Introduction
Management in the public sector involves major aspects concerning the implementation of performance measurement systems in a bid to enhance effectiveness and efficiency in major operations concerning governances. Performance measurement system refers to different mechanisms that are implemented for collecting and processing information in order to ensure relevance of the information that is presented to the users for analysis (Arnaboldi, M., Lapsley, I., & Steccolini, 2015). To focus on an effective management system in the public sector, there are a number of strategies that are employed in order to enhance positive performance. The strategies involve program evaluation and performance measurements, which are key elements that enhance government operations. The implementation of the strategies allows a government to identify the fundamental aspects of management that are functional in maintaining positive performances. The government is able to distinguish between the functional and non-functional aspects in different programs and agencies implemented at different levels of governance. Program measurement refers to the constant procedure of recording and monitoring a program's process and is therefore important as it keeps track of program accomplishments through use of pre-selected performance measures (General Accounting Office, 2005).
Based on the traditional aspects of management in the public sector, a program is defined as an activity or a project that is governed by a set of objectives in a bid to capitalize on increasing performances in a given sector. Additionally, a program may entail a policy or a function that aims at achieving set goals and objectives (Environmental Protection Agency, 2016) . Performance measurement process begins with addressing particular levels or types of program activities. Wherein, the process decides the actual output of programs to establish what is being achieved, and therefore the outcome is decided, consequently, becoming the results. The implementation of performance measurement evaluation strategies in the public sector is a critical element that requires appropriate measures that govern in making relevant decisions. The critical nature of the elements arises based on efforts to streamline the government by gaining efficiency, effectiveness, and productivity. In addition, the strategies focus on enhancing accountability and transparency; and regaining the public trust in the federal institutions (Fry & Raadschelders, 2008).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Performance measurement is a crucial aspect in any government as it help in assessing the impact of a given strategy, project or program in an organization. In this case, different sectors implement different strategies to measure performance. Civil service managers measure their organizational performance through contractors. On the other hand, state legislatures, city councils, and Congress insist that the executive branch federal agencies regularly report on their measures of performance. The stakeholder organizations demand performance measures outcomes to hold the government accountable. Traditionally, the primary focus of performance measuring has been on the inputs and the activities that lead to outcomes, and different public administrative advocates have had their viewpoints on the development of public administration and analysis of its dichotomy expressed by Dwight Waldo on the impact of public administration practice.
Government projects are specifically designed to provide a certain service to the community just as they are funded by public funds. Indeed, the term white elephant has been coined to refer to government projects that albeit spend public funds, do not end up providing viable services for the people. Unfortunately, it is a fact that government funds for conducting projects are never enough and will never be. There is always a deficit, hence the needs to be selective about what projects are to be performed and how much is to be undertaken for each project. This is the area where project management in the public service differs exponentially from the private sector. The making of the decisions is termed as the policy-making aspect of public service (Waldo, 1971). Once the policies have been made, the obligation to carry them out into the project is the public administration arena. A major component as well as problem within public sector management relates to the relationship between public administration and policymaking, and this forms the focus of the instant term paper.
Theoretical overview
Public Administration Advocates
Despite the realization and implementation of public administration which began its establishment in early 1990’s, this was not a new thing. In the B.C.’s and A.D.’s public administration was in practice. This gained momentum as time passed by from the 1883 Pendleton act and Frederic Taylor recognition of the need for labour management of 1990. The Budget and accounting act of 1921, classification act of 1923, civil rights act of 1964, Coleman report on equality of educational opportunity 1966, equal employment act 1972, civil service reform act 1978 and Grover starling managing the public-sector paper among others that formed the basis of management of the public sector. The journals and policies mostly drafted by public civil servants were, therefore, the principal sources and derivative of public administration system.
The civil services managers in the public sector play a significant role in advocating for performance measurement techniques in order to maintain a given standard in the management process (Johnsen, 2015). The managers within the sector continue to raise their concerns regarding the lack of motivation among the public employees. The civil service managers capitalize on the measuring performance outcomes in that assist in restructuring the organizations in order to make relevant modifications that may help in creating a positive impact on the organization (Rosenberg Hansen & Ferlie, 2016). Restructuring an organization helps in improving coordination, accountability, and effective delivery of services within the given sector. The public administrative advocacy duty of the civil service managers has been cantered on seeking decisive components for ensuring the civil service is performance oriented (Fry & Raadschelders, 2008). Through information on outputs and activities of workgroups, agencies, and individuals, the actions are essential in delivering success and proficiency in the public expenditure budget.
