Comparing Public Sector Reform in the OECD John Halligan ‘austratian National University: Public sector reforms in the OECD during the last 20 years have been notable for the magnitude, breadth and significance of the changes. There have, however, been wide variations between countries in terms of the pace and extent of reform, and the l2vel of commitment to NPA. ‘The diffusion of ideas has played an important role in the develop- ment of reform programmes, but different models have been applied under various state traditions and over time, as reform approaches have developed with experience and under new environmental pressures. Different change strategies have been applied, depending on the type of reforms and the complexity of country programmes, with distinctive strategies being relevant at different stages, . This chapter first considers some of the concepts and models appropri- ate for analysing change. It then examines the patterns and processes of change in a number of OFCD countries with the emphasis on some of the variations that exist. In doing so, it raises questions about the reform of complex public sector, levels of analysis In reform and the role of ‘organizational theory. . Types of public sector reform Several types of reform have been selected for brie! discussion according to two criteria: their significance and the availability of fairly reliable evidence (official documentation or secondary analysis) about their incidence within OECD countries. Cutbacks, pr Downsizing (ur cutback: A distinctive contributic: amme review and reform ) has become a fairly universal component {new approaclicy iy Mat they allow for 1 Dipindai dengan CamScannerwe te OLED 4. Cverview of Bultic Sear tet jccomplisting, Uais fading, ale thal tive approacties, HIE " wal figlency dividends and the use of sscope of the public formule for Judy ing tie fetention {funetlons, settee ‘ spo Test (8 sector is defined inv three snipe ways: Uy! ue he public sector 7 elephone book supplement, Me F suppiter Us Usted ty the Wed holce, and contestability role dhould be questioned), Hae emptiass on euelee (Camphal and tet i an 1 " on tine of the most common * Some fora of "programme review" bas nationally, for devices that have been adopted by poverninents intern: nally. for contaiting or eantracting their public sectors, A prominent recent “ ° is Canada (Lindquist, 1992) Even a reluctant reformer Hike Germany has had the ‘lean state" piogramme in recent years. A survey of OFCD countries shawed that more had ‘adopted some version of programme review? than any other reform (Peters, 1997, p. 80). A clear indicator of downsizing of public sectors are the changing, overall trends In scale relative to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as shown by OECD statistics on government outlay (e.g. OECD, 1997a). The highest point In the reform era (since 1985) is compared with the latest figures (in the form of projections for 2000) (Table 1.1). The | concem here Is with showing change over time for individual countries | (rather than inter-country comparisons, which can be more problematic | because of variations in how the compgnents are computed). It should | be noted that an expanding private sector (¢.g. the Irish) might con- | tribute significantly to changes in sectoral proportions of GDP). | The extent of change in systems has varied considerably, although all | but two countries record 2 decline, and in the majority of cases this i distinctive. The larger public sectors have generally been subjected to the most contraction, even if they generally continue to be Telatively large: the Swedish public sector records the fifth largest drop, but is still the largest. The major exceptions are the aggressive downsizers —[reland (-17.9), Netherlands (-9.8) and New Zealand (~8.4) which have sub stantially repositioned their public sectors. It needs to be noted that public sector cutbacks are not necessarily, product of a large public sector, as the case of United States indicat Another relatively small public sector, Australia, has also not been fi from major cuts (1996-98) that have covered downsizing, outsoust and privatizing of the Federal public service and state level - sectors, A tClatively large public sector does not necessarily indie Jack of reform (even the UK, which has engaged in extensive ref vif not changed thai mech in terms of these figures). orm, Dipindai dengan CamScanner anay of devices for decrement and employ Australia Ulastrates seveltt evel expenditure reviews, anninal &6 are fut: Sacto Refeviih BN dost COURIERS mow fOr FH re still whee variations in the cD, L497, the operations of cential buteauctacies M oa tesults and performance but there commitment to and application of such quinciples Follitt et af., 1992) } The spread of marketlzation to the core has bern 58 Inereasitiply | significant element of NI'M