The NPA came about at a time in the U.S.

when it faced deep societal

imbalances and moral decay. Poverty, racism and equal-work opportunities
were huge issues, and so was the wide moral chasm on America’s full
involvement in the Vietnam War and all of its attendant repercussions.
Amidst such backdrop, Waldo wondered why public administration was not
only not in step or out of step, but was to his view, absolutely indifferent to
the happenings on the ground. In his view, public administration was so
tunnel-visioned on the techniques of administration on economy and
efficiency, to the exclusion of the foundational societal issues.

Perhaps due to the profound generational gap between the classical and
neoclassical proponents on the one hand, Simon in particular, versus the
young scholars and public administration practitioners on the other, the
NPA was born.

The NPA brought focus to the obligation of public administration to the

more important issues of MVE, morals, values and ethics, and to pursue a
strategy of activism in coping with the problems of society. I am reminded
of the parallelism between the above-said dictum of Heady and the
immortal words of Ditto Sarmiento, viz: "If we do not act, who will act? If
we do not care, who will care? If not now, when?

The then 55-year old Waldo, in collaboration with a team of the brightest
assistant professors all of whom were not yet 35 years old (Frederickson,
Marini and Lambright), issued a clarion call for pro-activism,
responsiveness and for a reformist (and better) public administration vis-a-
viz the structured and rigid establishment. Sure, the Amtrak trains and the
Greyhound buses ran strictly on time, just as the trains and buses did in
Nazi Germany. But to the minds of the NPA theorists, there was a deeper
and more foundational purpose for public administration.

The biggest thrusts of the NPA were/are to my view a.) the advancement of
public participation and involvement in decision-making on societal basics
such as equality before the law and social justice, and, b.) quality of life as
the primary goal of any government program.

Pre-NPA, public administrators were so focused on not fixing what ain’t

broke, at least to their minds, and in the maintenance of the harmonized
and working classical and neoclassical theories and practices.
Translated to today’s time, we saw the emergence of multi-sectoral, private
sector driven programs and projects, as catalysts for change and progress.
Hardly any government project has succeeded without the active
involvement of the general public in the planning, execution and post-
execution stages thereof. Legislated programs and projects, whether on the
national or local levels, have mandated private sector involvement, in the
same way that the purely-executive initiatives have some form of built-in
private sector insights. The programs which are integrative in scope and
decentralization in purpose, have produced tangible results.

Surely, there have been missteps along the way in particular in the
application of the client-impact orientation of the NPA, the most recent
being the (mis) application of the 4-P’s and the Ayuda systems.