A local government official is also considered strong advocates of the government performance measures. The public administration is manifested in the arm of the local government through implementation of federal policies (Fry & Raadschelders, 2008). Local government officials are responsible for deciding on the programs and policies of the state, such as organizing, planning, controlling, directing, and coordinating of government operations. City councils advocate for the administrative performance measures and how they run their programs and activities. The members of the public are also part of the public administration advocates and measure the performance of the public agencies and their programs to determine their effectiveness. This is through challenging areas that are not implemented by the public administration and also by calling for implementation and development of new policies to improve the performance of the administration.
Impact on Public Administration
Waldo (1971) argues that classical scholars were describing social science when they emphasized on the principles of consolidation of power, efficiency, and management in public administration. The politics and behavioral administration models devastated the Classical approach, which continues to date. Waldo and Simon both held their arguments by zone competency and how the last effects of policy analysis impact on performance measurement of public administration programs and activities. Simon's substitution of the value of dichotomy for the administrative policies does not have any science theory backing it up. He proposes the concept of separateness that exists between public administrations and policymaking. In his view, public administration has separate agendas in maintaining the activities of the federal agencies and how they perform their duties and the policy-making and implementation. Simon gives much focus to the science of administration and how it is split into its roles and structures (Simon, 2008). Public administration performance measures are guided policies that are made by the government high ranking officials who oversee implementation of any policies that address any cases of ineffectiveness and inefficiency. For example, agencies use program analysis within their programs for determining how efficient and effective their activities and output is and gauge the results with previous outcomes.
Public Administration Dichotomy
According to Waldo (1971), the public administration dichotomy is engrained in the field of culture and suggests that no other alternative has emerged. Public administration is one of the sectors in governance that is experiencing crisis and quandary based on the challenges and issues concerning performances measurements. In recent years, the public has lost hope in the government institutions based on the weaknesses and negative issues portrayed during management of such institutions. By extension, the individuals behind the management of policies and resources are faltering. Waldo argues that public administration dichotomy was not built to last (Waldo, 1971). His view of government is based on the notion that public administration does not have any ideological goals regarding the Classical paradigm. Therefore, performance measurement of management and programs across the public sector is not used in the Classical paradigm according to Waldo.
Public Administration in Practice
Governmental Operations
The civil service management is concerned with the administrative aspect that concerns the approving the projects within a given program. The civil service faces a number of challenges that hinder effective and positive performances. The challenges resulting in the poor performances and a failed management system involves lack of motivation and commitment toward undertaking major programs and projects that concerns the interest of the public. No matter how good the policy and how much money is provided for the same, the measure for any project is determined by how well the project benefits the public. In this regard, the civil service implementation must ensure that the ideas engendered into the policy are reduced into a viable project. This project must not only be implementable based on the available resources but also capable of meeting the needs of the public itself (Bullock et al., 2015).
The local government can be considered as the level of government that is closest to the people, thus more conversant with public affairs at the grassroots level. The primary obligation of local government operations is to act as an advocate for the needs of the local populace. The local government will provide policymakers with the requirements and needs of the public as the local government gets them directly from the people. These needs will inform policymaking. Local governmental operations also act as a measurement and evaluation tool during the pendency of the project as they test its capability in assisting the people (EPA, 2016). Among the most complex issues kindred to the public service is the iron triangle, which consists of Congress as the main decision-makers, the Bureaucracy which is mainly tasked with implementation, and the interested group to whom projects are meant to benefit (Simon, 2008). Too much time and resources can be spent seeking to harmonize the three groups. The interest groups will mainly comprise of members of the public who have a firm grip on the legislature due to the power of the vote. It is incumbent upon the bureaucracy to provide advocacy, advisories, and balances to prevent the interest groups overcoming the legislature (GAO, 2005).
Differences between Public Administration and Private Sector Management
The issues on public and private sector management undertake two main perspectives that help in creating an understanding on factors that influences performance in the given sectors. The perspectives analyzes the key elements involved in each sector and outlines the relevant aspects that contribute to improved or reduced performance rate in the given sectors concerning management (Mättö & Sippola, 2016). From an organizational perspective, the private sector follows profit and expediency which makes decision-making processes much simpler. The public administration adheres to public policy based on the intention to meet the needs of the populace. The private service will focus on where a project will have the greatest benefit, but the public service will focus on where the benefit of the project is intended, even when the project would have provided better benefits elsewhere (Bullock et al., 2015). From a legal perspective, the private service is bound by mutually agreed upon contracts and deeds. The public service is, however, legally beholden to the public and must act in accordance with the interest of the public as set down in laws, rules, and regulations. Legally, wriggle room is wider in the private service than public service. Culture is more of a bearing factor in public service administration than it is in private service management (Bullock et al., 2015). In the public service, expediency is subject to culture, but the private sector only accommodates culture if it is expedient.
