Organizational Development in Public

Administration: The Italian Way 1st ed.

Edition Maurizio Decastri
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/organizational-development-in-public-administration-t
he-italian-way-1st-ed-edition-maurizio-decastri/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

The Politics of Public Administration Reform in Italy

1st ed. Edition Sabrina Cavatorto

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-politics-of-public-
administration-reform-in-italy-1st-ed-edition-sabrina-cavatorto/

Migration, Borders and Citizenship: Between Policy and

Public Spheres 1st ed. 2020 Edition Maurizio Ambrosini

https://ebookmass.com/product/migration-borders-and-citizenship-
between-policy-and-public-spheres-1st-ed-2020-edition-maurizio-
ambrosini/

Public Administration: Understanding Management,

Politics, and Law in the

https://ebookmass.com/product/public-administration-
understanding-management-politics-and-law-in-the/

The Palgrave Handbook of Public Administration and

Management in Europe 1st Edition Edoardo Ongaro

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-palgrave-handbook-of-public-
administration-and-management-in-europe-1st-edition-edoardo-
ongaro/
Introduction to Governance, Government and Public
Administration 1st Edition Franklin

https://ebookmass.com/product/introduction-to-governance-
government-and-public-administration-1st-edition-franklin/

Leading Organizational Development and Change:

Principles and Contextual Perspectives 1st ed. Edition
Riann Singh

https://ebookmass.com/product/leading-organizational-development-
and-change-principles-and-contextual-perspectives-1st-ed-edition-
riann-singh/

Introducing Public Administration 9th Edition, (Ebook

PDF)

https://ebookmass.com/product/introducing-public-
administration-9th-edition-ebook-pdf/

Constructing the Craft of Public Administration:

Perspectives from Australia 1st Edition Christine
Shearer

https://ebookmass.com/product/constructing-the-craft-of-public-
administration-perspectives-from-australia-1st-edition-christine-
shearer/

The Future of Election Administration 1st ed. Edition

Mitchell Brown

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-future-of-election-
administration-1st-ed-edition-mitchell-brown/
Organizational
Development in
Public Administration
The Italian Way
Edited by
Maurizio Decastri · Stefano Battini
Filomena Buonocore · Francesca Gagliarducci
 Organizational Development in Public
Administration

“This book tackles face up a major challenge met by public leaders and managers
all over the world: the management of people and competences in the public sec-
tor. By providing insights into the Italian experience in improving human resources
management over the past years and decades, and highlighting the key role of the
national school of administration in it, this book offers a vast range of ideas and
experiences greatly valuable to everybody with an interest in these topics. A key
reader in public management for scholars and practitioners alike.”
—Edoardo Ongaro, Full Professor of Public Management,
The Open University, UK

“This book provides an insightful journey from theory to practice from interna-
tional to national, from intrinsic public motivation to explicit performance evalua-
tion, from reform to change process, from competences development to actual
behaviour. A terrific challenge for intellectual curiosity.”
—Elio Borgonovi, Distinguished Professor of Public Management,
Bocconi University, Italy
 Maurizio Decastri
Stefano Battini
Filomena Buonocore
Francesca Gagliarducci
Editors

Organizational
Development in
Public Administration
The Italian Way
Editors
Maurizio Decastri Stefano Battini
University of Rome Tor Vergata Tuscia University
Rome, Italy Viterbo, Italy

Filomena Buonocore Francesca Gagliarducci

Parthenope University of Naples Italian Presidency of the Council
Naples, Italy of Ministers
Rome, Italy

ISBN 978-3-030-43798-5    ISBN 978-3-030-43799-2 (eBook)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43799-2

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer
Nature Switzerland AG 2021
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the
Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of
translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on
microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval,
electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now
known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are
exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information
in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the
publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to
the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The
publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional affiliations.

Cover image: © Marina Lohrbach_shutterstock.com

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature
Switzerland AG.
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
 Preface

Over recent years there have been significant changes in the cultural, eco-
nomic, and political global environment, leading to a new contextual
framework for public managers and contributing to the sense of needing
new managerial competencies for public governance and administration.
Information technology, in particular, has deeply affected the way we
work and organizational practices, contributing to new models of flatter
organizations, based on teamwork and project management. At a level of
macro analysis, the fluidity of the communication processes allowed by
technologies has increased the interdependence among public organiza-
tions, making structures more permeable and creating more opportunities
to interact and cooperate across organizational boundaries (Agranoff &
McGuire, 2003; Koppell, 2010; Lindsay, Pearson, Batty, Cullen, &
Eadson, 2017).
Other relevant changes concern the globalization that has deeply
affected the nature of work, in the public as in the private sector. As orga-
nizations operate more globally, they face an environment that is less pre-
dictable and as a result they need to be able to respond much more quickly
to environmental changes (Lawler III, 1994). On the other hand, global-
ization increases integration in the world, allowing people to interact eas-
ily across the globe and between different governments and economies, all
integrated into a “global community” (Farazmand, 2009). As a conse-
quence, immigration, terrorism, international finance, and reforms, the
latter rapidly migrating around the world and all too frequently being
adopted even where not wholly suitable, have become common issues

v
vi PREFACE

among countries requiring a particular effort from governments in finding

global solutions (Van Wart, 2013).
The effects of these changes on the way we work are evident. In public
organizations traditional administrative capacities are not going to disap-
pear, but awareness is spreading that they are not enough to meet the new
challenges ahead. There is an increasing need for new sets of knowledge,
skills, cultures, and designs in public organization and management that
can meet the challenge of this historical period and its rapid changes
(Farazmand, 2009; Handy, 1990; Morgan, 2006). Moreover, as is com-
monly pointed out in both the management and leadership literatures
(Van Wart, 2013), the effects of these changes on public employees are
more significant when they carry out managerial roles, which require lead-
ers to take the tasks of teaching, coaching, and mentoring seriously. The
expectation of new roles and competencies for public managers is a recur-
ring issue in Public Administration research and a central theme in the
ideas of contemporary reformers on enhancing and modernizing adminis-
trative capacities.
These changes and their related needs are captured in the literature on
“soft skills” to inform and empower managers and staff to deal with
changes, to encourage people in continuously learning, and to support
learning organizations to foster continuous improvement (Beard,
Schwieger, & Surendran, 2008). Communication, problem-solving, team-­
working, and the ability to improve professional (e.g., learning attitude
and performance, motivation, judgement, and leadership) and personal
(e.g., flexibility, resilience, and creativity) traits (Hennessey & Amabile,
1998) nowadays represent relevant competences in public management,
in line with Grugulis and Vincent (2009), who explained how in recent
years there has been a dramatic shift from technical to soft skills, especially
in the Public Sector.
The increased focus on individual capabilities calls for different
approaches to organizational design, work design, and human resource
management. Because organizations need to be much more adaptable and
to compete on the basis of their competences and skills, it is evident that
the old scientific management and bureaucratic approach to organization
was not effective. The development of a more competency-focused
approach, in which the capabilities of individuals are the primary focus,
may turn out to be a key breakthrough in allowing new and more flexible
approaches to organizing, leading to improved performance (Lawler
III, 1994).
 PREFACE vii

Relevant implications of moving to a competencies-based approach to

management also concerns human resources management, in the areas of
selection, training and career development, and competency assessment.
Traditional recruitment and selection activities focus on finding individu-
als who fit particular job openings, while selection according to a
competencies-­based approach will include an assessment of whether indi-
viduals will fit the culture of an organization and learn the types of skills
needed by the organization. Relevant effects are also evident for training
and development. Particularly, training is much discussed in public man-
agement because of its key role in facilitating the implementation of new
policies and reform by providing information about the policies, justifying
why they are needed, and giving employees the capacity to put the new
policies in place (Kroll & Moynihan, 2015). Effective training in public
organizations requires an understanding of the specific capacities needed
and how to create them. This means that organizations need to have a
well-developed system for providing training to individuals and to make
time available, so that individuals can take advantages of the training.
Perhaps the most relevant implications of a competencies approach to
management in public organizations concern assessment methods.
Public management literature is not familiar with the concept of job
assessment, evaluation, and appraisal and few techniques have been inves-
tigated so far. However, assessment methodologies also raise a number of
issues. According to McMullan and colleagues (2003), assessment con-
tributes to the maintenance of professional standards (Rowntree, 2015)
and “facilitates judgements about employees’ qualities, abilities and
knowledge against predetermined criteria” (p. 167). Despite the acknowl-
edged relevance of the skills assessment process, there is still no agreement
on the most effective methodologies. Competences are an integrated con-
struct, resulting from the combination of many dimensions; although pro-
fessional psychology does have tools for evaluating knowledge and skills,
there are currently no available methods to readily or reliably assess the
integration of knowledge, skills, and attitudes within the domain of
competence.
Competency frameworks, designed to improve the capabilities and
skills of public managers, have been applied in the US since 1979 and have
more recently appeared in several other developed countries, including
Japan, the UK, Germany, Sweden, and Italy. Since then there has been a
need for rethinking skills and competencies for public managers in order
to improve their performance at all levels (Gunz, 1983). One of the main
viii PREFACE

reasons that led to the adoption of a model based on skills was the intro-
duction of New Public Management Principles and Values (Horton,
2006) and its related managerial innovations, such as performance man-
agement, the focus on human resource strategies, and the need to keep
public expenditure down without having a negative impact on efficiency,
effectiveness, and performance. Driven by these needs, Italy has made sev-
eral attempts to reform work in the Public Sector over the last few years.
In 2009 with Legislative Decree N. 150 (27/10/2009), the concept of
performance in Public Administration was introduced into the Italian leg-
islative system. Subsequently, other amendments (Legislative Decree
N. 150/2009, law N. 124/2015) took measures aimed at valorizing mer-
itocracy in the Public Sector and rationalizing management evaluation sys-
tems. These amendments pursue the general objective of improving
performance in the Public Sector and ensuring efficiency and transparency
in the civil service.
This book is structured as follows.
Chapter 1 is inspired by the observation that new trends are changing
how public organizations are organized, making them increasingly com-
plex and effective in challenging problems that cannot be successfully
addressed through traditional bureaucracies. These changes are aimed at
influencing the behaviour of public employees through the introduction
of managerial and professional logics and other tools from the private sec-
tor. Efficiency, flexibility, and problem-solving have emerged as new stan-
dards for employees working in public organizations, who are now in
search of new means of anchoring their identity and motivation.
The main goal of Chap. 2 is to analyse the managerial competencies in
the Public Sector. The reform process in Western countries has profoundly
affected the way Public Administrations are managed, in terms of gover-
nance, responsibility, and culture. Reforms in recent years have established
a “management culture”, emphasizing the primacy of management above
all other activities and the key role of managers above all other employees
in the organizations. In many Western countries public organizations are
trying to identify the core competencies for being a public manager, mov-
ing from leadership competencies, to managing people or achieving
results. At the same time, a more recent literature has shown how compe-
tencies are changing, so while managers in public organizations are
increasingly concerned with performance, they are also influenced by
unique factors such as their need to be accountable to elected officials, the
public at large, and special interest groups. In coherence with this picture,
 PREFACE ix

