents an amorphous, variegated political alliance, with no one group dominant or likely to be (Lodge
1999). That leaves possibilities both for argumentation to have influence,
and for sliding away from mass interests towards a neo-liberal or a parasitic state (Ngema 2003). Notwithstanding Tapscott’s valid warnings about
how the term ‘development’ can be used and misused, the other alternatives—abandoning the term or leaving it to be monopolised by others—
are worse.8
Similarly, without an explicit ‘policy’ orientation, ‘public and development’ or especially ‘public management’ will be more likely to disappear into generic management. Policy direction is then far more likely to
come from unconsidered sources, not least the values embodied in the
market. Value concealment brings domination by the monied and by those
who are powerful in other ways.
Gasper2.p65
41
29/03/2004, 18:57
Africa Development, Vol. XXVII, Nos. 3 & 4, 2002
42
Is attention to labels worthwhile? Arguably, what one has won in practice one may not need to install in a label; and what one has not achieved
in practice is unlikely to be won through control of labels. However, the
processes of thinking and the content of the choices which lie behind
labels are important and influential; and the labels help to remind and
guide. Hence the critical look we have taken here at ‘new’, ‘public’ and
‘management’.
Conclusion: Thinking critically, caringly, and creatively
Good public policy, management and administration require thinking that
is disciplined yet creative, independent and committed. I have suggested
that the early 1990s South African New Public Administration Initiative’s
work in re-examining some central concepts and promoting independent
thinking in public administration education made a significant contribution to the encouraging aspects of independent-minded, critical and motivated public management that we see in post-apartheid South Africa; and
that these can be further strengthened. Mental liberation is needed to draw
fuller benefits from political liberation.
The system for critical analysis of key texts which we examined in
Section 2 is one widely usable way to strengthen skills of purposeful
rigorous thinking. It can contribute also to reflection on value assumptions, and to creative generation of alternatives and positions that express
one’s considered value commitments. Close examination of, for example, the images and metaphors that we and others use is often helpful in
generating new ideas; and skill in mobilising insightful metaphors helps
communication.
Case studies are also very important. They can build credibility and
stimulate integrated understanding and creativity. We need studies not
only of failures but of successful turn-arounds and innovative thinking in
redesigning the State. When can for instance retrenched workers receive
shares in commercialised public enterprises, so that they benefit from
later success? Success stories in State redesign exist, including various
from East Asia, Europe, North America, and India. Those from India deserve looking at, since they are from a country which is not more privileged than much of Africa, in fact less privileged than South Africa, yet
still has some strong national ethos and traditions of analysis independent of Washington and London (see for example Khandwalla 1988, 1999).
Nevertheless, public servants in Africa may find African cases the most
useful. Ramaite, Director General for Public Service in South Africa,
rightly calls for ‘a shift away from the uncritical application of…models
Gasper2.p65
42
29/03/2004, 18:57
Gasper: Fashion, Learning and Values in Public Management
43
from other contexts’ and for ‘active documentation of local and contextually relevant…practices’ (2002: 19). His Ministry’s new journal for public service managers, Service Delivery Review, exemplifies this approach.
Case studies are vital not only in helping to strengthen skills of independent thinking and creativity; they can also help to motivate, to build
confidence and commitment. Reforms which assume selfishness and do
not praise and foster altruism (e.g., which allow private sector practice in
public sector hospitals), might in practice foster more selfishness and
undermine existing altruism. Some schools of public management in South
Africa teach courses on public service ethics and ethos. These are essential, not luxury extras, as part of the task of ensuring that ‘civil service’
does not mean ‘uncivil and not much service’. As one vital but fragile
element of social capital, ‘public service ethics are much easier to destroy
than to build up’ (Mackintosh 1995: 50). The content of such courses
must go well beyond official codes of ethics. ‘Ethos’ includes the feeling
of pride in the job, the spirit of public service, loyalty and confidence,
based on a philosophy of public management and not only a tool kit, but
on knowledge of relevant achievements in public service, at home and
abroad. Service Delivery Review encouragingly espouses such an agenda.
Its second issue, for example, was entitled ‘RDP [Reconstruction and
Development Programme] for the Soul’, echoing a call by South Africa’s
Deputy President.
To effect the sort of rethinking and reorientation of ‘public’ in South
Africa that was sketched earlier, some strong markers and supplements
were required. The New Public Administration Initiative deliberately
brought in new terms, notably ‘policy’, ‘development’ and ‘management’.