intemationaTiy. While he extensive appiica { tion of market principles Im OECD ts still confined toa relatively amat} } number of countnes, the UE being one case, some elerertts AE wile. 5 Spread. There are newroles for contracts and competition, and contsact ng out outsourensy) and Internal markets ate Being used However, the extensive use of market principles for core functions defines the bound ary thar many counties are wot prepared Lo cross Pertormance management Acentral management refounthat isbest regarded a acluster of clements that focus on measuring performance, using performance Information and ceporting in order te allow external review of perTormance (OrcD,| 19975). OECD countries make extensive use of performance mana ment Insruments/tools and approaches, but there 1s wee varlath between them as to the mix of elements, and the level of commitment to performance management, Significant areas are outputs, measurement systems oF indicator reporting of petformance information, performance review and perf ance budgeting. But there {s still not much activity om benchmarks outcomes, which appear to define the limits. Acerual accounting and budgeting The record for the use of accrual approaches fs also falrly patchy. El ECD countries have adopted accrual accounting (although in thi cases It {s cither permissive or being plioted). However, only six ay consolidated whole-of-govemment accrual accounting, and anly have acerual Oudgeting (two more commencing within the next years) (OECD, 1999, p. 11). Since New Zealand adopted accrust accoury ing in 1991-92, a number have adopted It but few have ventured mur further, apart from Iceland, the other examples being Anglo-countried Structure and organization Structural guestions span more than one reform type, and vary fre} horizontal consolidation (concerned with improving, poticy coordi tion and integration) fo the vertical separation of tasks (addressing jan of roles and sinpeaving implementation) There tsa tr Dipindai dengan CamScanneryy OA, Me Teves " tealy, Pee Peper vir, pbvatizatioae We Tee Kingstout ye . C ves fay We IYI AL peeled span and sealant, annlehe (rvnnzalnul Auatutlbte Aire bee atta T EE robe Hen reve tetale ston paowi ay vides as ebitier ay nporatizatton, nivel tut etn eonneteuantts canning’ HE punber a i op avoblitiy puivatication! vet entegqubbes 0 avehol lity aset sales abe tor example, (he Dares any naw SUBICH Uy Tat there has been ierpilee tray beat aeanaty OF a Wey Hye at Jaane WHEL Ww Have expanted Ul cauypany Fay, al fo paivatizacin (ay tte (notte, WIAD AY ate awl private st cat canilete yense Coumpedtiyg foe graticy Hes At one time the pubic service It monopoly aver the pulley’ rote, bat ta quammber It thas become divided Detween the public setvice, Ue political exec itive, and ex Coral sources: fof advice, Where the new contestalle vironment ts promoted, the pubblte sector hay to function more Whe competitor, with business, pa Nate sector think tanks, aitnistertal staff, and atlier gover pent and community organizations, The enabling role bb belng stressed where the public service Has been divested of responstblities other than what are deemed to be cure functions, The picture fs varlable, however, and public sector policy roles remain entienched and dominant tn some sectors and counties ynvany Jurbsdicdens had close tot Variations In scale of reform Minor changes (fine-tuning and lac and Stace (1992). Comprehensive (ar cor 4 ee features: a new paradigin, tedistribution Tbe . Wan, and tne systemic application ol new ahene A lesser scale of change is special te tion), Dut here the qualitying fe. Danphy and Stace i guage of Dunphy form Involves several 1 extensive reorpaniza- i wapoacies across all agencles wacom (or modular transforma eather Nigh t than those of Range of reform scales County retorims can be c¢ tat eae low fate ta sccording toa MFO OLCD cama Spectrum of activity es exter IHS From those Dipindai dengan CamScannerne OLED dew of bude Sector Ree ' 10. Overview et the need to pull together the Mea yale Mat aie, ° fest Indicator Wwe oy anf perl naps (0 46 1 stan) dou Ina colnet MW be drawn between systerns that ely cay Addistin tion ar Caio as opposed to those Which day qt Ml work Fo es Australia, New Zealand anid they see form of framework as the bass of This has wormally Involved ty, ther have been argued to con, 1 applic developed frame ec! lo’ ‘The three "Ang - kingdom ~ have relied an some ramnmne. tong, term refort PHORIANIINE which tope ements over time, whicl hi " the tra rework, New Zealand, the most radi al of the reformers tine au da framework that has been widely acknowledged L0 De the yy, nt ! pated In! sophisticate J and expliclt: a carefully crafted, Integrated, and nn sophisticated and es te reinforcing sgenda’, which has heen upheld for ‘Hs Conceptual yyy), : : on 99 a an and coherence’ (Boston ef af, 1996, p. 3 ef