we will present the main contributions on the competency model in the

Public Sector. Through their knowledge, know-how, and skills, people are
at the heart of the reform processes in Public Sector, since it is people who
provide services, promote innovation, and carry out reforms. As a conse-
quence, in recent years people management has received increasing promi-
nence and there have been many calls for the Human Resource (HR)
function to play a strategic role. Developing Human Resource Management
(HRM) facilitates the recruitment and retention of valued staff, enhancing
organizational effectiveness and promulgating a performance-driven
culture.
Starting from these premises, Chap. 3 aims to answer some relevant
questions within the research of Public Administration: Why and how
does HRM matter to good government? Why is HRM in public organiza-
tions central to achieving effectiveness? HRM is widely recognized as a key
function contributing to democracy, transparency, meritocracy, and per-
formance in Public Administration. However, a number of characteristics
make the Public Sector particularly distinctive with respect to HRM. In
the Public Sector, activities are regulated by laws, regulations, and proce-
dures; decisions are influenced by political and informal procedures; objec-
tives are often multiple, vague, and politicized and, consequently, difficult
to measure; the employment process, specifically in the case of top manag-
ers, is based on appointment rather than selection; the organizational
structure is often centralized. All these variables have hampered the devel-
opment of HRM in the Public Sector, raising an intense debate among
Public Sector scholars. First, a prominent question is to what extent public
managers can influence employee performance given the constraints on
managerial autonomy and the prevalence of red tape, which has fostered a
compliance culture with managers viewed as “guardians” of established
rules and procedures. Second, a related question is what mechanisms link
HRM practices with organizational performance? Finally, empirical evi-
dence shows that not all HR practices are suitable for application in Public
Sector organizations, given the nature of services provided, the character-
istics of Public Sector employees, and the fact that public organizations are
accountable for the ways in which they spend public funds.
Chapter 4 investigates the evolution of the public manager role in a
given historical and local context: the Italian Public Administration under-
going a wave of reforms since the early 1990s. Italy represents an illustra-
tive case of organizational development. In line with the major trends in
other European countries, the reform path started in the early ’90s is
x PREFACE

recognized as the moment of a strong break with the past, leading to a

complete redesign of the organizational structure of central and local gov-
ernment, a re-organization of managerial planning and control systems,
and an emphasis on transparency. In other words, the last 20–30 years of
administrative reforms put a stronger emphasis on the improvement of the
efficiency, effectiveness, and sustainability of Public Administrations, cre-
ating the conditions for the development and consolidation of a perfor-
mance and risk management model in the Italian Public Administration.
Political agendas were inspired by the “New Public Management” (NPM)
model from the early 1990s to the late 2000s. Although no comprehen-
sive evaluation has ever been conducted, the literature agrees that reforms
have been generally unsuccessful. Organizational change has been cos-
metic, failing to produce quality or reduced costs, while managerial tech-
niques and tools have been adopted only formally. From a theoretical
prospective it is perhaps more appropriate refer to “New Weberian” model
that identifies a coexistence between the basic rules of the classic bureau-
cratic model with measures aimed at increasing the capacity for managing
complexity. An additional element of criticality is given by the fact that the
political system in Italy has been subject over the years to frequent govern-
ment turnovers, making the average government institutional life very
short. Consequently, this evolution has also affected the hierarchical strati-
fication in public management, in which the development of the role and
the related competencies and professional skills of the top management
has had trajectories (and attentions) different from that of mid-level
management.
Developing an effective, competent, and forward-looking public ser-
vice is one of the greatest challenges public organizations face today.
Chapter 5 explains the role that central administrations play in promoting
organizational and skills development. Particularly, we focus on the educa-
tion and research institutions with a key role in leading to a relevant orga-
nizational change and we propose the case of the Italian National School
of Administration (SNA) as a representative example. Over the last few
years, the SNA has supported the Italian Public Administration in success-
fully tackling the organizational change resulting from recent reforms,
contributing to the development and dissemination of a competency
approach for public employees. Its mission is to carry out training activi-
ties of excellence for civil servants, with the support of research activities,
in order to promote effectiveness and a culture of efficiency in Public
Administration, to disseminate methods of management control and
 PREFACE xi

economic accounting, to implement technological and innovation pro-

cesses in services provided by the central Public Administration. The SNA
ensures a constant and highly competitive channel of recruitment for pub-
lic management and pays attention to the development of training meth-
ods that are increasingly adequate both for the context and for people.
Chapter 6 describes an experimental project jointly launched by the
Italian Prime Minister’s Office and the Italian SNA, with the aim to pro-
pose and test a competency approach for the Italian public organization
system. It is an action-research project entitled “Analysis, Evaluation and
Strengthening of Managerial Skills” that involved 51 volunteer senior
managers of the Presidency of Council of Ministers (PCM). The PCM is
an important administrative structure which supports the Italian President
of the Council of Ministers, who makes use of it for the exercise of both
the functions of political orientation and coordination regarding other
administrations (Legislative Decree 303/1999), both for the definition
and for the implementation of determined public policies. The establish-
ment of the PCM is quite recent (Law N. 400/1988): it is a singular
branch of the Public Administration regulated by specific legislation
regarding its organization and functioning. The goal of this project is
threefold: (a) to identify the job descriptions and the role profiles of public
managers in order to represent and describe the intellectual, professional,
and human capital of PCM public management, (b) to create the condi-
tions for differentiated and targeted career and training paths, and (c) to
promote a process of constant development of managerial skills in a stra-
tegic perspective. Therefore, the project has been aimed at identifying the
role profile of top management levels of the PCM, by assessing the skills
and defining a learning environment suitable for strengthening the
“weaker” competencies.
Finally, Chap. 7 summarizes the contents of the various chapters of the
book and provides a complete overview of new training delivery strategies
implemented by national schools for Public Administrations. The pecu-
liarity and characteristics of the Public Sector suggest a necessary focus on
the reforms that are generating a constant organizational change. The role
of public managers, above all, has changed considerably over the years—
from a bureaucratic model to that of New Public Management and
beyond—and, within this framework, the competencies and managerial
skills required for working in the Public Sector have changed. In Italy,
more than in other countries, the reform of Public Administration has
been a distinctive and constant feature of every government, since the
xii PREFACE

foundation of its state in 1861. Personnel management, evaluation, and,

above all, human resource development are factors that should not be
underestimated and that need to be redesigned in light of the peculiarities
of the Public Sector and the constant changes which, particularly over the
last few years, are conditioning and affecting it.

Rome, Italy Maurizio Decastri

Viterbo, Italy  Stefano Battini
Naples, Italy  Filomena Buonocore
Rome, Italy  Francesca Gagliarducci

References
Agranoff, R., & McGuire, M. (2003). Collaborative public management: New
strategies for local governments. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt2tt2nq.
Beard, D., Schwieger, D., & Surendran, K. (2008). Integrating soft skills assess-
ment through university, college, and programmatic efforts at an AACSB
accredited institution. Journal of Information Systems Education,
19(2), 229–240.
Farazmand, A. (2009). Building administrative capacity for the age of rapid glo-
balization: A modest prescription for the twenty-first century. Public
Administration Review, 69(6), 1007–1020. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2009.02054.x.
Grugulis, I., & Vincent, S. (2009). Whose skill is it anyway? Soft skills and polar-
ization. Work, Employment and Society, 23(4), 597–615. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0950017009344862.
Gunz, H. (1983). The competent manager: A model for effective performance.
Strategic Management Journal, 4(4), 385–387. https://doi.org/10.1002/
smj.4250040413.
Handy, C. (1990). The age of unreason. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Hennessey, B. A., & Amabile, T. M. (1998). Reality, intrinsic motivation, and
creativity. American Psychologist, 53(6), 674–675. https://doi.org/10.1037/
0003-066X.53.6.674.
Horton, S. (2006). New public management: Its impact on public servant’s identity:
An introduction to this symposium. International Journal of Public Sector
Management, 19(6), 533–542. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513550610685970.
 PREFACE xiii

Koppell, J. G. (2010). Administration without borders. Public Administration

Review, 70(s1), 46–55. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02245.x.
Kroll, A., & Moynihan, D. P. (2015). Does training matter? Evidence from perfor-
mance management reforms. Public Administration Review, 75(3), 411–420.
Lawler, E. E., III. (1994). From job-based to competency-based organizations.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15(1), 3–15.
Lindsay, C., Pearson, S., Batty, E., Cullen, A. M., & Eadson, W. (2017). Street-
level practice and the co-production of third sector-led employability services.
Policy & Politics. https://doi.org/10.1332/030557317X15120417452025.
McMullan, M., Endacott, R., Gray, M. A., Jasper, M., Miller, C. M., Scholes, J.,
& Webb, C. (2003). Portfolios and assessment of competence: A review of the
literature. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 41(3), 283–294. https://doi.
org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.2003.02528.x.
Morgan, G. (2006). Unfolding logics of change: Organization as flux and trans-
formation. In Images of organization (pp. 241–290). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publishing.
Rowntree, D. (2015). Assessing students: How shall we know them? Routledge.
Van Wart, M. (2013). Lessons from leadership theory and the contemporary chal-
lenges of leaders. Public Administration Review, 73(4), 553–565. https://doi.
org/10.1111/puar.12069.
 Contents

Part I Rethinking Organization and Human Resource

Management in Public Sector   1

1 Organizing Public Administration  3

Maurizio Decastri and Filomena Buonocore
1.1 Introduction  3
1.2 Reforms and Organizational Change  6
1.2.1 NPM and post-NPM Reforms 11
1.3 A New Complexity for Public Administration: Organizing
According to the post-NPM Reforms 16
1.4 The Crisis of the Bureaucratic Model 22
1.5 Conclusions 25
References 26

2 Rethinking the Concept of Competencies for Public

Managers 37
Ernesto De Nito and Mario Pezzillo Iacono
2.1 Introduction 37
2.2 The Concept of Competence in a Managerial Perspective 39
2.2.1 The Entity-based Perspective 40
2.2.2 The Situationalist Approach 41
2.3 Competencies for Public Managers 42
2.3.1 Competency-based Public Administration Research 43
2.3.2 Behavioral Competencies of Italian Public Managers
and Employees 45

xv
xvi CONTENTS

2.4 HRM Practices and Managerial Competencies in the Public

Context 47
2.5 Competency Model and HRM: Italian Practices 50
2.5.1 The Competency Portfolio Developed by the
Campania Region 50
2.5.2 Competency Mapping and Learning Process: The
INPS Case 52
2.5.3 The Dictionary of Behavioral Competency of the
Sardinia Region 53
2.6 The Competency Model: The Other Side of the Coin 55
References 57

3 Human Resource Management in the Public Administration 61

Rocco Reina and Danila Scarozza
3.1 HRM in Public Organizations: Main Problems and
Challenges 61
3.2 The Concept of Public Motivation: Levers and Constraints 65
3.3 Recruitment and Training Systems 69
3.4 Evaluation Systems 74
3.5 Flexibility in Worker Relationships: New Challenges in HRM 78
3.6 Technology and New Modes of Working in Public
Administration 83
3.7 Considerations and Conclusions 94
References 95

Part II The Italian Case Study 103

4 Public Management Reform in Italy105

Alessandro Hinna and Federico Ceschel
4.1 The Conceptual Framework for the Reformist Season105
4.2 The Administrative Reforms of the 1990s107
4.2.1 Assumptions and Dimensions of Radicalism
of the Administrative Reforms107
4.2.2 The Legislative Interventions of the 1990s:
Some Cardinal Points108
4.2.3 Linkages Between the Administrative Reforms
of the 1990s, NPM, and Post-NPM110
 CONTENTS xvii

4.3 Determinants and Complexity of the Administrative

Change: The Answers of the Italian Legislator112
4.3.1 The Determinants and the Dimensions of
Complexity112
4.3.2 The Implications of Complexity116
4.3.3 The Reforms of the Italian Legislator118
4.4 Current Challenges130
References134