Are they still needed? I suggested yes for ‘policy’ and ‘development’,
which could be at risk. The concept of ‘public and development management’ has represented a historically necessary variant of and emphasis
within public administration in South Africa, where the term ‘development’ can now play two crucial roles. First, it can underline the claims
and interests of the majority of the population, as opposed to the majorities of capital. Secondly, the historical ‘State’ connotation of ‘public administration’ has required that ‘development’ be used as an indicator of
the worlds of public action beyond traditional public administration: hence
‘public and development management’. In the case of ‘management’, the
issue is not how to sustain the concept, but how to put brakes on indiscriminate and uncritical use. We need to complement ‘management’ by
policy and development, otherwise, unthinkingly the driving values are
likely to become those of the market or of other forces of privilege. To
Gasper2.p65
43
29/03/2004, 18:57
Africa Development, Vol. XXVII, Nos. 3 & 4, 2002
44
advance the ideals of ‘Batho Pele’ (People First), and support a societycentred governance model for less elitist, more mass-oriented reconstruction and development, we require as one element a public and development management vision that embodies the themes that ‘public’ is more
than ‘State’, and ‘the public’ is more than the monied; that ‘development’
means improvements for ordinary and disadvantaged people, and that
accountability is to the broad public, not only to chefs or the market.
Notes
1. See also the critiques of Northern NPM orthodoxy, especially for public services in a country like South Africa, by leading South African civil servants, in
Mokgoro (2002) and Ngema (2002); and a critical sifting of Northern management literature on leadership in Diphofa (2003).
2. JUPMET, the organisation founded in 1995-6 which actively links the six
postgraduate schools of public administration / management in South Africa,
adopted ‘Public Management’ in its title.
3. The first table adapts the method of argument analysis in Scriven (1976). The
second adapts the format for viewing policy arguments in Dunn (1994).
4. The Commonwealth Secretariat report followed New Public Management in
declaring ‘The term “customer” has a broad meaning: any citizen engaged
with government’ (1995: 37). But why not then say ‘citizen’? The customer
language can bias definition of the public to include only those who pay. It
impoverishes the picture of relationships in a polity.
5. Rivalrousness: my consumption of a good means that you cannot consume it.
Excludability: access to a good can be controlled; exclusion is feasible at an
affordable price.
6. The source words are the same as for ‘manual’ and ‘manège’: the Italian
‘maneggiare’, and ‘maneggio’, the training of a horse; from ‘mano’ (hand),
from the Latin ‘ manus’ [Webster’s].
7. Kettl himself sees public management as having a program- (and hence interorganisational) focus, not administration’s organisation-focus. Yet amongst
his contributors, Weimer and Vining treat public management as intra-organisational design and executive functions (so excluding policy analysis); and
Guy Peters shuns the term public management as unenlightening, and instead
delineates several different old and new schools of thought within public
administration.
8. Tapscott, like several others, puts considerable weight on James Ferguson’s
elegant study of one project in Lesotho in the 1980s. I critically evaluate
Ferguson’s generalizations from this one case, in Gasper (1996).
References
Burger, A.P.J., Theron, F. and van Rooyen, A., eds., 1996, Challenges in Change,
Bellville: School of Public Management, University of Stellenbosch.
Gasper2.p65
44
29/03/2004, 18:57
Gasper: Fashion, Learning and Values in Public Management
45
Cawthra, G., 2000, ‘From Context to Competencies: Reflections on One School’s
Experience and Emerging Challenge’, in Theron and Schwella, eds., The State
of Public and Development Management in South Africa, School of Public
Management and Planning, University of Stellenbosch, pp. 59-68.
Commonwealth Secretariat, 1995, From Problem to Solution: Commonwealth
Strategies for Reform, Managing the Public Service, Strategies for Improvement Series, No.1. London: Commonwealth Secretariat.
De Swaan, A., 1988, In Care of the State: Health Care, Education and Welfare in
Europe and the USA in the Modern Era, Cambridge: Polity Press.
Diphofa, M., 2003, ‘Contemporary Ideas on Leadership: Sound Advice or Empty
Slogans?’, Service Delivery Review, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 68-73.
Dreze, J. and Sen, A., 1989. Hunger and Public Action, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Dunn, W., 1994, Public Policy Analysis, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Ferguson, J., 1990, The Anti-Politics Machine: ‘Development’, Depoliticization
and Bureaucratic Power in Lesotho, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fitzgerald, P., 1995, ‘Towards a Developmental Public Administration Paradigm’,
in Fitzgerald et al., eds., Managing Sustainable Development in South Africa,
Cape Town: Oxford Univ. Press, pp. 511-522.
Frederickson, H.G., 1996, ‘Principles for South African Public Administration in
the Transformation Decades: An American Perspective’, in Burger et al., eds.,
Challenges in Change, Bellville: School of Public Management, University
of Stellenbosch, pp. 298-323.
Gasper, D., 1996, ‘Essentialism in and about development discourse’, European
Journal of Development Research, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 149-176.
Gasper, D., 2000a. ‘Thoughts for the Next Phase in Education and Training for
Public and Development Management’, in Theron and Schwella, eds., The
State of Public and Development Management in South Africa, School of
Public Management and Planning, University of Stellenbosch, pp.165-188.
Gasper, D., 2000b, ‘Structures and Meanings: A Way To Introduce Argumentation Analysis In Policy Studies Education’, Africanus, vol. 30, no.1, pp. 4972. Also Working Paper 317, Institute of Social Studies, The Hague, www.iss.nl.