noe ) chied or a erent {ra , No other OECD country has relied on such a coberent framewory, jy ment reforms were evolved over tiny, Min, the Australian case, a set of manag before the framework was officially argued to have a ‘consistent, togica, and integrated structure, whether it be In relation to Hnarictal manage, ment, Industrial relations or people management’ (Halligan, 19944, Sedgwick, 1994, p. 341). Nevertheless there was still a problem with identifying the framework within a complicated reform process accord. Ing to the offictal ten-year review of the reforms, which described them as ‘a combination of broad policy objectives, long-term strategies and specific one-off or ongoing changes acted upon In all parts of the Australian Public Service's (Task Force on Management Improvement, 1993, p.6). The UK framework, according to the offical 1993 ve based on four elements: separating the purchaser and the provider, the Next Steps, market testing based competition and the Citizens Charter. These, plus privatization, were sald to Provide ‘a coherent Strategy’ (Waldegrave, 19°6, p. 178). The extent to which these add uw t9 such a framework has been contested by observers who point to ryprocess by which It was develaped and. the Inconsistencies between the Thatch ween er and Major components (e.g. Campbell and 4 number of other countries ha cither within a specialized field (e rslon was ve engaged In widespread reform telecommunicatvons) or of & Policy flelds such as transport and countries reform within Speen, tized type (e.8 privatization) In such ecitle sectors 9 " on example, Germany is not aan may be quite extensive: [0 but there have been a few ue, naw for comprehensive retort “Clalized retoy C - with the Neues Ste 7 MMs, and con tuvity’ it CHCHUIEESMOUeHT at the hor al povern asic fee focal government level Wise Dipindai dengan CamScannerComparing py OMParlig Public Sector Reformin the OLCL Table 14 General Government total outtays (ay Prtcentage of nominal GDI f sOntinal GOP) —.W " 1985 O7 Wonge 19901995 1997 999+ 2000° Change josteslia 365° M8 362 350 336 G33 Austria S04 43.6 525 yg 494 492 Belgium 5365360 Siz 505 49.9 Canada 46.7 46.5 426 41.6 412 Denmark 56.0 56.8 S64 $3.8 525 fintand 184 $7.9 541490 486 france 419.6 54.3 $4.2 $3.9 53.8 Germeny 45.1 aro 46.3 Greece 46.2 429 aul Iceland 39.3 35.5 treland 29.0 32.1 kaly 53.6 48.8 4 japan 313 = Netherlands Sal 47.8 38 New Zealand WEE 414 BA Norway 497 47.2 -2.2 Portugal - 40.6 437 0s Spain 402 425 40.8 5.2 Sweden 63.3 S91 596 7.8 Switzerland - 41.0 49.2 - United Kingdom 444 41.8 40.3 -3.8 United States 329 328 31.2 18 “Estimates and projections. The OECD category ‘General government! excludes putlle « enterprises. Excludes countries that have become members of OECD since 1994, Sources: OECD, Exonorni¢ Outlook No 64, December 1998; OECD, Analytical Databank, There is, however, a question ef how we regard such downsizing. The language ranges from crude cutbacks, often dignified as programme review, to competitive tendering and contracting (CTC). This raises the question of the need to distinguish between simple cutbacks and reform (Lane, 1994), and whether downsizing through shedding public service jobs and pruning programmes should be equated with institutional reform. The problem is that they are often difficult to distinguish in Practice. The statistics may suggest which countries have been system- atically reforming public sectors, but cutbacks alone co not demons! ate a fully effective reform programme. Contrariwise, the size problem is Rot necessaziiy solved by institutional reform (Lane, 1997, p. 207). Managerialization and marketization The term, managerialization, covers 2 range of financial, see re- Source and other management processes that are designed to transformGounpuating Public Sector Reform tu the LCD Elements in analysing reform Reforming complex public scrvice systems over time Much of the organizational Ilterature Is centred on change toa specific oiganization, Where public service systems are under consideration several arenas of reform and a number of organtaations of different types may be Involved. In a multl- level public sector, there Is the core wblic service within the central (or federal) government, the broader pudlic sector and possibly similar distinctions replicated at the regional level. The national public sector may well be designated as the reform arena. Ifreform is comprehensive it implies both multi-agency and multiple reforms. As Olsen observes, comprehensive reform Involves greater com- pleaities and is more likely to lead to garbage can processes (Brunsson and Olsen, 1993, p. 26). In secking to analyse reform, thiee Important dimensions are the scale of change, the process of reform and the type of management reform. Scale of change Administrative change has traditionally been recognized as a constant feature of