5 The Key Role of the SNA in Promoting Organizational

Change and Competencies Development139
Sonia Moi and Anna Maria Massa
5.1 Introduction139
5.2 How Public Entities Lead to Organizational Development141
5.3 New Training Methodologies for Competencies Development146
5.4 The Key Role of Schools of Government in Public Employee
Training151
5.5 A Comparative Analysis with Other European National
Schools of Administration155
5.5.1 A Brief Description of the Italian National School
of Administration (SNA)155
5.5.2 A Brief Description of the French “École nationale
d’administration”156
5.5.3 A Brief Description of the German Federal
Academy of Public Administration157
5.5.4 A Brief Description of the Spanish National
Institute of Public Administration158
5.5.5 Some General Considerations159
5.5.6 Institutional Framework of Government Schools161
5.5.7 Relationships with Non-Governmental Institutions162
5.6 The Case of the Italian National School of Administration
(SNA)163
References174

6 A Project for Assessing Public Management Competencies177

Francesca Gagliarducci and Davide de Gennaro
6.1 Introduction177
6.2 The Italian Presidency of the Council of Ministers178
xviii CONTENTS

6.3 The Need for Assessing Competencies for PCM Managers182

6.4 Aims and Method185
6.4.1 Semi-Structured Interviews187
6.4.2 Assessment Centre190
6.4.3 Analysis193
6.5 Results: The Key Dimensions of Managerial Competence
Domain193
6.6 Implications for Organizational Design and Human
Resource Management197
6.7 Conclusions203
References207

Part III Learning from the Italian Way 213

7 Conclusions and Implications for the Italian Public

Sector215
Stefano Battini, Gianluigi Mangia, and Angelo Mari
7.1 Italy and Political Instability215
7.2 How Instability Affects Managerial Behaviour217
7.3 The Need for a Cultural Change in Public Management219
7.4 Conclusions: Looking Ahead223
References226

Index 233
 Notes on Contributors

Stefano Battini is Full Professor of Administrative Law in the Department

of Political Sciences at the Tuscia University. Since February 2017 he is
also President of the Italian National School of Administration (SNA). He
is the author of numerous publications, mainly in the field of public work,
global administrative law, and administrative procedure.
Filomena Buonocore is Full Professor of Organization Studies at the
Parthenope University of Naples and professor at the Italian National
School of Administration (SNA). Her research interests include issues of
diversity management, work-life enrichment, public management, job
crafting and organizational design. Her research has been published
in several academic journals, including Journal of Management, Human
Resource Management Journal, Journal of Managerial Psychology and
Tourism Management.
Federico Ceschel is temporary professor at the Italian National School of
Administration (SNA), where he deals with corruption risk management
systems and public management. He has provided consulting and strategic
analysis services in the field of risk management and anti-corruption to
various international institutions, including the World Bank, the
Organization for Security and Co-Operation in Europe, the United
Nations Economic Commission for Europe.
Maurizio Decastri is Full Professor of Organization Studies at the
University of Rome Tor Vergata. He is Professor of Public Management at
the Italian National School of Administration (SNA). He is chairman of

xix
xx NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS

assessment unit at the Ministry of Cultural Heritage and he is also

member of the faculty of the Police High School. Among the various
fields of activity, he mainly deals with Italian Public Administration,
human resource management, organization design, and change
management.
Davide de Gennaro is Assistant Professor of Organization Studies at the
University of Salerno and temporary professor at the Italian National
School of Administration (SNA). He received his PhD in Business
Administration and Organizational Behaviour at Parthenope University
of Naples and held a visiting position at Kedge Business School of
Bordeaux. He also works as contract researcher at SDA Bocconi School of
Management in Milan.
Mario Pezzillo Iacono is Associate Professor of Organization Studies at
the University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, where he teaches Human
Resource Management. He holds a PhD in Business Administration from
the University of Molise and he was visiting researcher at the Cardiff
Business School.
Ernesto De Nito is Associate Professor of Organization Studies at the
University of Salerno, where he teaches organization theory and design,
and human resource management in the Public Sector. He holds a PhD in
Business Administration from the University of Naples Federico II. He
was visiting researcher at the Gothenburg University, Viktoria Institute.
Francesca Gagliarducci is General Deputy Secretary at the Italian
Presidency of the Council of Ministers (PCM). In the past, she has served
as Head of the Department of Personnel at PCM and as professor at the
Italian National School of Administration (SNA).
Alessandro Hinna is Associate Professor of Organization Studies at the
University of Rome Tor Vergata, where he teaches Organization Theory
and People Management. He is also professor of Public Management at
the Italian National School of Administration (SNA). He is editor of
Studies in Public and Non-Profit Governance (Book Series) for
Emerald Group Publishing Limited. His current research interests
include change management, risk management and human resource man-
agement in public organizations.
Gianluigi Mangia is Full Professor of Organizational Studies at the
University of Naples Federico II and Head of the Department of
 NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS xxi

Management at the Italian National School of Administration (SNA). He

is a board member of European Group for Organizational Studies (EGOS).
His research interests are around public organizations, power and resis-
tance in organizations and organizational research methods.
Angelo Mari is Chief Administrative Officer of the Italian National
School of Administration (SNA). He has been a lecturer in several masters
on Public Administrations and professor of SNA. As an effective member,
he was part of three Italian national observatories of family, disability, and
childhood and adolescence. He was also a member of the Government
Commission for the reform of family law and of the Interministerial
Committee for Human Rights.
Anna Maria Massa is integrative professor at the Italian National School
of Administration (SNA). Over the years she has carried out support activ-
ities for teaching in the context of training courses for new managers,
specialized training courses, management practices, conflict management,
and training activities on anti-corruption matters.
Sonia Moi is temporary professor at the Italian National School of
Administration (SNA), where she deals with corruption risk management
systems and public management. She is also a research fellow at the
University of Rome Tor Vergata, where she deals with issues related to
organizational models for anti-corruption.
Rocco Reina is Full Professor of Organization Studies at the University
Magna Graecia of Catanzaro, in Italy, where he teaches organization the-
ory and design, and human resource management in the Public Sector. He
is temporary professor at the Italian National School of Administration (SNA).
Danila Scarozza is Research Fellow at the International Telematic
University UNINETTUNO and at University of Rome Tor Vergata.
She is also temporary professor at the Italian National School of
Administration (SNA).
 List of Figures

Fig. 4.1 Uncertainty and organizational planning: The problem of

decision-­making capacity. (Source: Adapted from Hinna, 2009) 112
Fig. 4.2 The conceptual framework adopted: Analysis perspectives and
objects of investigation. (Source: Adapted from Hinna, 2009) 113
Fig. 6.1 PCM structures established by the Italian Prime Ministerial
Decree 01/10/2012 (organization chart updated to May
2016). (Adapted from Esposito et al., 2016) 180

xxiii
 List of Tables

Table 1.1 Comparing perspectives: Old Public Administration, New

Public Management, and New Public Service (Denhardt &
Denhardt, 2000, p. 554) 15
Table 3.1 Smart workers involved in the project 89
Table 4.1 Public employment reforms 121
Table 4.2 Planning, programming, and control reforms in Italy 124
Table 6.1 Characteristics of the sample 187

xxv
 List of Boxes

Box 1.1 Managerial reform of Italian Public Administration (Source:

Gualmini, 2008) 7
Box 1.2 Managing successful organizational change (Source:
Fernández & Rainey, 2006) 9
Box 1.3 The case of the reform of the Norwegian Labour and
Welfare Administration (Source: Fossestøl, Breit,
Andreassen, & Klemsdal, 2015) 16
Box 1.4 Theoretical perspectives for studying hybridity
(Source: Denis et al., 2015) 20
Box 1.5 Bureaucracy as instrument, institution, or ideal-type
(Source: Olsen, 2006) 23
Box 6.1 The Structure and Areas of Interest of the Interview 189

xxvii
 PART I

Rethinking Organization and Human

Resource Management in Public
Sector
 CHAPTER 1

Organizing Public Administration

Maurizio Decastri and Filomena Buonocore

1.1   Introduction
Reforms possibly represent the most important driver in the process of
change in public organizations. The trend of administrative reforms involv-
ing European bureaucracies in the last decades mainly concerned the civil
service sectors through the adoption of company-like management styles
(Emery, 2019). An increased flexibility in public service employment con-
tracts, a greater mobility both within and outside the administration, a
strengthening of political appointments, a decentralization of recruitment
and training, and an extension of collective bargaining represented the
common traits of the reform trends in the UK, Italy, France, Spain, and
Germany during the 1980s and 1990s (Gualmini, 2008). Consequently,
public employees have begun to face managerial logics based on efficiency,
quality of service, openness, flexibility, and speed of execution.
All these changes have produced two relevant effects on the Public Sector.

M. Decastri
University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]
F. Buonocore (*)
Parthenope University of Naples, Naples, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s) 2021 3

M. Decastri et al. (eds.), Organizational Development in Public
Administration, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43799-2_1
4 M. DECASTRI AND F. BUONOCORE

Firstly, public organizations have become more complex in organiza-

tional terms, because of new logics that have not ousted the traditional
logics of the Public Administration, based on the criterion of compliance
with the law and administrative rules for public officials, but have been
added to them. This is congruent with the view of Olsen (2008), who
talks about a sedimentation process of reforms, that implies that new
reforms complement or supplement, rather than replace, old ones, leading
to the coexistence of old and new institutions, even if founded on partly
inconsistent principles (Christensen & Lægreid, 2011). In contrast to the
either-or reform approaches, assuming a linear or cyclic development
where one reform replaces the previous one (Verhoest & Lægreid, 2010),
Olsen (2008) proposed that reforms are conceived as a compound, based
on the idea that previous reforms are modified through the addition of
new, different reform measures, leaving certain elements of the structure
and culture relatively stable, but strengthening some and weakening oth-
ers (Christensen & Lægreid, 2011; Røvik, 1996).
Verhoest and Lægreid (2010) talk about a combination of “robustness
and flexibility” in the way public organizations change, where robustness is
associated with the concepts of stability, continuity, reliability, predictability,
low variance, and regularity, while flexibility is associated with change, varia-
tion, adaptability, new knowledge, flexibility, and innovation (Farjoun, 2010).1
Secondly, public and private organizations are minimizing their gaps
and overcoming their traditional structural differences in terms of values,
culture, and organizational asset. The New Public Management (NPM)
movement (Barzelay, 2001; Osborne & Gaebler, 1992) significantly influ-
enced the new trend, assuming that public and private sectors are conver-
gent, according to the principle that management is management,
regardless of sector (Lyons, Duxbury, & Higgins, 2006). The primary
objective of NPM is to give Public Sector organizations a new orientation
by changing the way of working, focusing on performance, effectiveness,
and productivity. Consequently, after a long period when much scientific

1
As a recurring theme in organizational studies, this dualistic view has inspired numerous
models of learning, design, and organizational change that implicitly recognize that stability
and change jointly contribute to organizational effectiveness. The common theoretical prin-
ciple is represented by the model of March (1991) and Levinthal and March (1993), which
explains how the success of an organization depends on the delicate balance between exploi-
tation and exploration, that is, the ability to explore new roads through change and experi-
mentation and, at the same time, the ability to exploit existing resources and knowledge
consolidated in the organization.
 1 ORGANIZING PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 5

debate has been centered on a number of organizational distinctions

between public and private organizations (Perry & Rainey, 1988; Savas,
1982; Spann, 1977),2 such distinctions have been downplayed because
most practices and organizational assets become similar in both public and
private organizations. At the individual level, sectorial distinctions between
public and private are becoming increasingly irrelevant, following a long
period when the attitudes and behaviors of employees of public and pri-
vate organizations were contrasted. The NPM movement is considered as
the “age of management” based on a new idea of leadership and a new
corporate culture. According to this view, various initiatives of HR-based
reforms have been undertaken in most European countries, aimed at the
renewal of human resources policies in public organizations, taking inspi-
ration from the practices commonly adopted in private organizations.
Starting from these premises, the objective of this chapter is to provide
a general overview of the reform processes that have affected the Public
Sector over the years. To this end, the chapter is structured as follows.
Section 1.2 tries to conceptualize the administrative reforms as a multidi-
mensional phenomenon, resulting from a combination of competing,
inconsistent, and contradictory organizational principles and structures,
that coexist and balance different interests and values. The succession of
reforms is associated to a constant organizational change process involving
the Public Sector, with different consequences for organizational assets
and administrative apparatus. NPM and post-NPM reforms are analyzed,
while in Sect. 1.3 the main organizational consequences resulting from
the post-NPM reforms are examined in depth. Section 1.4 deals with a
series of reflections on the crisis of the bureaucratic model, traditionally
recognized as the typical organizational form of Public Administration.
Finally, the Conclusions section summarizes the main issues dealt within
this chapter, offering suggestions for the development of future research
and for managerial implications.