Executive, Legislative, and Judicial Branches Roles
The executive branch is mainly considered as being made up of technocrats who form the bulk of the bureaucracy (Coan & Bullard, 2016). Their principle obligation is to come up with policies, which form the basic foundation of government projects. The policies may not be elaborate but form a foundation of what the government intends to do for the people. These policies are then passed on to the legislature (Jordão & Rose-Ackerman, 2014). The legislature is the law-making arm of the government. When it receives government policies, the legislature may accept or reject them. This acceptance or rejection can also be accompanied by the modification of the policies. The legislature is representative in nature, and it is considered that their input reflects the opinion of the populace. The judicial branch, on the other hand, plays the part of a guardian of the populace based purely on legal provisions. The judicial arm must determine whether or not an executive or legislative decision is legal or ultra vires, based on the constitution and applicable laws (Jordão & Rose-Ackerman, 2014).
Public Budgeting Techniques
The Zero-based budgeting (ZBB) begins every fiscal dispensation at zero thus every expense must be substantiated. This has the advantage of ensuring that no monies are spent on projects and undertakings that no longer stand a chance of being beneficial to the populace. This conserves funds and also encourages efficiency (Becker et al., 2014). However, ZBB also creates half-baked man projects that eventually become white elephants. Creating an opportunity to discontinue a project that has already spent so many resources wastes those spent resources. Performance-based budgeting (PBB) looks at the available resources and the needs of the society intended to be met then formulates a plan of implementation. In a PBB, the projects become as large as the resources available. This has the advantage of efficiency as the outcome is based on availability (Ryu, 2015). Its main disadvantage, however, lies in the fact that budget planners do not overexert themselves to find more resources in the case the needs are more than the available resources. Finally, the Emerging Budget Strategies entails seeking to find resources for needs that come up after budget parameters have already been arrived at. In the modern USA, seeking to find the right balancing act to please all stakeholders has resulted in massive emerging budgets (Mendez et al., 2013). When the same are tied to actual budgets, they get stuck at the legislative stage, leading to government shutdowns. This causes essential services also to be sacrificed.
Governmental Communication Strategies
The more knowledgeable the community, the harder it is to govern. Social media has ensured that modern society is among the most informed. This has a major impact on the Iron Triangle as it places a lot of power in the interested group side. However, whoever controls the narrative on social media is also able to have a greater impact on the said triangle (Fry & Raadschelders, 2008). The local government, being closest to the people stands the highest chance of controlling social media narrative that the state and federal governmental levels thus giving it an upper hand. From the perspective of media types, the nature of media used not only determines how widely a message will reach but also how seriously a message will be taken, hence its impact. Mainstream media has a limited reach and is not interactive. It is, however, taken more seriously based on the traditional concept that mainstream media is true (Dalrymple et al., 2013). These are as opposed to the alternative media which albeit not taken very seriously has a wider reach and is also interactive. The most effective way is to combine all available media. This has resulted in a communication strategy where the government seeks to remain formal, so as to be taken seriously and also be closer to the people through the interactive media (Austin & Pinkleton, 2015).
Accountability is a key to every institution performance. This enhances specificity both in follow up of personnel entitled to oversee any process as well as detecting gaps in a system. It seals bureaucracy loopholes, multi-principals, misallocation, multitasking and funds misappropriation hence efficiency and effectiveness. However, to hold one accountable the alleging ground-attained from performance analysis- is mandatory. Given the wide base of civil servants served through performance management system: taxpayers, politicians, service users, and professionals and organizations with conflicting goals, identification of the right indicators becomes problematic resulting in unintended and dysfunctional behaviours. As addressed by equity theory, reciprocity theory, and relative deprivation theory performance measurement is highly hampered by the civil servant's perception of fairness and subjectivity. This results to the economic consideration of the resulting rewards which promote miscellaneous acts and emotions from the engendered as a means of competing against the reduced incentives. On the other hand, psychological challenges as explained in expectancy theory presents where motivated servants put efforts in expectation of a correlative reward in future which may not be the case. In contrary the unmotivated servants- despite the grounds of denying them incentives- demoralizes them resulting in less efficiency and poor productivity. This reveals that doing the right thing is not sufficient unless and until the same is done in the right way to achieve a common interest. As identified above, the most important component in public service is the populace who fund the government through taxation; therefore, withdrawal of their beneficiary projects despite the basis is tantamount to economic and moral suicide. This, however, comes on board in cases of dysfunctional system audit and lack of accountability among the servants. To extenuate these challenges equity stands out, which can be easily monitored by the executive, the legislature and the judiciary as well as the one involving the Iron Triangle. These bodies in conjunction with the public are able to meet populace needs hence success. This can be achieved through strict administration dichotomy and policies which hold every individual accountable for his or her negligence. The legislature-accountable to the public- should take responsibility for protecting and propagating growth through holding accountable all servants by passing strict laws and policies worth protecting the populace. The media also should freely perform their duty of educating the populace to understand their rights and part in the system and empower them to play their roles.