organizational environments, and has been regarded in terms of adaptation to the environment. In the public sector, this has typically involved the expansion of activities and the organizations which pro- vide them, and has normally been Incremental, piecemeal and based on a department, ministry or other type of agency. There is a lack of coherent and sustained strategy or direction in application and imple- mentation. : A distinguishing feature of the last two decades has been the extent of reform to public sectors in OECD. What is different in the current era is the presence of three major orders of reform. These involve both ques- tions of scale and substance: the magnitude of change is greater, but there is also a qualitative dimension because the substance represents a fundamentally different way of doing things. The two less extensive but nonetheless significant orders of reform are specialized reform (signific- ant reform types such as corporatization or decentralization); and sec- toral reform (e.g. of a policy field such as health) or one major component (e.g, loca! government or the outer public sector). By com- prehensive reform is meant that a range of reforms are introduced that affects most aspects of the functioning of a public service or public Dipindai dengan CamScannerComparing Pubstic Sector Reform in tie OECD 13 which may apply at different times or different stages In a complex rocess. Mascarenhas (1996, p. 207) draws on technocratic and Iitical approaches, reflecting two broad schools distinguished by James March and Johan Olsen: one derived from orthodox administrat- ive theory ~ administrative design of structures and procedures to facit- jtate bureaucratic efficiency and effectiveness ~ the other, realpolitik, which regards administrative structures as a product of interests and reform as a political issue. Dunphy and Stace (1992) focus on participative and directive approaches and four types: two participative (collaboration and consultation) and two coercive (directive and reform Pp coercive). . ‘A number of studies (e.g. Dunphy and Stace, 1992) note the con- straints imposed on achieving extensive reform where a pronounced participative basis is imporant to tie process. Mascarenhas identifies 2 political approach, recognizing that the actors involved may extend well beyond the reforming institution when it comes to public organizations and systems: ‘a political strategy adopts uncontrolled public involve- ment or participation, while a teciinocratic strategy adopts a more con- trolled public involvement’ (1996, p. 217). There are, however, intermediate.cases which have combined direc- tive elements at certain points in the reform process with some provi- sion for consultation. Mascarenhas contrasts Australia with New Zealand because the former employed a ‘political or consensus model of administrative reform affected through gradual education and achieved through existing institutions’: Even though public service reform was an election issue ... Reforming the Australian Public Service (1983) was used as a basis for public consultation with the aim of taking into account the views of polit- ical parties, staff, eminent Individuals and the community at large... Asa result not only was the reform package firmly based on prior studies of the problem, it also enjoyed considerable support from both the public service and political parties. The Australian reform effort was a careful and well planned strategy. (Mascarenhas, 1996, p. 217) New Zealand's approach, which he describes as a technocratic strategy, was ‘not a part of its election manifesto. No specific study was undes- taken in support of the reform which was carried out without prior consultation’ (Mascahenhas, 1996, p. 217), and it had a more confronta- tional character: ° indai dengan CamScannerse gectar Reform it tte OFCD 14 Oreniew of or implementation, Roger Doupty, tof the New Zealand effort, aserted that vested, inter ‘ ne and therefore advocated spe tity r overcoming such obstacles. ... Atcorg) | { responsibility for reform to a sma) , links with key advisers. | : \ apy fi In enunciating his steateny arc ‘ would be obstacles objectives asa strateay 0 overnment entrusted ingly the &¢ ooh which established informal (Mascarenhas, 1996, p. 20, be the archetypal coercive case, but Prime Ministe | ted Kingdom provided the role model for lays): New Zealand may Thatcher in the Uni i directive reformers internationally. External direction; the role of politicians and central agencies In disaggregating the processes we need to differentiate the systen: designers - those operating in central agencies with responsibility fy ; cross-service change - and the key line operatives, those who test an/ experiment with the applications at the agency level. Similarly, th! more significant the reform, the more likely there will be involvemen)' of