2
Kelman (2007) talks about a “ghetto” for Public Sector research to explain the push by
Public Sector scholars to emphasize how they differ from the scholars in other disciplines.
The most distinctive features between public and private organizations are as follows: public
organizations are exposed to much greater influence by external political and governmental
institutions; they are subject to more external scrutiny and accountability and their goals are
intangible and often conflicting; they have more elaborate formal rules and reporting
requirements and more rigid hierarchical arrangements; public organizations are also often
characterized by a lower operating efficiency compared to other types of organizations; the
actions public managers take are often dictated by political necessities and they have limited
decision-making autonomy due to constraints such as civil service rules.
6 M. DECASTRI AND F. BUONOCORE

1.2   Reforms and Organizational Change

Pollitt and Bouckaert (2004) define the term “reform” as a deliberate and
intentional change, marking a distinction from all those changes that sud-
denly occur and are not predictable. Public Sector organizations are con-
stantly changing due to the continuous succession of administrative
reforms acting on the administrative apparatuses and organizational pat-
terns (Verhoest & Lægreid, 2010), although reforms do not always pro-
duce total innovation.
A variety of theoretical perspectives have been provided to study the
organizational change in Public Administration and, in particular, to focus
on its nature and main drivers. The most common frameworks are the
Institutional Theory and the Change Management Theories. According
to the institutionalists, change is not intentionally implemented to improve
efficiency and the organizations pursue their legitimacy by conforming
themselves to environmental pressures (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983).
Evidently, the institutional perspective promotes a deterministic explana-
tion of change and focuses on the level of analysis of the organizational
field rather than of individual organizations. In contrast, Change
Management Theories follow a rational-adaptive perspective to highlight
the intentionality of the organizational change process, that results from
choices made by the actors involved in the change process (Abramson &
Lawrence, 2001; Fernández & Rainey, 2006; Kotter, 1995).
Kuipers et al. (2014) identify three orders of change, depending on the
depth of reform. First-order changes are limited to a part or subsystem of
an organization, and generally they occur as an incremental process. These
changes concern, for example, the introduction of managerial innovations
related to information technology or new accounting systems. Second-­
order changes involve radical processes of transformation that impact on
the organizational level. These are often labeled as reorganizations (Boyne,
2006), or agency turnarounds (Borins, 2002), with a focus on behavioral
factors that make possible and support organizational change, such as
organizational culture, climate, values, and beliefs. The study on public
leadership of Parry and Proctor-Thomson (2003) provides an interesting
example of second-order change, highlighting the key role of decision-
makers in establishing the values and beliefs among employees that make
it possible for decisions to be translated into actions. Finally, a third-order
change spans specific organizational boundaries and widely affects many
organizations/sectors. Public service reforms provide significant examples
leading to a radical transformation of values and ideologies in a society and
to the creation of various collaborations and partnerships (Box 1.1).
 1 ORGANIZING PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 7

Box 1.1 Managerial reform of Italian Public Administration

(Source: Gualmini, 2008)
The Italian experience, in particular, has been particularly relevant as
a sign of a break with the past. The urgent need to reduce public
debt in order to enter the European Monetary Union, the reform of
the electoral system, and the support of trade unions for some of the
innovations introduced, especially the extension of collective bar-
gaining, contributed to make the Italian reform cycle of the 1990s
much more radical than in other countries.
From a structural point of view, the 1999 reform established
administrative agencies, which were granted powers by central gov-
ernment on the basis of negotiated budget and framework agree-
ments and were headed by general managers. As in other European
countries, these agencies were to be an answer to state overload.
However, the subordination of the agencies to the ministries and the
maintenance of directorates general in certain ministries meant that
the degree of decentralization of state bureaucracy was much weaker
than in other countries.
From the personnel policy point of view, the Italian government
had aimed to dismantle the system of public law regulation.
Legislative decree 29/1993 introduced the private regulation of
civil servants’ employment conditions and wages, based on central-
ized collective bargaining with the trade unions, as well as a newly
established Agency for the Representation of the Civil Service.
Direct entry from outside Public Administrations was actively pro-
moted, as mobility within the Public Sector and the private sector
and performance targets and goals were established for public
employees.
Finally, legislative decree 80/1998 completed the reform process
by extending collective bargaining to top-grade civil servants and by
introducing the spoils system for higher-level/senior civil servants
who had to be confirmed or removed from their offices within the
first three months of each new legislature. Subsequently, Berlusconi’s
government strengthened the spoils system by abolishing the mini-
mum term for senior civil servants’ contracts, allowing more people
from outside the Public Sector to have a direct access to senior
positions.
8 M. DECASTRI AND F. BUONOCORE

Drawing on this organizational change research, relevant studies ana-

lyze the psychological consequences of change, explaining how organiza-
tions that frequently change due to reform processes create a sense of
precariousness and uncertainty among organizational members (Andrews,
2008; Bordia, Hobman, Jones, Gallois, & Callan, 2004). Uncertainty is
considered as “one of the most commonly reported psychological states in
the context of organizational change” (Bordia et al., 2004, p. 509). If
employees are unable to make sense of their environment, because of lack
of information or difficulty in predicting future outcomes, they tend to
experience a higher level of uncertainty due to the difficulty in carefully
predicting the impact the change will have on them (Daft, 2001; Lau &
Woodman, 1995). Perceived uncertainty is positively associated with stress
(Schweiger & Denisi, 1991) and turnover intentions (Johnson, Bernhagen,
Miller, & Allen, 1996), and it is negatively associated with job satisfaction
(Rafferty & Griffin, 2006), psychological well-being (Bordia et al., 2004),
and trust in the organization (Schweiger & Denisi, 1991).3
According to Brunsson and Sahlin-Andersson (2000), many Public Sector
reforms can be interpreted as attempts at constructing organizations, which
means that they try to adopt new management techniques and to change the
modes of managing, controlling, and accounting for the production of pub-
lic services. More specifically, organization theorists conceive organizations
in the general sense of coordinating actors and activities possessing special
characteristics, such as an identity, a certain degree of autonomy, collective
resources to control, and clear boundaries between the organization and its
environment. Reforms aimed at realizing these aspects can be interpreted as
a way of constructing the organization and, if the reform was successful, the
reformed entity is more likely to be perceived as a “real” organization, pos-
sessing the standard organizational attributes. NPM and post-NPM reforms

3
In the Public Sector research, Bordia et al. (2004) introduce the distinction between
strategic, structural, and job-related uncertainty. Strategic uncertainty refers to uncertainty
regarding organization-level issues, such as the reasons for change, the future direction of the
organization, or its sustainability. For example, a public manager perceives strategic uncer-
tainty when, in a context of changing government and policies (e.g., privatization or funding
cuts), s/he experiences a lack of clear vision and this will provide uncertainty regarding the
impact of change on administration’s strategic direction. Structural uncertainty refers to the
administrations’ organizational structure. An example is the merging of two different offices
that is likely to produce changes in internal hierarchies: this type of change generates uncer-
tainty about the chain of command and the responsibilities of the employees within the
public offices. Finally, job-related uncertainty refers to job security, career opportunities, and
changes in the role and tasks to be performed due, for example, to the introduction of new
technologies or the downsizing of certain programs and activities.
 1 ORGANIZING PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 9

provide relevant examples of organizational reforms in the Public Sector

assigning various aspects of the concept of organization to individual public
services (Brunsson & Sahlin-­Andersson, 2000).
The key feature in constructing organization processes is about “con-
structing management”, conceived as the authoritative center of an orga-
nization which is assumed to exert control and bear responsibility for the
organization, its actions, and results. Reforms recognize the freedom of
the chief executives to manage, removing them from the condition of civil
servants following and implementing central directives. As managers have
been allowed greater discretion, their leadership role in change manage-
ment process has been emphasized (Brunsson & Sahlin-Andersson, 2000).
In the Public Sector context, leadership is discussed in terms of adminis-
trative or bureaucratic leadership, which can be contrasted with political
leadership. Administrative leadership is regarded as an exclusive activity of
managers at the head of an administrative apparatus; they have a relevant
role as drivers of change, provided that it is credible, competent, and
trained in the process of transforming organizations (Kavanagh &
Ashkanasy, 2006; Ridder, Bruns, & Spier, 2005) (Box 1.2).

Box 1.2 Managing successful organizational change (Source:

Fernández & Rainey, 2006)
In their study on organizational change in Public Sector, Fernández
and Rainey (2006) illustrated eight relevant tasks from public man-
agers as potentially contributing to the successful implementation
of change.
First, public managers must verify and communicate the need for
change. The literature on public management has repeatedly stressed
the need to disseminate information about the change and to con-
vince civil servants about the urgency of change, also through efforts
to take advantage of mandates, political windows of opportunity,
and external influences to verify and communicate this need
(Abramson & Lawrence, 2001; Harokopus, 2001; Lambright, 2001).
Second, public managers must develop a course of action or strat-
egy for implementing change. More specifically, they must design a
road map for the administration, identifying the obstacles and propos-
ing solutions to overcome them. It is also important that the objec-
tives are clear and specific—therefore measurable, capable of being