Conclusion
In conclusion, public sector management is one of the relevant elements that help in gaining the effectiveness of the operations undertaken by a given government. With that in mind, the governing authorities focus on implementing strategies that help in enhancing proper management of the sector and increase the performance rate of the sector compared to the private sector. The government has invested in strategies and tools that capitalize on promoting success in the management of the public sector in order to increase individual satisfaction and obtain trust from the general public. To focus on the effectiveness in the management of the sector, the governments implements performance measurement systems that seek to collect and process information concerning effective management of the public sector. The governing authorities engaging in the management of the public sectors engages in program evaluation strategies that are significant in monitoring success of the program and identify key areas that require improvement.
References
Arnaboldi, M., Lapsley, I., & Steccolini, I. (2015). Performance management in the public sector: The ultimate challenge. Financial Accountability & Management , 31 (1), 1-22.
Austin, E. W., & Pinkleton, B. E. (2015). Strategic public relations management: Planning and managing effective communication campaigns (Vol. 10). New York: Routledge
Becker, S. D., Jagalla, T., & Skærbæk, P. (2014). The translation of accrual accounting and budgeting and the reconfiguration of public sector accountants’ identities. Critical Perspectives on Accounting , 25 (4), 324-338
Bullock, J. B., Stritch, J. M., & Rainey, H. G. (2015). International comparison of public and private employees’ work motives, attitudes, and perceived rewards. Public Administration Review , 75 (3), 479-489
Coan, A., & Bullard, N. (2016). JUDICIAL CAPACITY AND EXECUTIVE POWER. Virginia Law Review , 102 , 765-833
Dalrymple, K. E., Shaw, B. R., & Brossard, D. (2013). Following the leader: Using opinion leaders in environmental strategic communication. Society & Natural Resources , 26 (12), 1438-1453
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (2016). Program Evaluation and Performance Measurement at the EPA. Retrieved from www.epa.gov/evaluate/program-evaluation-and-performance-measurement-epa
EPA. (2016). Program evaluation and performance measurement at the EPA . Retrieved from www.epa.gov/evaluate/program-evaluation-and-performance-measurement-epa
Fry, B. R., & Raadschelders, J. C. (2008). Mastering Public Administration. Washington D.C.: CQ Press.
GAO. (2005). Performance measurement and evaluation: Definitions and relationships. Retrieved from http://www.gao.gov/assets/210/202674.pdf
Johnsen, Å. (2015). Strategic management thinking and practice in the public sector: A strategic planning for all seasons?. Financial Accountability & Management , 31 (3), 243-268.
Jordão, E., & Rose-Ackerman, s. U. S. A. N. (2014). Judicial review of executive policymaking in advanced democracies: Beyond rights review. Administrative Law Review, 66 (1), 1-72
Mättö, T., & Sippola, K. (2016). Cost Management in the Public Sector: Legitimation Behaviour and Relevant Decision Making. Financial Accountability & Management , 32 (2), 179-201.
Mendez, C., Wishlade, F., & Bachtler, J. (2013). A new dawn for cohesion policy? The emerging budget and policy directions for 2014-20. (4 ed.) Glasgow: University of Strathclyde.
Rosenberg Hansen, J., & Ferlie, E. (2016). Applying strategic management theories in public sector organizations: Developing a Typology. Public Management Review , 18 (1), 1-19.
Ryu, J. E. (2015). The Public Budgeting and Finance Primer: Key Concepts in Fiscal Choice . New York: Routledge
Simon, H. A. (2008). The Proverbs of Administration. In J. M. Shafritz, & A. C. Hyde, Classics of Public Administration (pp. 124-37). Boston: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
The United States General Accounting Office (GAO). (2005). Performance Measurement and Evaluation: Definitions and Relationships. Retrieved from http://www.gao.gov/assets/210/202674.pdf
Waldo, D. (1971). Public Administration. In J. A. Uveges Jr., The Dimensions of Public Administration: Introductory Readings (pp. 71-73). Boston: Holbrook Press