politicians as well as officials (noting also that lack of commitment likely to produce failure). ) The conventional wisdom once regarded the lack of political suppor and the iailure of politicians to sustain their commitment to reform 2)! key factors in reform failure (March and Olsen, 1995, 1993). There |} evidence that major change requires the intervention of politician (Aucoin, 1990; Halligan, 1994; Halligan and Power, 1992). The role o external direction has been identified as one significant factor by Dur phy and Stace (1990). The political executive can be the key factor in the success of majo: reform. The reasons for this are obvious: fundamental chan, Rew paradigm and approaches, and inevitably some new Teadershi The existing senior public service is unlikely to su rt ch eck i 4 order if itis likely to undermine its positions and vit “Conte ee sae governments are divided, reliant es. Contrariwis 3 in office, change they ential figure in Australi, the non-impleme: le 10 the neglect an reform, contende Ntation of proposals if. Gevelopment of apis OF politic ¢ a appropriate Mechanisms to ach ca actors. framework became centted on the wae we 3 New politi riséts 3 i in i advisers and avoiding isolated changes nine use of minister Strategic for strengthenit Dipindai dengan CamScannerComnarnre Pu ic Sector Reform in the OECL 1S ‘ol (Wilensid, 1986, pp. 166-7, 198). The enhancement of c's power proceeded through several phases in 2 set of politicel mechanisms for influencing and direct- & range of tested political methods became package remained incomplete until goverm- nagerialist approaches to enforcing and maintain- : menegetia! chenge was now seen as complementing bureaucracy by relying on a. shift to managing within the bureaucracy, the two @ termed political management (Halligan and Power, intemal app2ratus, but often funct . The best known case of the reform era is sury. The key reforms were derived from Q choice and relaied theory, first articulated ed, explicitly termed the Treasury's framework’ bfiess OF NPA wg eppevathes to NPM can be Identified. The first, seeks.to present t which actual sets of reforms can be evaluated. Ferlie et mofeis 21 2n ‘initial attempt to build a typology of NPM ideal ne Ef riency Drive, Downsizing and Decentralization, In Search and Public Service Orientation (1996, pp. 10-15}. There inus Gafficulties with the models, one being whether they t organizational and system levels. The difficulties sculeted by the authors themselves towards the end of their iri when tney express Coubts about all four. Their initial artempr at a qieay Gren on private sector management for three of the ‘coherent pes’ (p. 240), but subsequently the analysis indic- ¢ are inadequate without adaptation to the public nthe fourth theme ‘the public service orientation’ is 15 to0 far in the presumption of difference’ the: Ferive et al culate that in addition to their original brid forms may be emerging as subspecies in (p. 240). The study thus ends Inconclusively fails tg pick up on the international experience ference to the need for more international te) typet one OF mor it hecohirataty ne typ 4 with relsevear Refornn in the QDECD tie | 1s Onevinw of PE to ground the development of models mor expericnees of countries. Mucit on ur ow cecty tn the tefon XPS Jan-Exik Lane's uncompromising Positiog | | alee whe def ning feature of NPM (unpublished paper) | th co ade the TN) countries that come In as ‘half-strengthy hans ‘ie A distinction between the management and =a managenalists, A dt | Ime second approach is {reform is one useful means of analysing NPM (c¢ on 1997; Schick, 1996). The broader approach followed ners has focus oa three | ¢ NPM: the management ang t nponents of 1 to focus on three main com 1 ‘ ; pains dimensions as well as systematic cutbacks. The variants of NP volve around these core features, lypes of NPM may also refiect stages or phases in reform (Polity, 3) Others have also identified distinctive forms; thus ‘medern Tay, * is identified in the 1980s and differentiated from the more} Types of NPM Cutbacks are an integral element of NPM but this hardly warants ation as a type in isolation from the other two elements. 