(continued)
Box 1.2 (continued)
improved, and unambiguous—and based on sound causal theory—
eliminating inconsistent or conflicting directives that can undermine
efforts to implement change (Bishop & Jones Jr, 1993; Grizzle &
Pettijohn, 2002; Mazmanian & Sabatier, 1989; Rossotti, 2005).
Third, managers are called to build internal support for change and
to reduce the resistance to it through widespread participation in the
change process. Participation can be guaranteed, for example, through
continuous meetings with stakeholders in order to share information
(Rossotti, 2005), also by promoting bottom-up initiatives granting
frontline workers greater discretion to implement changes.
Fourth, the success of change requires top-management support
and commitment to change. In the Public Sector, top management
support for change often requires the cooperation of top-level career
civil servants in addition to politically appointed executives (Abramson
& Lawrence, 2001; Berman & Wang, 2000; Harokopus, 2001;
Thompson & Fulla, 2001); Aucoin (1990), for example, attributes
the failure of reforms in Canada to a lack of support from cabinet
ministers that were simply not interested in supporting those reforms.
Fifth, external support is an important component of change.
Therefore, public managers implementing change in their administra-
tions must display skills in obtaining support from powerful external
actors (e.g., Berman & Wang, 2000; Julnes & Holzer, 2001). It has
been shown, for example, that the governor’s high level of commitment
and support for some reforms in Florida lead to a strong influence on
the implementation of change (Berry, Chackerian, & Wechsler, 1999).
Sixth, change is not cheap or without trade-offs and reorganiza-
tions and redirections are often expensive and require sufficient
resources to be effective (e.g., Nadler & Nadler, 1998).
Seventh, the dynamics of change must be constantly monitored in
order to assess their actual implementation (Judson, 1991): the eval-
uation and monitoring efforts represent a fundamental task of public
managers and should continue even after the change is fully adopted
to ensure members do not lapsing into old behavioral patterns.
Finally, change must be structural, it is not enough to work on
some subsystems as if they were separate and not interconnected
boxes (e.g., Hannan, Polos, & Carroll, 2003; Meyers & Dillon,
1999; Nadler & Nadler, 1998). Public managers must develop an
integrative approach to change achieving subsystem congruence. For
example, Shareef (1994) found that an effort to implement a partici-
pative culture in the US Postal Service fell short because of manage-
ment’s failure to modify organizational subsystems consistently.
 1 ORGANIZING PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 11

1.2.1  NPM and post-NPM Reforms

NPM and post-NPM reforms provide relevant examples of organizational
reforms in the Public Sector assigning various aspects of the concept of orga-
nization to individual public services (Brunsson & Sahlin-Andersson, 2000).
The NPM movement (Barzelay, 2001; Osborne & Gaebler, 1992)
established itself as the dominant approach to Public Administration in the
1980s and 1990s. It was marked by Osborne and Gaebler’s best-selling
book Reinventing Government (1992) and the Clinton Presidency admin-
istration’s National Performance Review (Bryson, Crosby, & Bloomberg,
2014; Gore, 1993).
The new movement was supposed to represent a reaction to the logic of
the old Public Administration, based on procedural controls and rules, and
to the model of large and centralized government agencies. Globalization,
neoliberal reforms, and technological revolution represent some of the most
significant changes that inspired the NPM movement. The basic idea of
NPM is to make Public Sector organizations and public employees much
more “business-like” and “market-oriented” because of an increased pres-
sure and competition of a much more challenging business environment. In
the opinion of the proponents of NPM, although public organizations tra-
ditionally do not operate in a competitive market as private organizations
and are largely chained by legal, economic, and political bindings, they can
be improved by the importation of business concepts, techniques, and values.
The primary objective of NPM is to give Public Sector organizations a new
orientation by changing their way of working and by paying attention to per-
formance, effectiveness, and productivity. A series of interventions concerned
the organizational structures and processes: decentralization, in order to
achieve more flexible structures and less hierarchy; intensification of internal
cross-boundary collaboration; standardization and formalization of strategic
and operational routines through management tools typical of private organi-
zations, such as scenario planning, SWOT (Strenghts, Weaknesses,
Opportunities, and Threats) analysis, and business and unit plans (Diefenbach,
2009). The goal of the reform was twofold: to increase the efficiency, produc-
tivity, and quality of public organizations, improving performance and
strengthening employees’ motivation on the one hand and on the other,
because of explicit targets, standards, and performance indicators, to promote
accountability and fairness of public administrators and managers.
Although NPM reforms are based on economic/business theories
(neoliberalism, public choice theory, change management concepts),
scholars emphasize many inconsistencies, providing evidence that NPM is
based on partially or totally contrasting principles (Christensen, 2012;
Christensen & Lægreid, 2011). For example, although flexibility and
12 M. DECASTRI AND F. BUONOCORE

change are recognized as a relevant organizational capability, NPM propo-

nents also strive for standardization and formalization of strategic and
operational management, centralization of activities crucial for the organi-
zation, and an increase in bureaucracy and formal requirements, all fea-
tures that stiffen the structure and hinder the ability to change.
Furthermore, according to NPM, employees are expected to develop
business-like, entrepreneurial attitudes. At the same time, a wide range of
systems and processes of auditing, control, regulation, assessment, inspec-
tion, and evaluation were introduced in order to tightly control employ-
ees’ tasks, attitudes, and performances. Another important claim of NPM
is a decrease of hierarchy, but in contrast more management layers were
introduced with many negative consequences. In fact, there is empirical
evidence suggesting that many managers adopt strategic initiatives of
change primarily for their individual ambitions, for the advancement of
their own interests, and for career prospects (Diefenbach, 2005).4
As a response to the criticisms of NPM, a new generation of reforms,
labeled New Public Service (Denhardt & Denhardt, 2011), Public Value
Management (Stoker, 2006), and New Public Governance (Osborne,
2010), was launched. According to an increasing number of scholars, the
aim of these new post-NPM reforms—from this moment on, this will be
the expression we will use to refer to the research lines born to supersede
NPM theories—was to counteract the disintegration or fragmentation
that occurred under NPM by improving a horizontal coordination of gov-
ernmental organizations and among government and other actors
(Christensen, 2012; Christensen & Lægreid, 2007; Lægreid & Verhoest,
2010). The central idea is that public policies and programs evolve and are
delivered by more than one organization, operating in networks or in
other forms of partnerships (Pollitt, 2009). Networks of different actors
and other forms of interorganizational cooperation have spread to the
Public Sector to make better use of scarce resources and to create synergies
by involving different actors on a given problem.
Scholars argue that post-NPM reforms center on how to “govern”, not
just to “manage”, diverse and complex societies enhancing an inclusive

4
Other critical points highlighted on the NPM reforms concern the introduction of per-
formance measurement and management systems: more specifically, these systems were
aimed to capture only quantitative outputs of performance, related to the concepts of effi-
ciency, productivity, and accountability, by excluding nonquantifiable parameters, such as
skills and knowledge, cooperative behaviors, fairness, commitment, creativity, innovation,
and loyalty. All these organizational behaviors are completely ignored by NPM and portrayed
as being unimportant.
 1 ORGANIZING PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 13

dialogue and cooperation among different actors (Bryson et al., 2014; Kettl,
2002; Osborne, 2010; Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2011), in order to find innova-
tive solutions to solve emerging problems. Poverty, sustainability, natural
disaster, deepening inequality, all offer important examples of complex
problems that governments face today and that touch each and every one of
us. These types of problems, also labeled “wicked problems”, cannot be
effectively addressed through traditional bureaucracies; rather, they require
specialized knowledge and a large number of stakeholders that cooperate to
produce innovative policy solutions (Lindsay, Osborne, & Bond, 2014;
McGuire & Silvia, 2010; Sørensen & Torfing, 2011). The unique contribu-
tions of different actors—politicians, civil servants, experts, private firms,
user groups, community-based associations, and social cooperatives—are
likely to produce a better understanding of the problem at hand, promoting
a process of mutual learning through which the different stakeholders can
develop and test new and bold solutions while building a joint sense of own-
ership for the project (Sørensen & Torfing, 2018).
Politicians and government officials at all levels agree on the impor-
tance of involving citizens and civil society organizations in collaborative
efforts to find innovative solutions to such problems (Ansell & Torfing,
2014; Sørensen & Torfing, 2018; Tait & Lester, 2005) or to produce
what is valued as “good” for society (de Souza Briggs, 2008).
Gaventa (2002) captures the importance of an active involvement of
citizens and civil society organizations in co-creation processes of public
value through the concept of “active citizenship”. Citizens thus move
beyond their roles of “social clients” (as perceived in the traditional Public
Administration) or “customers” (as defined in the NPM reform program),
becoming “active citizens”, that is, citizens as resourceful and empowered
actors, with knowledge of public affairs, a sense of belonging and concern
for their community, and a strong willingness to assume personal respon-
sibility for what happens around them (Cruikshank, 1999; Denhardt &
Denhardt, 2000; Sørensen & Torfing, 2016). Putnam (1993) talks about
“civil society” as a context in which people need to work out their personal
interests for the benefit of the community.
Government, especially at a local level, plays a central role in this new
vision in order to create, facilitate, and support the connections between
citizens and their communities. According to the traditional approach,
government directs the actions of the public through regulation and
decree and establishes a set of rules and incentives to motivate and guide
people. In the new perspective of post-NPM reforms, government
becomes a player with the key role of facilitating the dialogue with all
14 M. DECASTRI AND F. BUONOCORE

other players and of finding solutions. In doing this, government must

ensure that the public interest predominates and that the solutions and the
processes by which solutions are found are consistent with democratic
norms of justice, fairness, and equity (Denhardt & Denhardt, 2000;
Ingraham & Ban, 1988; Ingraham, Rosenbloom, & Edlund, 1989).
Public managers also gain a new role compared to that envisaged under
the tenets of NPM, where their main task was to manage inputs and out-
puts in a way that ensures economy and responsiveness to customers.
Post-NPM public managers are expected to create public value for society
by guiding collaborative networks and enhancing the overall effectiveness,
capacity, and accountability of public policies and programs. In doing this,
managers have more discretion than they did in the past because theirs is
more than a service delivery role, rather they play a conciliating, mediat-
ing, or even adjudicating role (Denhardt & Denhardt, 2000). New chal-
lenges and complexities of work are recognized for public administrators
(Denhardt & Denhardt, 2000), who have the responsibility to serve citi-
zens by acting as stewards of public resources (Kass, 1990) and to operate
as facilitators of citizenship and democratic dialogues (Chapin & Denhardt,
1995; King, Stivers, & Box, 1998). Furthermore, administrators should
share authority and reduce control and they should trust in the efficacy of
collaboration, seeking greater responsiveness and corresponding increase
in citizen trust (King et al., 1998).
Moreover, the concept of accountability changes in the perspective of
post-NPM reforms, becoming more complex than in the past. It differs
from the classical vision of the old Public Administration, in which public
managers must simply report to their superiors, elected officials, and senior
administrators, and from the managerial logic of NPM, in which new pub-
lic managers are called to account in terms of efficiency, cost-effectiveness,
and responsiveness to market forces. In the new vision of post-NPM
reform, public administrators are held accountable to numerous institu-
tions and standards, including public interest, law, community values,
political norms, professional standards, democratic norms, and citizen
interests (Christensen, 2012; Iacovino, Barsanti, & Cinquini, 2017;
Romzek, LeRoux, & Blackmar, 2012). Denhardt and Denhardt (2000)
suggest that institutions and standards influence the work of public manag-
ers, but they can also be influenced from them. For example, public man-
agers are obviously subject to legal restrictions in their work, but the way
in which public managers apply the law influences its implementation and
also influences lawmakers, who might decide to change that law (Table 1.1).
Table 1.1 Comparing perspectives: Old Public Administration, New Public
Management, and New Public Service (Denhardt & Denhardt, 2000, p. 554)
Old Public New Public New Public Service
Administration Management

