1998Unpublished venueRequires access

New Public Management

Owen E. Hughes

Open publisher page 45 citations

Abstract

The 1980s and 1990s saw the emergence of a new managerial approach in the public sector, in response to the inadequacies of the traditional model of administration. This approach may alleviate some of the problems of the earlier model, but does mean quite dramatic changes in how the public sector operates. As noted earlier, the managerial approach has many names: ‘managerialism’ (Pollitt, 1990); ‘new public management’ (Hood, 1991); ‘market-based public administration’ (Lan and Rosenbloom, 1992); the ‘post-bureaucratic paradigm’ (Barzelay, 1992); or ‘entrepreneurial government’ (Osborne and Gaebler, 1992). In most of what follows, the terms ‘new public management’ (NPM) and ‘managerialism’ will be used interchangeably, although managerialism does tend to be used as a pejorative by other writers. ‘New public management’ also contrasts with the earlier American usage of ‘public management’, which sometimes sees it as a technical sub-field of public administration (see Chapter 1).

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The 1980s and 1990s saw the emergence of a new managerial approach in the public sector, in response to the inadequacies of the traditional model of administration. This approach may alleviate some of the problems of the earlier model, but does mean quite dramatic changes in how the public sector operates. As noted earlier, the managerial approach has many names: ‘managerialism’ (Pollitt, 1990); ‘new public management’ (Hood, 1991); ‘market-based public administration’ (Lan and Rosenbloom, 1992); the ‘post-bureaucratic paradigm’ (Barzelay, 1992); or ‘entrepreneurial government’ (Osborne and Gaebler, 1992). In most of what follows, the terms ‘new public management’ (NPM) and ‘managerialism’ will be used interchangeably, although managerialism does tend to be used as a pejorative by other writers. ‘New public management’ also contrasts with the earlier American usage of ‘public management’, which sometimes sees it as a technical sub-field of public administration (see Chapter 1).

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 45 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The 1980s and 1990s saw the emergence of a new managerial approach in the public sector, in response to the inadequacies of the traditional model of administration. This approach may alleviate some of the problems of the earlier model, but does mean quite dramatic changes in how the public sector operates. As noted earlier, the managerial approach has many names: ‘managerialism’ (Pollitt, 1990); ‘new public management’ (Hood, 1991); ‘market-based public administration’ (Lan and Rosenbloom, 1992); the ‘post-bureaucratic paradigm’ (Barzelay, 1992); or ‘entrepreneurial government’ (Osborne and Gaebler, 1992). In most of what follows, the terms ‘new public management’ (NPM) and ‘managerialism’ will be used interchangeably, although managerialism does tend to be used as a pejorative by other writers. ‘New public management’ also contrasts with the earlier American usage of ‘public management’, which sometimes sees it as a technical sub-field of public administration (see Chapter 1).

Key concepts: Managerialism, Pejorative, Bureaucracy, New public management, Public sector, Public administration, Government (linguistics), Public management

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
New Public Management — Research Paper | ScholarLens