Gasper, D., 2001, ‘Learning in Public Management – thinking critically, thinking
caringly, thinking creatively’, Service Delivery Review: A Learning Journal
for Public Managers, Department of Public Service and Administration, Government of South Africa, pp. 5-9.
Gasper, D., 2003, ‘Studying Aid: Some Methods’, Working Paper 382, Institute
of Social Studies, The Hague, www.iss.nl.
Gasper, D., Schwella, E. and Tangri, R., 2002, ‘“Healthy” Public Enterprises –
Lessons for and from South Africa?’, Service Delivery Review: A Learning
Journal For Public Managers, pp. 25-28.
Gray, J., 1993, Beyond the New Right – Markets, Government and The Common
Environment, London: Routledge.
Hodgkinson, C., 1978, Towards a Philosophy of Administration, Oxford:
Blackwell.
Gasper2.p65
45
29/03/2004, 18:57
Africa Development, Vol. XXVII, Nos. 3 & 4, 2002
46
Hood, C. and Jackson, M., 1991, Administrative Argument, Dartmouth Publishing Co., Aldershot, UK, and Brookfield, Vermont, USA (reprinted 1996).
Horwitz, Robert B., 2001, Communication and Democratic Reform in South
Africa, Cambridge and Cape Town: Cambridge University Press.
Kettl, D. and Milward, H.B., eds., 1996, The State of Public Management, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Khandwalla, P., 1988, Fourth Eye: Excellence through Creativity, Second edition, New Delhi: Wheeler Publishing.
Khandwalla, P., 1999, Revitalizing the State – A Menu of Options, New Delhi:
Sage.
Lodge, T., 1999, South African Politics Since 1994, Cape Town and Johannesburg: David Philip.
Mackintosh, M., 1992, Introduction. In Wuyts et al., Development Policy and
Public Action, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 1-9.
Manning, N., 2001, ‘The Legacy of New Public Management in Developing
Countries’, International Review of Administrative Sciences, Vol. 67, No. 2,
pp. 297-312.
Ministry of Public Enterprise, 2000, Restructuring of State Owned Enterprises,
Pretoria: Ministry of Public Enterprise.
Mokgoro, T.J., 2002, ‘Finding An Appropriate Management Approach For Basic
Social Services’, Service Delivery Review, pp. 12-16.
Ngema, K., 2002, ‘Globalisation and the State’, Service Delivery Review, pp. 4041.
Ngema, K., 2003, ‘The Making of a Parasitic State’, Service Delivery Review,
Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 18-19.
Parsons, W., 1995, Public Policy, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Peters, G., 1996, ‘Models of Governance for the 1990s’, in Kettl, D. and Milward,
H.B., eds., The State of Public Management, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 15-44.
Pollitt, C., 1993, Managerialism and the Public Services, Second Edition, Oxford: Blackwell.
Pollitt, C., 1995, ‘Justification by Works or by Faith?: Evaluating the New Public
Management’, Evaluation, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 33-54.
Ramaite, R., 2002, ‘Public Service Leadership in an Age of Globalisation’, Service Delivery Review, pp. 17-19.
Schwella, E., 1999, ‘The Paradigmatic Debate in South African Public Administration: A Continuing Struggle’, in Wessels and Pauw, eds., Reflective Public
Administration: Views from the South, Cape Town, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 333-356.
Scriven, M., 1976, Reasoning, New York: McGraw Hill.
Stiglitz, J., 2002, Globalization and Its Discontents, London: Penguin.
Swilling, M. and Wooldridge, D., 1997, ‘Governance, administrative transformation and development in South Africa: a normative approach’, Africanus, Vol.
27, No. 2, pp. 8-33.
Gasper2.p65
46
29/03/2004, 18:57
Gasper: Fashion, Learning and Values in Public Management
47
Tapscott, C., 1995, ‘Changing discourses of development in South Africa’, in J.
Crush, ed., Power of Development, London: Routledge.
Tapscott, C., 1997, ‘Current development discourses in South Africa’, Africanus,
Vol. 27, No. 2, pp. 86-95.
Theron, F. and Schwella, E., eds., 2000, The State of Public and Development
Management in South Africa, School of Public Management and Planning,
University of Stellenbosch.
Weimer, D., and Vining, A., 1996, ‘Economics’, in Kettl, D. and Milward, H.B.,
eds., 1996, The State of Public Management, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 92-117.
Wessels, J.S. and Pauw, J.C., eds., 1999, Reflective Public Administration: Views
from the South, Cape Town: Oxford Univ. Press.
White, L., 1990, Implementing Policy Reforms in LDCs, Boulder, CO: Lynne
Rienner.
Wuyts, M., 1992, ‘Deprivation and Public Need’, in Wuyts, M., et al., Development Policy and Public Action, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 13-37.
Wuyts, M., et al., 1992, Development Policy and Public Action, Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Gasper2.p65
47
29/03/2004, 18:57
Des Gasper