Public organizations should be educated from their failures and successes but perhaps they should also learn from failures and successes of other organizations of the public (Ferlie & Pollitt, 2005). Public organizations should find out information that is available by experience sharing, participating in conferences, linking with networks that are internet based like Public’s measurement Performance and Reporting Network which is crucial sharing information tool. This paper describes this public management of organizations in general.
Provide an example of how New Public Management (NPM) has worked in your geographical area or public sector organization with which you are familiar.
New public management helps to learn and improve on what is working and that which is not working and help make suitable modifications towards improving an organization. An example of this is the Baltimore’s Citistat City program in learning and improving the operations of the organization (Ferlie & Pollitt, 2005).
The program was established by the previous Baltimore’s mayor Martin O’Malley who served from 1999 to 2007 and in 2006, he became an elected governor of Maryland. Citistat is a measurement of a performance-based system of management that use computer pin mapping. It evolved from the city of New York’s program of Compstat that was commonly used to pinpoint hotspots of crime. This Citistat keenly worked on the model of CompStat by including all government areas (Ferlie & Pollitt, 2005). Communication and cooperation made it possible for Citistat to work. Bureau heads and city agencies made it possible come up with strategies, help setting goals and assist in collecting performance data that go in hand with the goals and strategies and they present this data after every 2weeks’ meetings of CitiStat. Here, Mayor, Deputy Mayor and other officials who are crucial are always present (Noordegraaf, 2015).
An example of this is the Solid Waste Bureau of Baltimore that might present data performance that ranges from a number of sick offs taken and amount of paid overtime in two weeks’ time (Ferlie & Pollitt, 2005). Using this information, both the head of Solid Waste Bureau and the Mayor can come up with a plan ensuring that the missed pickups of trash take place less frequently or cleaning up in the dirty alleys. By this CitiStat is a powerful accountability and management tool, giving chance to the Mayor to perceive how different functions of government’s city are performing.
Program evaluation is an important component of New Public Management. Define program evaluation.
To evaluate is to establish the worth of or fixing a value on some objects. Program evaluation is known to be a social science action aimed to collect, analyze, interpret, and communicate information about effectiveness and workings of social programs (Ferlie & Pollitt, 2005). It is done for a number of reasons which includes; aiding decisions regarding whether a program should be continued, expanded, curtailed or improved (Ferlie & Pollitt, 2005). Program evaluation also assesses the value of new initiatives and programs. It also gives room to increase the effectiveness of program administration and management, and also program evaluation satisfies accountability desires of sponsors of the program.
Provide an example of program evaluation in a public sector organization.
An example of public sector organization’s program evaluation is the CIPA (Citizen-Initiated Performance Assessment) project of Lowa. This was a project of three years funded by the Foundation of Alfred P. Sloan in 2001. This program engaged departmental staff, citizens and members of the city council on development and usage of performance measure in evaluating public services (Noordegraaf, 2015).
This CIPA Lowa project is different from the measurement of traditional performance in the following major aspects. Firstly, it lays emphasis on collaboration amongst citizens, managers and elected officials so as to develop measures to certify receptivity of those measures and political. It also highlights the perspective of citizens during performance measurement, instead of managerial perspectives that always stresses input and efficiency of cost (Ferlie & Pollitt, 2005). Thirdly, it underlines public distribution of measurements performance results in holding the government accountable.
During the CIPA project’s first year, every city that participated formed a performance team of citizens where people from various backgrounds made up the team’s majority. In CIPA second stage, the sections of the city developed necessary equipment like user surveys to help in collecting performance data (Ferlie & Pollitt, 2005). Consequently, the populations would assist in collecting performance data, report progress of the project to the city council and come up with tactics better for engaging the public generally in the mission. Finally, results of performance extent are reported to performance group, a council of the city and overall public. An input of the public is beseeched to improve the performance (Ferlie & Pollitt, 2005). Departments of the city then incorporate the outcomes in a strategic plan, budgeting which performance-based and service operator’s management that is activity based.
This CIPA project is presently in its second phase. Apart from it being immature to draw conclusions of the project’s long-term impacts, quite a lot of lessons have been learnt which includes, helping the officials to focus on citizen concerns and outcome measures (Ferlie & Pollitt, 2005). This will help enhance public accountability and orientation of services of the public result. It also helps to show the benefit of public communications (Noordegraaf, 2015). For instance, departments should not overlook notifying the public about the advancement of actions of the department after filing a service wish. Subsequently, managers ought to make for measurement of comparative performance since the people have interest in knowing how good their city achieves compared to others in neighbouring areas (Ferlie & Pollitt, 2005). In enhancing citizens’ relevance, measures of performance are to be reported at the nearby region level.
Lastly, capitals should reflect on using technology like the internet to carry out this with effective costs (Noordegraaf, 2015). A number of cities have been gathering performance data for a long time and CIPA changes the perspective of elected officials and managers in a simple way through engaging citizens to help influence the public’s basis of evaluating government services.
Ferlie, E. (1996). The new public management in action. Oxford [u.a.: Oxford Univ. Press.
Top of Form
Ferlie, E., Lynn, L. E., & Pollitt, C. (2005). The Oxford handbook of public management. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bottom of Form
Noordegraaf, M. (2015). Public Management. Palgrave Macmillan.