Acceso usuarios
Yoonho Kim
Some management paradigms—traditional public administration (TPA), new public administration (NPA), new public management (NPM), and network governance—have long led the practice and theory of U.S. public administration during different time periods. Although each paradigm purports its newness, this study analyzes the truth of such claims. Thus, this study provides an in-depth analysis of management paradigms by differentiating new from old elements in each, and identifies certain underpinning streams or tides that penetrate from one management paradigm to another. Here, the primary conceptual focus is a two-by-two table that classifies management paradigms into four quadrants based on two dimensions: “politics-administration dichotomy” and “market-driven management.” Results indicate that TPA has various novel features such as neutral competence, political guidance, and procedural equality, and that NPA and NPM also have new features such as a policy-administration continuum and market-driven management, respectively. Finally, network governance appears to be a derivative of NPM’s market-driven management and NPA’s policy-administration continuum. Another important research finding of this study is that the four management paradigms are the mixtures of multiple “lenses.” Likewise, the four management paradigms are the combinations of “privateness”-oriented and “publicness”-oriented managerial norms. This study is significant as the firstexamination of the newness of management paradigms and in filling the gaps in previous categorization models of U.S. administrative reforms and public administration theory.