Primary Political theory, social Economic theory, Democratic theory,

theoretical and and political more sophisticated varied approaches to
epistemological commentary dialogue based on knowledge including
foundations augmented by naive positivist social science positive, interpretive,
social science critical, and
postmodern
Prevailing Synoptic rationality, Technical and Strategic rationality,
rationality and “administrative man” economic rationality, multiple tests of
associated models “economic man”, or human of rationality
behavior the self- interested (political, economic,
decision-maker organizational)
Conception of Politically defined and Represents the Result of a dialogue
the public expressed in law aggregation of about shared values
interest individual interests
Who are public Clients and Customers Citizens
servants constituents
responsive to?
Role of Rowing (designing Steering (acting as a Serving (negotiating
government and implementing catalyst to unleash and brokering interests
policies focusing on a market forces) among citizens and
single, politically community groups,
defined objective) creating shared values)
Mechanisms for Administering Creating mechanisms Building coalitions of
achieving policy programs through and incentive public, nonprofit, and
objectives existing government structures to achieve private agencies to
agencies policy objectives meet mutually agreed
through private and upon needs
nonprofit agencies
Approach to Hierarchical Market driven—the Multifaceted—public
accountability administrators are accumulation of servants must attend
standards responsible to self-interests will result to law, community
democratically elected in outcomes desired values, political norms,
political leaders by broad groups of professional, and
citizens (or customers) citizen interests
Administrative Limited discretion Wide latitude to meet Discretion needed but
discretion allowed administrative entrepreneurial goals constrained and
officials accountable
Assumed Bureaucratic Decentralized public Collaborative
organizational organizations marked organizations with structures with
structure by top-down authority primary control leadership shared
within agencies and remaining within the internally and
control or regulation agency externally
of clients
Assumed Pay and benefits, civil Entrepreneurial spirit, Public service, desire
motivational basis service protections ideological desire to to contribute to
of public servants reduce size of society
and administrator government
16 M. DECASTRI AND F. BUONOCORE

1.3   A New Complexity for Public Administration:

Organizing According to the post-NPM Reforms
The significant changes introduced by the post-NPM reforms have made
Public Sector organizations more complex and hybrid. The transition from
NPM to post-NPM reforms has involved macro-transformations and shifting
ideologies in contemporary societies, determining a high institutional com-
plexity (Box 1.3). The most important changes concern the increasing inter-
dependence among organizations and the spread of more interactive forms of
governance, based on collaborative arrangements, which changed the jobs of
public administrators, who must now build and maintain critical relationships
with other organizations (McGuire, 2006). The central idea is that public
policies and programs are not being run from within single organizations, but
they are evolved and delivered by more than one of them (Pollitt, 2009).

Box 1.3 The case of the reform of the Norwegian Labour and Welfare
Administration (Source: Fossestøl, Breit, Andreassen, & Klemsdal, 2015)
Collaborative arrangements are being used in order to face the grow-
ing dynamism of contemporary societies and the institutional com-
plexity resulting from the succession of reforms. The case of the
reform of the Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration (NAV
reform) helps to explain the organizational responses of Public Sector
to institutional complexity (resulting from the transition from NPM
to post-NPM reform). The reform led to the establishment of front-
line service organizations, named local NAV offices, based on a part-
nership between the central government and local municipalities,
which allowed to respond to the institutional complexity imposed by
the coexistence of two contradictory political reform logics, NPM and
post-NPM reform. More specifically, NAV offices developed new
forms of holistic service provision in collaboration with other relevant
local services, such as municipal partners, employers, and other rele-
vant services in the field. At the same time, NAV offices dealt with the
requirements of the Directorate of Labour and Welfare, which pressed
to provide a uniform service and to maintain a national control
through standardization, specialization, and hierarchical government.
This reorganization was made possible thanks to the efforts of both
employees, most of them learnt and integrated new tasks and became
able to give their clients more comprehensive or holistic assistances,
and managers, who played a role of “boundary spanners”, managing
within an interorganizational context.
 1 ORGANIZING PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 17

A very common classification of interorganizational relationships in the

Public Sector is based on vertical and horizontal collaborative relations.
Vertical collaborative relationships represent a relevant arrangement
furthered by post-NPM, in which tasks are carried out at different levels of
government. This is the case of public agencies operating at different ter-
ritorial—central, regional, and local—levels, which are involved in a com-
plex system of overlapping jurisdictions (Bache & Flinders, 2004). Tasks
can rarely be treated independently of each other, the different levels have
to collaborate, and coordination between levels is an important precondi-
tion for coordination between sectors. The division of tasks between cen-
ter and periphery can involve various phases of administrative process: the
formulation and detailed deliberation of public policy, its implementation,
the control of results. In this way, an administrative system is set up con-
sisting of bodies with political orientation (parliaments, elective assem-
blies, governing bodies), on the one hand, and managerial and executive
organizations, on the other (agencies, public companies, authority, offices
peripheral, local autonomy, etc.) (Christensen & Lægreid, 2011).
Horizontal collaborative relationships, spanning organizational bound-
aries, may be a simple interorganizational arrangement between two gov-
ernment agencies or a complex combination of organizations, groups, and
individuals from a variety of sectors, government agencies, private firms,
and nonprofit/community organizations (Hall & O’Toole Jr, 2004).
From the organizational point of view, these horizontal forms of collabo-
ration are configured as networks, that is forms of governing activities
between multiple actors (organizations, but also groups or individuals)
who decide to collaborate in a stable manner over time (Jones, Hesterly,
& Borgatti, 1997). Networks provide flexible structures that are inclusive,
rich in information, and prefer coordination based on cooperation between
actors, minimizing the hierarchy, and bureaucratic control that represent
the defining characteristics of a bureaucracy. Networks are considered
innovative organizing hybrids, flexible, and efficient forms, which enable
participants to understand and address complex tasks that could not be
accomplished individually (Powell, 1998). Huxham and Vangen (2013)
talk about “collaborative advantage”, highlighting how cooperative net-
works provide better conditions to find innovative solutions and to solve
complex problems, because a wider network offers more insights but also
because greater cooperation improves the prospect that different parties
may reach an understanding about what to do.
18 M. DECASTRI AND F. BUONOCORE

Interorganizational networks can be set up for different purposes when

the public actor does not have the necessary resources and skills to act
independently: the exchange of goods or services, the joint realization of
a product or service, the sharing of information and knowledge, or the
realization of a particular project.
Formal or informal networks are distinguished in relation to the degree
of formalization that characterizes the collaboration agreement between
the actors. Formal networks are initiated by mandate or regulatory require-
ment, and they are supported by formal contractual partnering (Hall &
O’Toole Jr, 2000, 2004; Klijn & Skelcher, 2007; Weber & Khademian,
1997). Informal networks are voluntarily activated by entrepreneurial
managers to accomplish resource sharing and enhance program perfor-
mance (Bardach, 1998); such collaborations are very informal, time-­
limited, voluntary, and include a strong private component.
Different subcultures coexist within a network because of the high
degree of differentiation among the actors, based on different technical
specialties, cognitive orientations, and organizational forms. The cultural
complexity, resulting from such variety of cultural norms and values,
increases within intersectorial networks where public, private, and non-
profit actors are involved and face specific barriers, namely different legal
status, behavioral models, and cognitive frames, which all make knowl-
edge transfer and the interorganization cooperation more difficult and
complex.
Many theoretical perspectives have been used in the managerial litera-
ture to explain the interorganizational arrangements, such as policy net-
work theory, resource dependency theory, exchange theory, and network
analysis theory. Over the last 20 years, new governance network theories
have developed with analytical focus on collaboration arrangements in the
Public Sector (Sørensen & Torfing, 2007), which are examined as an alter-
native to the hierarchical and bureaucratic administrative systems in public
policy development and delivery (Jennings Jr & Ewalt, 1998; Milward &
Provan, 1998; Provan & Milward, 2010) and as a more democratic means
of developing public policy (Kenis & Raab, 2003; Scharpf, 1999).
According to this theoretical perspective, public managers operate as
“boundary spanners”, as they are concerned with how to link the organiza-
tions together in a functioning network. Collaborative management
skills are considered as the unique skills for a collaborative context
(McGuire, 2006). They include communicating to create shared meaning,
 1 ORGANIZING PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 19

understanding, empathy, conflict resolution, networking, creativity, inno-

vation, empowerment, and building trust. More specifically, according to
many scholars the success of a cooperative relationship depends on the
presence of trust, which means a positive expectation about the behavior of
individual participants in a collaboration (Ferguson & Stoutland, 1999).
The numerous new elements introduced by the post-NPM reforms
have triggered a sedimentation process leading to the emergence of com-
plex or hybrid organizations, for the combination of competing, inconsis-
tent, and contradictory organizational principles and structures that
coexist and balance different interests and values, which is not necessarily
damaging but rather a new mode of working in Public Sector organiza-
tions, which have to learn to live in a context of hybridity, with partly
conflicting principles, goals, structures, and cultural values in a new turbu-
lent environment (Christensen & Lægreid, 2011).
“Hybridity”, referring to a situation of “mixed origin or composition
of elements” (Gittell & Douglass, 2012), is not a novel phenomenon in
Public Sector. It has been predominantly understood as a “structural”
concept, as it incorporates many organizational situations: for example,
quasi-governmental organizations that exist at the interface between the
public and the private sector (Lan and Rainey, 1992); the mixture of mar-
ket and hierarchy or different structural forms inside the same organiza-
tion, (Williamson, 1991); the combination of political advocacy and
service provision (Minkoff, 2002). In some sectors, such as social policies,
higher education, health systems, and secondary education, such hybrid-
izations have been more intense, as public policies increasingly blur tradi-
tional boundaries between private, nonprofit, and public sectors (Bozeman,
2013; Denis, Ferlie, & Van Gestel, 2015; Newman, 2001).
If we look at the “old Public Administration”, which existed in many
countries up until the late 1970s, the system, based on bureaucracy and
the key role of rules and procedures, was simple and integrated. Despite
the many innovations introduced by NPM and post-NPM reforms and the
underlying economic ideas, Weberian features from the old system were
kept and blended with the new logics of the reforms. Public organizations
tried to manage the institutional complexity through a reorganization
process, incorporating elements from contradictory institutional logics in
their organizational processes (Fossestøl et al., 2015).
20 M. DECASTRI AND F. BUONOCORE

Building on the dimensions of structure (organizational and opera-

tional design), agency (activities and tasks), institutional context (environ-
ment and culture), and identities (workforce and personnel), Denis et al.
(2015) identify four literature multilevel and multi-actor perspectives to
define hybridity in Public Sector. These four theoretical perspectives, by
considering different drivers of change, emphasize distinctive manifesta-
tions of hybridity at different levels of analysis and as a coherent and stable
phenomenon (Box 1.4).

Box 1.4 Theoretical perspectives for studying hybridity (Source:

Denis et al., 2015)
The first theoretical perspective for studying hybridity refers to gov-
ernance theories: it is about how shifts in structures and governance
(hierarchy, network, market) at the supra-organizational and sys-
temic level affect organizational hybridity (Dent, Van Gestel, &
Teelken, 2007; Moore & Hartley, 2010). According to this line of
studies, hybridity can develop between hierarchies, markets, and net-
works/clans (Ouchi, 1979), including relational markets, managed
markets, and managed networks (Ferlie, Fitzgerald, McGivern,
Dopson, & Bennett, 2013). Hybrid governance models goes against
others by suggesting a possible radical shift to a post-NPM paradigm
(Moore & Hartley, 2010; Osborne, 2010).
The second literature perspective refers to institutional theories,
using organizational archetype theory and institutional logics (e.g.,
Greenwood & Hinings, 1988; Hinings & Greenwood, 1988). A
critical assumption here is the coherence within an embedded arche-
type, specifically between the levels of structure, systems, and values
and ideology, so that traditional and new archetypes clash but with-
out breaking the continuum of change. In other words, “while one
dominant logic may emerge, it does so only temporarily and one
change is followed by another” (Van Gestel & Hillebrand, 2011,
p. 233). Hybrids thus appear to be a viable organizational form over
time, focusing on the process of “becoming” rather than of “being”
(Bjerregaard & Jonasson, 2014).

