1. ‘Management is management – wherever it is’
· Each derives from same set of principles (Scientific management?)
· Each has stakeholders which management must manipulate:
e.g.
Governments Investors Political Groups
æ â å
Suppliers à FIRMS ß Customers
ä á ã
Trade Associations Employees Communities
You can read about stakeholding here
Definition of stakeholding
“stakeholder theory
The theory that a firm should be run in the interests of all its stakeholders rather than just the shareholders.
stakeholder
Loaded
term now widely used to mean someone who has a real or psychological ‘stake’ in
an organisation: used to include anyone who has significant dealings with it,
such as customers, employees, suppliers, distributors, joint venture partners,
the local community, bankers and shareholders. It is generally a
normative rather than a descriptive term, implying that the user believes that
a number of stakeholders have a right to determine what happens within an
organization, and more particularly in a firm, rather than just the owners.” (Crainer
1995)
·
In the case of public sector managers, the concept is
the same but the stakeholders
change
·
Griffith’s enquiry view…(Management of the NHS)
’In many organisations in the private sector, profits do not impinge on large
numbers of people below board level.
They are concerned with levels of service, quality of product, meeting
budgets, cost improvement, productivity, motivating and rewarding staff, and
the long run viability of the undertaking’
· Public goods (street lighting, higher education)
· Increasing returns to scale (provision of utilities such as water)
·
Merit goods (Provides benefits to
society as a whole: education,
defence)
·
Information asymmetries (health,
welfare – professionals have the power to
exploit)
Rose,A. and Lawton,A.(1999): Public Services Management
Individual choice in the market Collective choice in the polity
Demand and price Need for resources
Closure for private action Openness for public action
The equity of the market The equity of need
The search for market satisfaction The search for justice
Customer sovereignty Citizenship
Competition as an instrument of the market Collective action as instrument of the polity
Exit as the stimulus Voice as the condition
· Equity
The ‘equity of the market’ versus the ‘equity of need’ and the provision of service to all
This was claimed to be a big distinction – but is it now fading?
You can read the summary or, indeed, the whole Report
· Public service organisations have complex and often competing objectives
Values of efficiency, robustness and equity may collide.
Even within one value system (efiiciency) we can have a collision between economy, efficiency and effectiveness ( we can teach more students efficiently but not as effectively)
· Public services are subject to high degrees of external controls
Inspection include central government, Audit Commission, Best value, Comprehensive Performance Assessment, locally elected members (councillors), the press. Moreover, the legislative framework indicates what can/cannot be done but also how things should be done.
Transparency and openness are more apparent in the public sector than in their private sector counterparts
1. An academic’s
view Public v. Private Management is given by Lynn
(2001) and the
whole document in Public Management
2. A Management Today (Australia) article argues for
increasing similarities between public
and private sectors
3. The financial
rewards given to firms who supply services (not always efficiently!) to the
public sector tends to outstrip
those of their public sector counterparts
(‘More
money, less risk’)
4. Customer
Relationship Marketing (CRM) differences in the public v. private sector is
discussed in CRM
Hot Topic: Public Sector v. Private Sector
—end—