4 Tislist focus has much stronger claims and has been accepted 3s such (Considine and Painter, 1997). A more intriguing issue is whether a market centred system is viable without good management. The different mixes are illustrated first by the Australian and New a New Zealand are regularly ed Kingdom) as di S for Australia, Ause re while the position ¢ increasingly ‘trickled in’ ined the two fro; f the 1980s ig but ade marker el Man early stage, was p de later the 1 iepia ai ste to depict distinctive model! kee siete a mMmMon features Were more salient mm. in par becsuse of Laps underdeveloped for the firs ae wa use or Parry itics ¢. A. etc), and — ¥ Politics (a ipath N Patt because the tetce ap oa antipatts ~~" SBBIGACh and lew Dipindai dengan CamScannerOECD 18 Overview of Public Str Row i ve steateytes Thy jane row mnie Heyy ronment] (Dunphy mnple distinc ton, present, There is also the question of the wlty oo organizational literature seeks ‘a way Of we an an organization needs to restore fit! [wilt lio al and Stace, 1990, p. 71), If we are contines vy not be between a cluster of characteristics that may Ors aporate MAY U6 then a choice between incremental, modular and co! Lee would ath take us very far. The growing literature on policy H40 ity to predic suggest some caution is necessary about lustitutlonal capac fications fo; reform outcomes and strategies. These experiences have Imp! the value of formulistic solutions beyond sweeping [udyementss This raises the question of the longer view given the transience of much reform. A lesson from the international experience ts that sucee with major reform does not bring resolution of the need to change. Thi echoes one of the most resounding lessons from the popular ment studies (e.g. Crainer, 1997; Osborne and Gaebler, 1992), that the reported cases of excellence and reinvention experienced short lve Comprehensively reformed systems have continued to evolve rapidly a decade after the new approaches to public management took shape ti the 1980s, several have been substantially replaced by a different type of framework. The wide variation between OECD countries and type extensive evolution and experimentation with different eforns, but raises questions about the future direction of change. There fren question of whether it is best to conceive of reform witht * also the framework, particularly as new governance approaches atten | eM attention. : MACE preater SOfNDPM reflectso i Comparing Public Sectar keform f> the OFC 7 +a towards agencification, the most Interesting development being the reas, experiments with separating policy formulation from implementation. Vey ‘The best known example has been the British executive agencies which Vely operate within a policy framework established by departinents (note val? also the New Zealand decoupling of policy advice and service provision ton through smal! policy ministries and large delivery departments), The “ ots special agency has been either standard practice or new to a number of ve other countrics, including Denmark, France and Sweden, but as Shand (1996. p. 8) has observed the policy/implementation distinction is not so explicitly reflected in these countries’ structural arrangements. Asia, Japan and Kore2 have been looking at new style agencies with a view to achieving employment flexibility. In many respects, many of these Clem, experiments with agencies are simply a modern variant of the tradi- formaygf tio"! separation of functions that often had a statutory basis, but e (Opa witha 1990s cwst where there isa serious commitment to performance and contracts. Mana i, Varia Decentralizati mitme Gf The centrality of decentralization to public management is generally accepted (Pollitt e¢ at., 1998). Mar.agerial decentralization has been a Adicateg} tenet of the modem twinning of both greater responsibility and perfor accountability. While decentralization of one form or another, is ubi- imarksgl] quitous, the irony is that those systems that have been most active in management reform are less likely to engage in the most ceveloped form, namely intergovernmental devolution. While some systems have concentrated more on intra-public service Gecentralization others have pursued intergovernmental solutions. El Fad) Those opting for the former (e.g. New Zealand) have generally not ity hf (2¥oured local government to the same extent, whereas in the Nordic ty countries (such as Finland and Sweden), the trend has been towards * on heavy decentralization to the sub-national level as one means of reliev- . ing welfare state pressures on large central governments. ‘ed 49] Privatization and cozporatization NM] The reach of privatization, one of the more ubiquitous reforms under- taken, is well documented (e.g. Feigenbaum et al., 1998). It has been used actively in the United Kingdom, extensively in some countrizs (e.g. ary Mg France end the Netherlands) but much less so in others (e.g. Nordic -oot8 fH Countries) (Pollit et cf, 1997, p. 16; Toonen and Raadschelders, 1997, sing >. 