+

WISDOM QUOTE

Just dont give up trying to do what you really want to do. Where their love and aspiration, I dont think you can go wrong. (Ella Fitzgerald)

GROUP MEMBERS

Muhammad Dino Amid

Mulong Group

Bujang Rahman Seli

Khairul Nizam Morshidi

Question No. 1: What were the positive and negative aspects of the NPM (new public management) over taking the traditional public administration model and what are the impacts on the contemporary practice of public management?

Purpose of Presentation

View of NPM and Dynamism

The Dilemma of New Public Management (DOES IT WORK )

POSITIVE

NEGATIVE

Impact Of New Public Management

TRANSFORMATION IN PUBLIC SECTOR

Since From

the mid - 1980s

Traditional Model to New Public Management. to Hughes, 2003

According

this is not simply a matter of reform or minor change in management style, but a change in the role of government

Hughes, 2003 :

Trend away from bureaucracy within public sector.

Giving

a good service provided to

people

+
VIEW OF NPM

What is NPM
The Paradigm Shift to replacing the formal way of thinking
Kuhn (1970) : The Structure of Scientific Revolution

What is NPM

set of principles and practices in the public service, which has emerged during the past several decades in a variety of countries around the world
(Barzelay, 2001, p.xi)

What is NPM
Revolution entail not only mass mobilization and regime change, but also more or less rapid and fundamental social economic and /or cultural change during or soon after the straggle for state power.

Goodwin, 2001 : No Other Way Out

HUGHES OWEN, + Management2003 : Public and Administration

NEW PARADIGM IDEOLOGY = NEW PUBLIC MANAGEMENT / PUBLIC MANAGEMENT

+ Hughes (2003)

DYNAMISM OF NPM
a management culture that emphasizes the centrality of the citizen or customer, as well as accountability for results. It also suggests structural or organizational choices that promote decentralized control through a wide variety of alternative service delivery mechanisms, including quasimarkets with public and private service providers competing for resources from policymakers and donors

(Manning, 2000)

Creation of good culture in management Process to become good governance (Manning. 2000)NPI is not about whether tasks should be undertaken or not. It is about getting things done better

HUGHES OWEN, 2003 : Public Management and Administration

Dilemma3of NPM + ( Does it Work )

(Polidano 1999)

Conclusion that the impact of NPM is perplexingly equivocal Emphasizes the important of contingency factors, arguing that few generalization are possible concerning NPM

REDUCING ROLE OF THE GOVERNMENT

Tools Positive Negative Expertise of government servants is not fully utilized Business oriented service Government is seen less powerful - Surplus employees/ unemploymen t rose - Predator Effect Reducing Role Privatization - Devolution of Of The power Government - Quality service (Hughes (2003)) delivery - Reduce operational cost - More focus - Quick decisions -

In 25 February 1983 privatization was chosen as a major strategy for reducing the states involvement in the economy and society

By the end of 1980s, the public sectors dominance was largely undermined and diminished because of robust privatization.

Impact Of Privatization

Serious concerns with regard to public accountability

Public officials are no longer responsible for the delivery of goods and services Encourage and facilitate the private provider to deliver public services

Impact Of Privatization

Privatization in Malaysia

There are scores of allegations about it involving the manner in which it was carried out, types of units privatized and to whom they were privatized The privatization policy in Malaysia has favored the vested interest, these involved extra-legal tactics and widened opportunities for kickback and graft. Despite off-loading of shares under privatization Government has continued to provide soft loans, tax incentives and other concessions Huge amount of public money has been pumped into the rescue of privatized units (that faced massive burdens of debt. Converting private debt public debt

CASE STUDY : SESCo Bhd.

1921 Electric Section is under Jabatan Kerja Raya 1932 established Sarawak Electric supply Company Limited (51% shared own by Sarawak Government) Sept 1953 100% of equity own by government 1 Jan 1963 Sarawak Electric Co. Ltd. Is change to SESCo. 31 Jan 1996 Sarawak sell 45% of equity to Sarawak Enterprise Corporation Bhd. 1 July 2005 100% privatization

CASE STUDY : Syarikat Air Johor Holdings

Positive Impact - Managed to reduce Non Revenue Water in Johor from 49% (1999) to 29% (2007) Negative Impact - Increasing on Water tariff - Water quality has not yet reached the level expected - Johor Government debt difficulties SAJ - Johor Water Supply was taken over by the Central Government

Conclusion

Batley (1999) find that the effect of NPM reform in developing country has been mixed, at best, with some improvements in efficiency and mixed effects on equity Some of the original NPM practices have been preserved, some refined and some improved upon; but others have been quietly abandoned, or even reversed (Grant Duncan and Jeff Chapman) Autonomization storey a common but success seen relatively rare Privatization in Malaysia still dominants by the government (semi-autonomous) Accountability is a critical factor for the success of NPM.

Some

of the original NPM practices have been preserved, some refined and some improved upon; but others have been quietly abandoned, or even reversed (Grant Duncan and Jeff Chapman)

Q&A