KAMU YÖNETİMİNDE “YENİ ÖTESİ” BİR ARAYIŞ: “YENİ KAMU YÖNETİMİ ÖTESİ”

Year 2020, Issue: 32, 134 - 144, 27.11.2020

Cansu Kaymal

https://doi.org/10.20875/makusobed.787080

Cited By: 2

Abstract

Bu çalışmada, yeni kamu yönetiminin başarısız olarak değerlendirilmesinin nedenleri ve yeni kamu yönetimi ötesi bir arayışın neden yükselişe geçtiği sorularına odaklanılmıştır. Çalışmada yeni kamu yönetimi ötesi anlayışın ortaya çıkmasının nedenleri, yeni kamu yönetiminin uğradığı başarısızlığın sonuçlarına dayandırılmıştır. Bu bağlamda, geleneksel kamu yönetiminin yerine yeni kamu yönetiminin geçişi gibi, yeni kamu yönetimi ötesi anlayışın da bir yer değiştirme olup olmadığı ve yeni kamu yönetimi anlayışının küresel çapta bir başarı sağlayıp sağlayamayacağı sorgulanmıştır. Literatür taraması kullanılan bu çalışmada, kamu yönetimi disiplininin öncülüğünü üstlenmiş akademisyenlerin görüşlerine karşılaştırmalı bir yöntemle yer verilmiş ve yeni kamu yönetimi, yeni kamu yönetiminin eksiklikleri ve yeni kamu yönetimi ötesi gibi meseleler bu akademisyenlerin düşünceleri ışığında ele alınmıştır.

Keywords

kamu yönetimi, yeni kamu yönetimi, yeni kamu yönetimi ötesi

A “POST NEW” SEARCH IN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION: “POST NEW PUBLIC MANAGEMENT”

Abstract

This study focuses on the causes of disappointments created by the new public management and why the search for a post new public management has been on the rise. In the study, the reasons for the emergence of post new public management are based on the results of the failure of the new public management. In this context, they are questioned whether or not post new public management is a substitution just like transition of the traditional public administration to new public management and post new public management will ensure a global success. In this study, which uses the literature review, the opinions of academicians who are pioneering the public administration discipline are included in a comparative way and issues such as new public management, deficient of new public management and, post new public management are discussed in the light of these academician’s opinions.

Keywords

Public Administration, New Public Management, Post New Public Management

References

• Aberbach D and Christensen T (2001). “Radical reform in New Zealand: Crisis, Windows of opportunities and rational actors”. Public Administration, 79(2): 404–422.
• Banelay, Michael, and Linda Kaboolian (1990). "Structural Metaphors and Public Management Education." Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 9(4): 599-610.
• Bardach, E. (1998.) Getting Agencies to Work Together. The Art and Practice of ManagerialCraftsmanship. Washington, DC: The Brooking Institution.
• Behn, Robert D. (1991). Leadership Counts. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Uni- versity Press Bogdanor, V. (ed.) (2005). Joined-up Government. Oxford: Oxford University Press
• Boston J, Martin J, Pallot J, et al. (1996). Public Management: The New Zealand Model. Auckland: Oxford University Press.
• Boyne A, Farrell C, Law J, et al. (2003). Evaluating Public Management Reforms. Buckingham: Open University Press.
• Christensen, T. (2016). “Post-New Public Management: a new administrative paradigm for China”. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 0(0) 1-16, DOI: 10.1177/0020852316633513
• Christensen, T. and Laegreid, P. (2007a). “The whole-of-government approach to public sector reform”. Public Administration Review, 67(6): 1057-1064.
• Christensen, T. and Laegreid, P. (2007b). “Post-NPM Reforms: Whole of Government Approaches as a New Trend” https://www.researchgate.net/publication/291703450_Post_New_Public_Management_Reforms_Emprical_Tendencies_and_Scholarly_Challenges#fullTextFileContent (Erişim: 19.06.2020).
• Cook, Brian (1996). “Bureaucracy and Self-Government: Reconsidering the Role of Public Administration in American Politics”. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hop- kins University Press.
• Drechsler, W.(2005), ‘The rise and demise of the New Public Management: Lessons and opportunities for South East Europe’, Uprava, 2009, VII(3), pp. 7-27.
• Dunleavy, P. And Hood, C. (1994). “From old public administration to new public management”, Public Money&Management, 14:3, 9-16, DOI: 10.1080/09540969409387823
• Fountain, J.(2001). “Paradoxes of public sector customer service”. Governance, 14(1): 55–74.
• Gregory, R. (2006). “Theoretical faith and practical works: De-autonomizing and joining-up in the New Zealand state sector”. In: Christensen T and Lægreid P (eds) Autonomy and Regulation: Coping with Agencies in the Modern State. London: Edward Elgar.
• Halligan, J. (2006). “The reassertion of the centre in a first generation NPM system”.In: Christensen T and Lægreid P (eds) Autonomy and Regulation: Coping with Agencies in the Modern State. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
• Hammond, T. (2007). “Why is the intelligence community so difficult to redesign? Smart practices,conflicting goals, and the creation of purpose-based organizations”. Governance, 20(3): 401–422.
• Hood, C. (1991). “A Public Management For All Seasons”. Public Administration. Vol. 69, 3-19. Royal Institute of Public Administration.
• Hood, C. (1995). “The ‘New Public Management’ in The 1980s: Variations on a Theme”. Accounting Organizations and Society, 20(2/3), 93-109, Great Britain: Elsevier Science Ltd.
• Kaboolian, L. (1998). “The New Public Management: Challenging the Boundaries of the Managemenet-Administration Debate”. Public Administration Review, 58(3), 189-193.
• Kelly, Rita Mae and Georgia Duerst-Lahti, eds. (1995). “Gender Power, Leadership and Governance”. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press
• Kettl, D. (2004). System under Stress: Homeland Security and American Politics. Washington DC: CQ Press.
• Lynn, Laurence E. Jr. (1996). Public Management as Art, Science and Profession. Chatham, NJ: Chatham.
• Nagel, Jack H. (1997). "Radically Reinventing Government: Editor's Intro- duction." Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 16 (3): 349-356.
• Osborne, R. and Gaebler, T. (1992), Reinventing Government. Addison Wesley, Wokingham.
• Pollitt, C. and Bouckaert, G. (2011). Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis, 3rd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Stephens, R. (1996). “Social services In: Silverstone”. B, Bollard A and Lattimore R (eds). A Study of Economic Reform: The Case of New Zealand. New York: Elsevier Science B.V.
• Jun, Jong S. (2020). “The Limits of Post: New Public Management and Beyond”. Public Administration Reniew. 69(1). 161-165.
• Terry, Larry D. (1995). “Leadership of Public Bureaucracies: The Administrator as Conservator”. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Ventriss, C. (2013). “The economic crisis of 2008 and the substantive implications for public affairs”. American Review of Public Administration, 43(6): 627–655.
• Zanetti, L.and Adams, G. (2000). “In service of the leviathan: Democracy, ethics and the potential for administrative evil in the New Public Management”. Administrative Theory& Praxis, 22(3): 534–554.