40: Wright, 1994), f is apparent in countries not otherwise well known tor public sector reform (Germany and Japan). Dipindai dengan CamScannerComparing Public Sector Regn da ie EEL which have persbted Wi incremental change ta tase whitch have engaged in comprehensive OF extensive retonn Ln between we find countries that have either made some attempt at retina wlth bess sue cess of approached reform ina ditterent, ustally less ambitions, way. NO attempt has been made to apply the s loa OLOD countiles, tout several cases are used Co HMustrate the ange af possibilities The extremes ste readily established and generally accepted (egy How, 1996; OECD, 1997a), At one end are counties that have reformed compichensively, the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand pro viding the most obvious cases (see Boston etal, 199, Campbell and, Halligan, 1992; Campbell snd Wibon, 1995). AL the other end are coun’ that have experienced relatively limited refozm, such as Ger many, Japan and Switzerland, that were claiming until the mid-L9995 that iiorm was uanecessary (Dedien, 1996; Klatt, 1996), tn Large part because the reform imperative did not exist until recently, Germany and Switzerland have been operating within a distinctively Luropean Ladi- tion, and were zpparently immune from Uevelopments ebewhere at least until the mid- to late 1990s when reform pressures Intensified with economic downturns in both countries, Japan has been attempting, various types of reform during the Last 40 years, but until the emergence of the 1997 economic crisis, appeared to be operating on a different reform cycle. There is also the Norwegian case, ‘the reluctant reformer and slow learner’ (Christensen, 1997, p. 1; Olsen, 1996). The middle ground covers the majority of cases but obscures consider. able variations and several sub-categories. [t represents a mixture of experiences including active reformers, such as Denmark, Finland, Netherlands and Sweden; and partiaily reformed systems, such as France, which for various reasons have not taken their programmes very far. Despite 30 years of experience of reform, Canada undertook more dramatic changes in the mid-1990s, but ones that stil! fall short of the extent of management reform accomplished elsewhere (Aucoin, 1995; Lindquist, 1997). The US is another country that has sought to weld together major changes based on an extensive programme for reform (Gore, 1993; Halligan, 1994). How well this adds up to. a work- -able and durable framework remains unclear, although recent studies Indicate that changes have been occurring (Ingraham et al., 1998). ecattey Comprehensive and sectoral reform Countries approach reform in different ways. Comprehensive reform Picks up the question of scale by addressing cases where there is an Extensive range of reforms across a range of organizations, One good Dipindai dengan CamScanner12. Overniew of Public & y of “This large-scale reform my ° oval reforms (Halligan correspond witht hose incre! transform a sector or both specialized and sect “These distinctions cores Stace (1992): (wo forms of mental adjustmeat) and 880 ceepmrate, leneeds tobe noted tat wile rr ore corporate). etree categories ave defied 18 TCT or nye gifferences 1 difficulties al public sec- c cases of public te izational which may present som ‘ cranes ocused organicacon and 3 multl-orgeniea re not particu tor. (It should also be noted that the qualifying criteria Wns surveyed larly demanging, yet only one-quarter of organi en. two-fifths managed corporate transformation, while fewer th: achieved modular transformation.) The process of change means by which reforms Process covers a number of elements about the severa! raised here: the are developed and implemented, including Structure, use of frameworks and leadership style. In comprehending - change, we need to note that it assumes several forms, different actors will make distinctive contributions, and at different levels. All of which may depend on the stage in the reform process. Questions of reform scale may eventually become process questions. ‘The distinction between reform content and process 1s also quite funda- mental to understanding what is happening. The structure of the reform process may consist of a series of reforms over time and multiple stages that may be either incremental or transformative. There isnow consid able evidence to suggest that major zeform does not occur overnight bu through a series of stages in complex organizational cont in hee typically involves major initiatives follewed by mo: atts. Reform change and implementation, re incremental Arelated elerentis the character of refo: given coherence. The relationship between the a it is organized and trough some sort of framework or organizational doctann cot vides a coherent set of ideas for influencing and es doctrine which pro- reference points. 