New Public Management: Lean State,
Lean Government
(February 9 - 16, 2003)
by Dr. Julio C. Teehankee
 |
| Dr.
Julio C. Teehankee |
In the past two decades beginning the 1980s, there has been a growing
realization among some public servants, politicians, activists and
academics around the world regarding the inherent weaknesses of
government bureaucracy. From the industrial states of Europe and
the United States of America to the developing and underdeveloped
countries of Africa, Asia and Latin America, bureaucratic dominance
is often viewed not as a solution to the problems of public administration,
but the very source of these problems.
New Public Management (NPM) emerged in the 1980s and 1990s as
a powerful critique of the traditional philosophy of public administration
articulated by Max Weber – that bureaucracy made administration
more efficient and rational. For advocates of NPM, such as David
Osborne and Ted Gaebler, there was a need to “reinvent government”
and harness the “entrepreneurial spirit” to transform the public
sector and later “banish the bureaucracy.” The seminar organized
by the International Academy for Leadership entitled “New
Public Management: Lean State, Lean Government” gathered
leadership personnel
from the academe, public and private sectors from around the world
to discuss ways at restructuring government bureaucracy to promote
efficiency and effectiveness.
Common Problems
The seminar began with an assessment of the state of public
administration in the respective countries of the participants.
Twenty-two participants from seventeen countries were grouped
into five regions (Asia, Latin America, Africa, Europe and Eastern
Europe). Despite the varying levels of socio-economic and political
development, common problems regarding government bureaucracy
and public administration in each region were identified. Among
the problems were:
-
Public administration is too slow
and expensive
-
The quality of service is very
poor
-
Public administration is too far
removed from the citizens to be able to cater to their interests
-
Public administration is corrupt
-
It is inefficient and ineffective
since it wastes financial and human resources
Proponents of NPM seek to address these problems and have carried
out public sector reforms all over the world with varying levels
of success.
Philosophy of New Public Management
Essentially, NPM is “a management culture that emphasizes the
centrality of the ‘customer’, as well as accountability for results.”
The main objective of implementing NPM is to achieve “more transparency,
more efficiency and more quality as well as reduction of expenses.”
The following represents the NPM philosophy:
-
Management culture that emphasizes
the centrality of the customer
-
Transparency with regard to resource
allocation and results
-
Organization that promotes decentralized
control through a wide variety of alternative service delivery
mechanism
-
NPM represents the idea of a cascading
chain of contracts leading to a single principal who is interested
in getting better results within a sector portfolio over which
he/she has significant authority
-
NPM is the attempt to transfer
management instruments from the private sector in a modified
way into the public administration
Concepts of New Public Management
As a tool for public sector reform, NPM consists of several
elements. Reformers from all parts of the world can avail of these
elements as fundamental tools in transforming the public sector.
These elements include the following:
-
Lean State – reduced tasks
performed by state
-
Separation of Decision Making
Levels – Separation of the strategic from the operative
level: politics decides the what, administration the how
-
Lean Management – Combination
of management by objectives, flat hierarchy, project management,
performance related payments, modern methods of leadership
-
New Service Attitude –
Customer orientation: satisfaction in the center of all considerations,
behavioral changes
-
New Model of Control –
Steering by clear targets, measurement of results, transparency
of resource allocation
-
Decentralization – Task,
responsibility, competence and budget in the hand of the project
manager/ department manager
-
Quality Management – Ensure
high service quality through qualification, competition, transparency
-
Product Approach – Describing
all administrative service as “products” highlighting factors
such as: features, cost, needed resources, and time to deliver
NPM in the Philippines
In the Philippines, the implementation of NPM principles at
the national and local level has been uneven brought about by
an entrenched bureaucracy. Despite having a rich and long history
of political democracy, it has suffered from bad governance at
the national and local levels. The perennial problems of Philippine
public administration include: bureaucratic red tape, corruption,
inefficiency and ineffectiveness, failure in the delivery of basic
services, lack of accountability, nepotism and political dynasties.
Nonetheless, efforts at social, political and economic reforms
have been ongoing since the restoration of political democracy
in 1986. One showcase of successful reform in the Philippines
is the passage of the 1991 Local Government Code. The Code decentralizes
governance in the Philippines by devolving the power and functions
of local government units and the strengthening of people’s participation
in local governance. It comprises four distinct approaches, namely:
-
Devolution – the conferring
of power and authority by the national government to the local
government units (LGUs)
-
Deconcentration – the
increase and further delegation of functions, responsibility
and authority by the central office of a National Government
Agency (NGA) to its appropriate regional and field offices
-
Privatization – this involves
certain government functions and activities
-
Participation – the inclusion
of non-government organizations (NGOs) in active decision-making
processes
Shared Experiences
Beyond the introduction and discussion of the core philosophy
and concepts of New Public Management, the seminar was very successful
in facilitating the sharing of views and experiences of a diverse
set of participants from different parts of the globe. A big factor
that contributed to the success of the seminar was the judicious
selection of participants by the Academy. All of the participants
were mature professionals with a wealth of experience either in
the public or private sector. It was the remarkable mix of public
servants, politicians and academics that made the workshop and
the plenary sessions productive. In addition, the dialogue conducted
with Wiehl Mayor Werner Becker-Blonigen and the field trips to
the privatized elderly home and the “Burgerservice” in Hagen were
particularly instructive.
It was interesting to note that most countries particularly
from Asia, Africa and Eastern Europe are newly-restored democracies.
Some countries like South Africa, Poland, and the Philippines
have utilized the democratization process as a major impetus for
reforming their bureaucracies and introducing market reforms.
Almost all of the countries in Latin America are still struggling
with a historical legacy of statist intervention. The former communist
Russia has also embraced elements of new public management, while
the war torn Yugoslavia (now known as Serbia and Montenegro) has
only taken its initial steps at national reconstruction. Consequently,
the seminar has provided the diverse participants a significant
opportunity to learn, internalize and exchange views on New Public
Management as an important tool for deepening liberal democracy
in their respective countries.
|
