R
It has been suggested that public and private sector management is fundamentally dissimilar and is distinct (Sayre, 1953). However, when it comes to managerial work, this study suggests that differences are over embellished in public administration and management literature. Comparing the work activities of public sector managers in the Canadian healthcare industry with a recent study of private sector managers in Sweden (Tengblad, 2006), this paper found that there were remarkable similarities, despite contextual differences such as culture and time. While a few distinctions were found between the two studies, such as managers in this public sector study spending more time spent with superiors, and spending less time engaged in external board work, on the whole, and contrary to Sayre (1953), managerial work, at least at the highest level, appears to be similar in most respects. In fact, this study found that the recent emergence of information and communication technologies in the workplace has greater effect on managerial work than sectoral differences.
The finding of similarities in the managerial work of public and private sector managers has significant implications for NPM, as it provides rare empirical evidence that suggests private sector models may be applicable to the public sector. While the results are too broad to determine which models may be a better fit than others, this finding has specific implications for human resources. Particularly managerial selection and development, as this study suggests that managerial work at the top manager level is, more or less, transferable across the public and private
sectors and requires similar skills (Gentry et al., 2008). As one of the CEOs in this study suggested, “public sector recruiters need to reduce emphases on public sector experience”, proposing that public sector managers can easily step into management roles in the public sector due to parallels in administrative and managerial tasks and responsibilities.
That said, it is important to note that this research does not insinuate that differences do not exist between the public and private sectors as recent research has found differences in human resource practices and policies (Boyne et al., 1999), management of ethical issues (Berman et al., 1994), decision-making polices (Nutt, 2006), and management styles (Andersen, 2010; Shortell et al., 1990). This research does however suggest that, like Simon (1950/1970), differences are relatively minor and questions the ‘distinctiveness’ of managerial work between the public and private sectors. Particular concerns are raised over methodologies traditionally used to examine questions of distinctiveness, as public administration literature has, more or less, been conducted under the premise that there are differences using a small number of tools - generally interviews and surveys (See Boyne, 2002). While these methods are particularly effective for capturing perceptions, views, and cognitive reasoning of managers on a large scale (See Rainey et al., 1995), they are not known for their ability to capture content and characteristics of managerial work, which are important in determining the distinctiveness of sectors. Further, relying on perceptions and beliefs of managers, a priori views about public private distinctions
can have an effect on responses, causing managers to establish differences where there may be none in practice (Rainey and Bozeman, 2000). Referring to the use of
interviews and surveys, Barley and Kunda (2001, p. 81) note that ‘whether qualitatively or quantitatively oriented, most contemporary students of organizing employ methods that distance them from the kind of data needed to make grounded inferences about the changing nature of work and work practices.’
As a result, this study suggests that observational research be more frequently harnessed in public administration. Unlike other methodologies, there are no artificial constraints in observational research, which allows researchers to be inductive (Mintzberg, 1973). As Dargie (1998b, p. 71) pointed out, observation, although rarely applied in political science and public administration is ‘a practical research technique that can help researchers understand and interpret what actors in the public sphere do.’ This paper suggests a number of avenues for future research, a number of which could benefit from a fresh perspective that could be provided by harnessing observational methodologies.
First off, further research could be conducted investigating whether or not there are differences in public and private work environments, especially anecdotal claims with regards to complexity, instability, permeability, and competition (the four propositions of public sector work environments). While the literature tends to suggest that differences in work environments that were once easily observable have eroded or converged with the emergence and promotion of NPM initiatives (Fabian, 2010) there are few studies that investigate whether this has actually occurred. This is particularly alarming given the potential implications for management training and education. If this is in fact the case, questions over distinctions in teaching curriculum and separations in management education between business schools and
schools of public administration and public management could be made (See Chandler, 1991) as it has already been suggested that private organizations have much to learn from public organizations and vice-versa given new developments such as public-private partnerships (Savas, 2000). Along similar lines, another area of research that could be investigated is the implications of NPM initiatives on public organizations. As Butterfield and colleagues (2005, p. 329) recently noted, ‘there has been surprisingly little research into the impact of New Public Management (NPM) initiatives.’ Investigations on this front could examine managerial work roles, practices, processes and organizational forms (e.g. the creation of hybrids), and how shifts (if they are present) affect organizational performance and innovation in the public sphere. Finally, in a similar fashion to Tengblad (2006) this study suggests that a shift has occurred from administrative management to institutional leadership in the public sector. Given this apparent shift at the top manager level, research on the presence of institutional leadership and associated implications on organizational factors such as structure, innovation, and performance could be conducted at the top, middle, and lower management levels.
Importantly, these are but a few avenues that could be investigated. What is more essential than these individual avenues, however, is that further examinations be conducted on the public-private divide. Although this ‘divide’ has been referred to as one of the ‘grand dichotomies’ of western thought (Weintraub, 1997), this study, and others (See Andersen 2010; Boyne, 2002) have found that relatively little empirical research has been conducted which aims at understanding it. Overconceptualized and under examined, the field of public administration needs to
get beyond the mere fact that there are some differences between the sectors, even if they are, as this study found ‘of degree rather than kind’ (see Simon et al., 1950/1970) and begin to understand ‘how’ and ‘why’ management is different. Doing so will not only help us gain a better understanding and conceptualization of how public organizations operate relative to private organizations, but also aid in the development of made to measure reforms, NPM or otherwise, and likely performance gains.
CHAPTER SIX (PAPER #3): ETHICAL ISSUES AND DILEMMAS IN