8 and establishing action and 1 | j t i | | i I Style An important element is reform management and i ship style. In complex systems the style of reform will i elements including the roies of different actors, tf iil involve several something about the character of reform; and Sarione emphasis saying 's leadershj P styles, n Particular, leader. Dipindai dengan CamScannerComparing Public Sector Refonn in the OECD 19 vernment differed from the New ze. nce appear to be receding tn voce ort The differences, Australia had trailed Neve Zealand it was now seek ve nes in hich route. In part this reflected the limitations rine to follow a similar approach which lad largely Sgnored some dimeneony ay 1 eee limensions of chi were significant in the UK and New Zealand, In th change that relations, the Australian goverment has following long-estobi nes New Zealand practice for the public and private sectors Ne wall did not markelize at the same time as New Zealand end the United Kingdom, but has been tnarketizing when the other two have showed signs of relaxing their commitment to that type of reform, Australia then has been rapidly extending its commitmcat to competition and contestability, while New Zealand has been reassessing the value cf management. In 2 number of respects there are clear indications of convergence. ‘Ine other approach is to recognize those countries with a lesser but still distinctive commitment to elements of NPM. Canada dabbled in managerial reform over a long period without producing cither an all- enveloping thrust or the degree of managerial change accomplished elsewhere, although change in the mid 1990s was of a different order (Aucoin, 1995; Lindquist, 1997), and its own brand of public manage- ment is evident (Dwivedi and Gow, 1999). Sweden, once ranked highly as an NPM country by Hood (1996) based on the official reporting to OECD, presents another hybrid case. It still has the largest public sector in OECD, despite hzving undertaken some corporatization and privat- ization, and is moving towards a results approach with purchaser- provider principies used in the health sector and NPM is significant at the local government level. Conclusion Public sector reform in OECD countries is notable for wide variations and different levels of change and commitment to NPM principtes. The reform process for large public administrations that involve multi-organizational systems presents distinctive challenges. Translat- ing approaches developed from the level of the organization to a broader public sector can present difficulties because of the complexities indicated some of the limita- Ofthe larger system. This chapter therefore il izati t at tions of an approach that draws heavily on organizational theory liter 7 tis not sulficiently ure, particularly with model development that i Bruunded empirjcelly Dipindai dengan CamScannerCompaing babe § Public Sector Refurin in the OCU soliticet control (WIENSEL, 1946, pp, 166 rye pelitical executive's” power Proceeds aid. The enhancement of inac resulted [0.2 Sct of political mechantene t through several phases ne panic wees A range of tested polite cans and direct- watiable, but the package rematned incon al methods became Ments embraced managerlalist approaches to e plete until govern- ing control managerial change was now enforcing and maintain gotitical agendas. The Austzallan reform fail complementing political and managerlal agendas for reform rem then consisted of ical executive hed had to secure cuntrol over the bureaucracy by relying from administering to managing within th ying on a shift tm» ‘Peombined being termed political manage the bureaucracy, the two Im W992). agement (Halligan and Power, 4 Central agencies are tofthe 2 d Zuced ves ofshange Tet tottr etotne roa the role of the New Zealand Treasury. The key reforms Mee sl fon a is the rigid application of public choice and related theory, ns derived frons py this egency, end Indeed, explicitly termed the “Treasury's ribitiass na (Boston ef al., 1996, p. 4). orl jodeis of NI?'M wo approaches to NPM can be Identified. The first, seeks.to present eal types against which actual sets of reforms can be evaluated. Ferlieet 1's four models are an ‘Initial attempt to build a typology of NPM ideal +. the Efficiency Drive, Downsizing and Decentralization, In Search f Excellence, and Public Service Orientation (1996, pp. 10-15). There :e some cbvious difficulties with the models, one being whether they ay be applied at both organizational and system levels. The difficulties re well articulated by the authors themselves towards the end of their k when they express doubts about all four. Their initial attempt at2 logy drew on private sector management for three of the ‘coherent iParadigms or archetypes’ (p. 240), but subsequently the analysis indi es that three models are Inadequate without adaptation to the public public service orientation’ is pa evi tor, and that even the fourth theme ‘the 1 oblematic because it ‘veers too farin the presumption of difference’ fend . 243). Further, Ferlie et at. speculate that in addition to their orginal fa, i9¢2l types one or more ‘hybrid forms may be emerging as subspecies in ‘ends inconclusively’ ¢ classificatory system’ (p- 240). The study thus end id the typology fails to pick up on the International experience though it concludes with reference to the need for more international alysis), ae Dipindai dengan CamScanner