(continued)
 1 ORGANIZING PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 21

Box 1.4 (continued)

A third perspective concerns actor network theories, by considering
hybrid agency and practices coming from sociological accounting the-
ory and Actor Network Theory (ANT) (Bruni & Teli, 2007; Latour,
1987, 1993; Law, 1991). According to ANT, a complex actor network
consists of clusters of human and nonhuman actors brought together in
material semiotic networks; however, these networks prove to be fragile,
diverse, and shifting, so it may not be easy to establish a central forum
to bring all participants together (Law & Hassard, 1999). Through
networks, hybrids in action are developed and interactions between
diverse elements produce a mix of practices, processes, and knowl-
edge—also thanks to tools like technology—in the multilevel perspec-
tives of individuals, groups, and organizations (Noordegraaf, 2011).
Finally, an identity perspective at individual level aims at understand-
ing hybrid roles and identities. Hybridity may entail changes to, and
the formation of, new and multiple work identities, and consequently
it may generate new challenges and threats for the Public Sector setting
(Fitzgerald, Ferlie, & Buchanan, 2006; Witman, Smid, Meurs, &
Willems, 2011). As an example, a doctor in a hospital moving into a
managerial role (e.g., clinical director) may develop new skills and
competencies and this shift may trigger a changed work identity not
necessarily appreciated (see Beech, MacIntosh, & McInnes, 2008;
Iedema, Degeling, Braithwaite, & White, 2004; Sveningsson &
Alvesson, 2003). Therefore, the identity perspective on hybridity opens
new ways to understand the consequences of macro- and meso-level
changes in public services for individuals and groups, including their
perceptions, adaption, and resistance to hybrid roles and demands.

Drawing on these theoretical perspectives, hybridity of organizational

forms is related to multiple levels of analysis. That means that hybridity is
embedded into the following: (a) individuals, who play more occupation
roles and identities; (b) groups, which combine autonomy and managerial
control; (c) organizations, because of the incorporation of heterogeneous
values in governance, like profit and social support; and (d) broad net-
works or organizational fields, where private, public, and nonprofit orga-
nizations work together.
22 M. DECASTRI AND F. BUONOCORE

There is no agreement in the scholarly community about the effects of

increasingly complex and hybrid structures, where Weberian, NPM, and
post-NPM features coexist (Christensen & Lægreid, 2011). Although
many authors emphasize increasing conflicts, ambiguity, and the problems
of achieving public goals, the most recent trend in the public management
literature tends to adopt a more optimistic view, seeing hybrid structures
as a response strategy to the complexity of institutional environment.
More specifically, this response indicates the possibility of dealing with
seemingly incompatible demands, providing holistic services even in con-
texts of strong hierarchical control and ensuring effectiveness in goal
attainment and flexibility in catering to different interests.

1.4   The Crisis of the Bureaucratic Model

Changes in Public Administration over recent decades have undermined
the foundation of the bureaucratic model, traditionally recognized as the
typical organizational form of Public Administration (Emery & Giauque,
2014; Polzer, Meyer, Höllerer, & Seiwald, 2016). These changes are
aimed at influencing the motivation and the behavior of public employees
through the introduction of managerial and professional logics and other
tools from the private sector. Consequently, compliance with the law and
administrative rules are no longer the only criteria by which the behavior
of public employees is assessed; efficiency, quality of service, flexibility,
problem-solving have emerged as new standards for employees working in
public organizations, who are now in search of new means of anchoring
their identity and motivation.
As a consequence, Public Sector scholars have recently become inter-
ested in the theme of the development of new organizational forms result-
ing from the crisis of the bureaucratic model and the transition to
post-bureaucratic structures and processes (Decastri, 2005).
The central hypothesis of this body of work is that bureaucracy repre-
sents an undesirable and nonviable form of administration that is incom-
patible with the new managerial logics of Public Administrations, and,
therefore, it should be replaced by new—faster, more efficient, more flex-
ible, more committed, and more outward-looking—organizational forms.
Post-bureaucratic organizations have “been put in place as a conscious
replacement for a traditional bureaucracy” (Pollitt, 2009, p. 200). This
shift, which has been made possible by NPM and post-NPM reforms,
involves relevant innovations, which provide the basis to market or net-
work organizations (Box 1.5).
 1 ORGANIZING PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 23

Box 1.5 Bureaucracy as instrument, institution, or ideal-type

(Source: Olsen, 2006)
Bureaucracy can be described according to three points of views:
instrument, institution, or ideal-type (Olsen, 2006). As an instru-
ment, bureaucracy represents a rational tool for executing the com-
mands and realizing the goals of elected leaders and is assessed on
the basis of its effectiveness and efficiency in achieving predeter-
mined purposes. As an institution, bureaucracy is based on organiza-
tional and normative principles, and it is the expression of its own
cultural values. Specifically, bureaucrats are supposed to be the
guardians of constitutional principles, law, and professional stan-
dards, and they have autonomy in adapting the law to individual
cases without the involvement of elected politicians. As an ideal-­
type, bureaucracy has clear characteristics, following the mainstream
scholarship of Weber (Albrow, 1970; Meier & Hill, 2005; Pollitt,
2009): clear hierarchy of offices, officials are appointed on the basis
of a contract and are selected on the basis of a transparent set of
requirements for certain levels of education/training, career struc-
ture is based on seniority or merit defined by superior ranks, official
is subject to unified control and a disciplinary system, the whole
organization is rule-governed, and those rules are law or law-like.

In the light of these considerations, two types of criticisms have been

made with regards to Public Administration over time (Olsen, 2006).
First, Public Administration is criticized because it doesn’t meet the ideal
public model, which is hierarchical, rule-based, and professionally staffed.
Bureaucracy is considered merely a façade because bureaucrats are corrupt
and unreliable, incompetent, inefficient, lazy, and unresponsive; further,
they often misuse their power and do not always apply laws in a competent
and fair manner. Second, bureaucracy is considered as a mistaken public
model based on inappropriate ethos and codes of conduct. In this perspec-
tive, Public Administration is excessively bureaucratic, where rules and
procedures are followed too slavishly and bureaucrats have a rigid behav-
ior, as too many constraints prevent them from exercising autonomy and
expressing professionalism. In recent decades, the second type of criticism
has been predominant because, since the late 1970s, bureaucracy has been
attacked for its inefficiency, costs, and rigid internal organization and
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
nearby county school systems. One of the rangers, Lloyd Foster,
became so attached to the ideas being presented that he obtained a
leave of absence from his work, persistently promoted the project,
and became Tremont’s first director. Experienced teachers such as
Elsie Burrell and Randolph Shields helped Foster convert talk into
action, rhetoric into experience.
The center soon offered a real alternative to conventional and
overcrowded schools caught in the midst of industrialization.
Teacher-led or parent-supervised classes from a multitude of states
and cities organized themselves, paid a base fee for each member,
and came to the valley for one week during the year. Within months,
Tremont was teaching elementary students at the rate of thousands
per year. The organizers retained their informal, camp-like approach
to interested groups and added to the original dining room and two
dormitories an audiovisual room and a laboratory complete with
powerful microscopes. As the program expanded, children could
fulfill their imaginative promptings in an art room, or build a miniature
skidder in the crafts room, or turn to a library of extensive readings.
As the idea of environmental education at Tremont and elsewhere
spread by word of mouth, volunteers from across the country arrived
and aided those already at work. High school and college students
participated in and still attend weekend conferences on the activities
and the progress of the Center.
They learn, first of all, fundamental concepts that are expressed
simply: “You don’t have to have a lot of fancy buildings to do a good
program,” or “You know, sometimes we teach a lot of theory and we
don’t really get down to—I guess you’d call it the nitty-gritty,” or even
“Now don’t chicken out, the way some of you did last time, step in
the water.”
They learn of “quiet hour,” when, at the beginning of the week, each
child stakes out a spot for himself in the woods, beside the stream,
wherever choice leads. For an hour each day, in sun or rain,
everybody seeks his or her own place and is assured of peace and
privacy. A girl writes a poem to her parents; a fourth-grader
contemplates on a rock by the water; and almost everyone who
observes the quiet
hour looks forward to
it eagerly each day.

Fred R. Bell
In an attempt to capture the spirit
of the old days, a family climbs
about a Cades Cove barn.
 Pages 142-143: Members of the Tilman Ownby family
of Dudley Creek, near Gatlinburg, gather for a reunion
in the early 1900s. Many of their descendants still live
in the Smokies area today.
National Park Service
 Children anxiously line up to go back a few years with
Elsie Burrell at the one-room schoolhouse in Little
Greenbrier.
Clair Burket
They learn about the highly effective lessons that are scattered
throughout the week, lessons such as “man and water,” “stream
ecology,” “continuity and change.” Imaginative gatherings become
not the exception but the rule: “Sometimes we take a group of
children, divide them into members of a make-believe pioneer family,
and take them up into a wilderness area, an area which is truly
pristine, almost a virgin forest. And we let the kids imagine that they
are this pioneer family, and that they are going to pick out a house
site.” In one game called “succession,” a boy from blacktopped,
“civilized” Atlanta might search along a road for signs of life on the
pavement, then in the gravel, then in the grass, then within the vast,
teeming forest. And a day’s trip to the Little Greenbrier schoolhouse
gives the children of today a chance to experience what it was like
when the Walker sisters and their ancestors sat on the hard wooden
benches and learned the three R’s and felt the bite of a hickory
switch.
It may seem odd that modern children should enjoy so much a trip to
school. But enjoy it they do, for as they fidget on the wooden
benches or spell against each other in an old-fashioned “spelldown”
or read a mid-1800s dictionary that defines a kiss as “a salute with
the lips,” they enter into a past place and a past time. For a few
minutes, at least, they identify with the people who used to be here
in these Smokies—not “play-acting” but struggling to survive and
improve their lives.
The schoolhouse itself is old, built in 1882 out of poplar logs and
white oak shingles. Its single room used to double as a church for
the community, but now the two long, narrow windows on either side
open out onto the protected forest of the park. A woman stands in
the doorway, dressed in a pink bonnet and an old-fashioned, ankle-
length dress. She rings a cast iron bell. The children, who have been
out walking on this early spring morning, hear the bell and begin to
run toward it. Some of them see the school and shout and beckon
the others. In their hurry, they spread out and fill the clearing with
flashes of color and expectation. The woman in the doorway is their
teacher.
They have spanned a century and longer. They now live in more
worlds than one, because they have come to the place where their
spirit lives. It is again homecoming in the Great Smoky Mountains.
 Part 3

