Search Results (2)

Classical organizational management literature draws clear parallels between organizational culture and climate and effective use of power and influence as key to successful policy implementation of reforms in public sector organizations. On the other hand, the public policy literature, in particular, policy transfer as a strand within policy studies, emphasizes the role of the national context, more specifically, ‘facilitators’ and ‘constraints’ of ‘‘politico-administrative culture” within the national context, as crucial to understanding processes of transfer, convergence, and diffusion of public policy. There is a plethora of studies by Western scholars of public management who have successfully utilized these theoretical underpinnings to study the effectiveness of public service reforms in mature policy environments such as the UK, the US, Australia, New Zealand, and others. However, the public policy and comparative public management literature only offers a limited number of case studies from developing, middle-/upper-middle countries, which rely on concepts of organizational management in addition to narratives on the impact of policy learning from global doctrines, such as Weberianism, New Public Management (NPM), and New Public Governance (NPG), and national politics, on the implementation of administrative reforms in those contexts. Kazakhstan, as a resource-affluent post-Soviet country and a bastion of modernization and ‘open government’ in Central Asia or the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) in the post-Soviet era is a case in point. Based on ethnographic research consisting of interviews with elite academics, civil servants, and think-tank activists, as well as reviews of OECD and government strategy reports in Astana, the findings point to a potential abatement of the impact of context constraints such as large power distance and collectivist behavior by context facilitators such as those surrounding the use of ‘trilingualism’ and public diplomacy towards reforms in Kazakhstan particularly in recent years. Full article

Public administration and public governance play a crucial role in society today by ensuring that social needs are met. Due to the constantly changing environment, public governance models have transformed many times, creating differences in public governance practices among public administration institutions, with combinations of contradictory structures and principles that coexist. Accordingly, this paper aims to provide an overview of different public governance models, extract quantifiable elements based on models’ principles and examine the extent of layering of different governance models at different levels of public administration in the specific case of the Slovenian administration. Thus, the main focus is on identifying the differences in characteristics of public governance practices between state administration and local self-government. The results show state administration institutions are more strongly characterised by the Neo-Weberian model’s principles. In contrast, local self-government institutions are more oriented to managerial public governance and Digital-Era Governance practices. Public managers may regard the results as additional resources for democratic and efficient governing. At the same time, they may provide policymakers with in-depth insights to consider while determining the trajectories of future public administration reforms. Full article