Guide and Adviser

 Traveling in the Smokies
“You can’t get there from here,” an oldtimer might tell you about
traveling in the Smokies, and you might think that’s true when you
get on some of the back roads in the area. But if you stick mostly to
the paved roads and use your auto map and the map in this book,
you should not have much or any trouble finding your way around
Great Smoky Mountains National Park.
The park, which is administered by the National Park Service, U.S.
Department of the Interior, is located along the border between North
Carolina and Tennessee. It can be reached by major highways in
both states and by the Blue Ridge Parkway, which connects the park
with Shenandoah National Park in Virginia. Newfound Gap Road, the
only road that crosses the park, connects Gatlinburg, Tennessee,
with Cherokee, North Carolina. It is closed to commercial vehicles.
There are just a few other roads within the park itself, so travel
between distant points is quite roundabout and time consuming. But
you will see plenty of nice scenery along the way. Because this
handbook focuses on the history of the area, the travel information
does, too. But by no means should you let the limited scope
presented here limit what you do. We encourage you to enjoy the
scenic views, flowers, shrubs, and wildlife as you travel to and
through the historic sites. For example, while you’re in the Cable Mill
area at Cades Cove, you might take the trail to Abrams Falls. It’s a
delightful short hike to a beautiful spot in the park. And if you take
the Roaring Fork Auto Tour, you might hike the 2.4 kilometers (1.5
miles) through a hemlock forest to Grotto Falls. There are plenty of
other short hikes in the park, and when you take them you may
come across decaying ruins of early settlements.
Visitor Centers
Park headquarters and the major visitor center are at Sugarlands,
3.2 kilometers (2 miles) south of Gatlinburg. Other visitor centers are
at Cades Cove and at Oconaluftee, both of which are prime historical
areas in the park. The Sugarlands and Oconaluftee centers are open
8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. during the winter, with extended hours the rest of
the year. The Cades Cove center, located in the Cable Mill area on
the loop road, is open from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. from mid-April through
October. Exhibits at the Cades Cove and Oconaluftee centers
feature the human history of the Smokies. The relative flatness of the
Cades Cove area makes this the best place to bicycle in the park.
Walks and Talks
Some of the guided walks and evening programs deal with history.
Check schedules at the visitor centers and campgrounds or in the
park newspaper.
Mountain lifeways and skills are demonstrated periodically from early
spring through October at the Pioneer Farmstead at Oconaluftee,
Cades Cove, Mingus Mill, and Little Greenbrier School. At
Oconaluftee you can walk through a typical Smokies farm and see
many of yesteryear’s household chores being demonstrated. At
Cades Cove, you can see, among other things, how sorghum and
wooden shingles were made. Millers seasonally operate the
gristmills near Oconaluftee and at Cades Cove. All of these
demonstrations indicate that the good old days were not easy ones.
Further Information
For more detailed travel and natural history information, see
Handbook 112, Great Smoky Mountains, in this National Park
Service series. This book and an extensive array of literature about
various aspects of the park are sold at the Sugarlands, Oconaluftee,
and Cades Cove visitor centers by a nonprofit organization that
assists the park’s interpretive programs. For a price list, write to:
Great Smoky Mountains Natural History Association, Gatlinburg, TN
37738.
Specific questions can be addressed to: Superintendent, Great
Smoky Mountains National Park, Gatlinburg, TN 37738. The
headquarters’ telephone number is (615) 436-5615.
Accommodations and Services
You can obtain gasoline, food, lodging, and camping supplies in
most communities near the park in both Tennessee and North
Carolina. Several campgrounds are located in both the park and in
the nearby towns.
Within the park, only LeConte Lodge and Wonderland Hotel offer
accommodations, and they are limited. A half-day hike up a
mountain trail is required to reach LeConte Lodge, which is open
from mid-April to late October. Rustic hotel accommodations and
food service are provided at Wonderland Hotel in Elkmont from June
1 to October 1.
Write to the chambers of commerce in the communities near the
park for general travel advice and for current information on the
availability of lodging facilities.
Safety
While touring the park’s historical sites, stay on the trails, keep
children under control, enjoy the farm animals at a distance, and stay
safely away from the millwheels and other machinery.
While traveling throughout the park, beware of the many black bears
no matter how tame they may appear. If they approach your vehicle,
keep the windows closed. Do not feed the bears!
And keep in mind that the weather can change quickly in the
Smokies and that hypothermia can strike not only in the winter but at
any season. Be careful not to become wet and/or chilled. Carry extra
clothing.
See Handbook 112, Great Smoky Mountains, for more precautions
and information about the black bear, hypothermia, and other
dangers.
Regulations
Roads within the park are designed for scenic driving, so stay within
the speed limits and be alert for slow vehicles and for others exiting
and entering. Pull off the roads or park only at designated areas.
Gasoline is not sold in the park, so be sure to fill your tank before
heading on a long trip.
Do not leave valuables inside a locked car where they can be seen.
Leave them home, take them with you when you leave your vehicle,
or lock them in the trunk.
Hunting is prohibited in the park. Firearms must be broken down so
they cannot be used. The use of archery equipment, game calls, and
spotlights also is prohibited.
All plants, animals, and artifacts are protected by Federal law here.
Do not disturb them in any way. Fishing is permitted subject to state
and Federal regulations and licensing.
All overnight camping in the backcountry requires a backcountry
permit. Otherwise, camp and build fires only in designated
campground sites.
We suggest that you do not bring pets. They are permitted in the
park but only if on a leash or under other physical control. They may
not be taken on trails or cross-country hikes. Veterinary services are
found nearby. If you want to board your pet during your stay here,
check with the nearby chambers of commerce.
 Oconaluftee

At the Pioneer Farmstead in Oconaluftee you can get

a glimpse of what daily farm life was like in the
Smokies. Besides the ongoing kitchen tasks, chores
included tending cows and chickens, cutting and
stacking hay, building and repairing barns and
wagons, and a thousand other things.

Self-sufficiency and individuality were strong traits in the Smokies.

Each person had to do a variety of tasks, and each family member
had to help or complement the others. Just as Milas Messer (see
pages 90-91) exemplified these traits personally, the Pioneer
Farmstead at Oconaluftee on the North Carolina side of the park
represents them structurally. Various buildings have been brought
here to create a typical Smokies farmstead on the banks of the
Oconaluftee River.
In the summer and fall farm animals roam about the farmstead and a
man and a woman carry out daily chores to give you an idea of what
the pioneers had to do just to exist. At first these Jacks- and Jills-of-
all-trades had no stores to go to. They made their own tools, built
their own houses and barns and outbuildings, raised their own food,
made their own clothes, and doctored themselves, for the most part.
The log house here is a particularly nice one, for John Davis built it
with matched walls. He split the logs in half and used the halves on
opposite walls. The two stone chimneys are typical of the earliest
houses. Davis’ sons, then 8 and 4, collected rocks for the chimneys
with oxen and a sled.
Behind the house is an essential building, the meathouse. Here
meat, mostly pork, was layered on the shelf at the far end and
covered with a thick coating of salt. After the meat had cured, it was
hung from poles, which go from end to end, to protect it from
rodents. In the early years especially, bear meat and venison hung
alongside the pork.
Apples were a big part of the settlers’ diet in a variety of forms: cider,
vinegar, brandy, sauces, and pies. And of course they ate them, too,
right off the tree. The thick rock walls on the lower floor of the apple
house protect the fruit from freezing in winter. The summer apples
were kept on the log-wall second floor.
The Indians’ maize, or corn, was the most essential crop on the
typical Smokies farmstead. Besides being used as food for livestock,
it was the staple for the pioneers themselves. With corn they made
corn bread, hoe cakes, corn meal mush, and even a little
moonshine. The harvested crop was kept dry in a corncrib until used.
As the pioneers became more settled and turned into farmers, they
built barns to provide shelter for their cows, oxen, sheep, and
horses, plus some of their farming equipment and hay. The large, log
barn at the Oconaluftee Farmstead is unusual. It is a drovers’ barn—
a hotel for cattle and other animals driven to market. The barn is
located close to its original site.
Most farmers had a small blacksmith shop where
they could bang out a few tools, horseshoes,
hinges, and, later on, parts for farm machinery.
These structures were not very sophisticated; they
just had to provide a little shelter so the fire could
be kept going and to protect the equipment—and
to keep the smith dry—during inclement weather.
The springhouse served not only as the source of
water but as a refrigerator. Here milk, melons, and
other foods were kept, many of them in large
crocks. The water usually ran through the
springhouse in one half of a hollowed out log, or in
a rock-lined trench. On hot, muggy days, a child
sent to the springhouse for food or water might
tarry a moment or two to enjoy the air conditioning.
The farmstead is open all year, but the house is
open only from May to November.
Cades Cove
 The Methodist Church, Cable Mill, and Gregg-Cable
house are just three of the many log or frame
structures still standing in Cades Cove today.
Just as Oconaluftee represents self-sufficiency and individuality,
Cades Cove illustrates those traits, plus something else: a sense of
community. Here individuals and families worked hard at eking out a
living from day to day, but here, too, everyone gathered together
from time to time to help harvest a crop, raise a barn, build a church,
and maintain a school. The structural evidence of this helping-hand
attitude still stands today in Cataloochee (see pages 154-155) and in
Cades Cove.
At its peak in 1850, Cades Cove had 685 residents in 132
households. A few years after that the population shrank to 275 as
the soil became overworked and as new lands opened up in the
West. Then the population rose again to about 500 just before the
park was established.
The State of Tennessee had acquired this land in 1820 from the
Cherokees and then sold it to speculators, who in turn sold plots to
the settlers. They cleared most of the trees and built their houses at
the foot of the surrounding hills. Corn, wheat, oats, and rye were
raised on the flat lands, whereas the slopes were used for pastures,
orchards, and vegetable gardens. The Park Service leases some of
the land here today to farmers to keep the cove open as it was in the
early settlement days.
In Cades Cove you will find some of the finest log buildings in
America. Some are original; the others come from elsewhere in the
park. The first log house on the 18-kilometer (11-mile)-loop-road tour
belonged to John and Lurena Oliver, who bought their land in 1826.
Their cabin, with its stone chimney and small windows, is typical of
many in the Smokies, and it remained in the Oliver family until the
park was established. A stone in the Primitive Baptist Church
cemetery just down the road commemorates John and Lurena, the
first permanent white settlers in the cove. The church was organized
in 1827, and the log building was used until 1887, though the
members, who were pro-Union, felt they had to shut it down during
the Civil War because of strong rebel sentiment.
The Methodist Church supposedly was built by one man, J. D.
McCampbell, in 115 days for $115, and after he was done he served
as its preacher for many years. The frame Missionary Baptist Church
was built in 1894 by a group that split from the Primitive Baptists in
1839 because it endorsed missionary work.
Elijah Oliver’s log house may well be one of the first split-levels. The
lower kitchen section off the back formerly was the home of the
Herron family and was brought here and attached to the main house.
This is a good place to see some of the many auxiliary structures
most families had: springhouse, barn, and smokehouse.
Many families also had a tub mill with which they could grind a
bushel of corn a day. When they had more corn to grind, they would
take it to a larger mill, such as John Cable’s. His was not the first
waterwheel mill in Cades Cove, but it is the only remaining one
today. It has been rehabilitated a few times, but the main framing,
the millstones, and some of the gears are original.
In the Cable Mill area are several other structures that have been
brought here from other parts of the park. Among them is the Gregg-
Cable house, possibly the first frame house in Cades Cove. It was
built by Leason Gregg in 1879 and later became the home, until her
death in 1940, of Becky Cable, John’s daughter. At different times
the house served as a store and a boardinghouse. The blacksmith
shop, barns, smokehouse, corncrib, and sorghum mill are
representative of such structures in the Smokies.
Heading east from the mill area, you come to the Henry Whitehead
and Dan Lawson places. At both you can see some of the best log
work, inside and out, within the park, and both have brick instead of
stone chimneys. These houses represent the transition between the
crude log house and the finer log house. Further down the road is
“Hamp” Tipton’s place, where you can see an apiary or bee gum
stand. Honey, sorghum, and maple syrup were common sweets for
folks in the Cove.
The last house on the loop road is the Carter Shields place, a one-
story log house with loft. This cabin is about the average size of
Smokies cabins, but it is a bit fancier than most with its beaded
paneling in the living room and a closed-in stairway.
The buildings in Cades Cove are open all year except for the
churches and a few other structures.