THERE IS NO LONGER A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MANAGEMENT OF THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR

Authors Avatar

THERE IS NO LONGER A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MANAGEMENT OF THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR

The last twenty years have seen major changes within the public sector. The conservative government changes during the 1980’s to 1990’s saw them introduce improved services and long awaited improved efficiencies in the welfare state for instance. The reforms which took place by the conservative government, and latterly by the Labour government completely altered the way in which public sector management is carried out, thus leading us to the statement “There is no longer a difference between management of the public and private sector”.

Without a clear measurement of success, the public sector has often had measures imposed upon it in the form of performance indicators.  Such indicators usually concentrate on a quantitative approach, examining elements of service, which can be measured (e.g. school truancy levels, hospital waiting times).  Whilst many such indicators are important in the measurement of economy and efficiency, they are limited in accurately appraising effectiveness, which can only be properly examined through qualitative methods. The largest external influences resulting in the change in public sector in the last twenty years is political, legal, economic and socio cultural. The political agenda in the 1980’s had several core themes. In order to change the way public sector was being managed, the government needed to alter the whole culture of the public sector and initiate and implement quite radical reforms. The government realised that in order to implement more cost effective and radical changes, they had to look at the methods used within the private sector as an example and be the driving force behind the changes. One such change was to reduce the size of the public sector as a whole and of public spending.  The knock on effect of a reduction in public spending was a reduction in the Public Sector Borrowing Requirement. The inherent practices of the public sector had to be overhauled and a new approach was necessary to become more efficient, competitive, budget focused and overall more effective. A lot of revenue was being lost due to complacency, duplication, beurocracy, high numbers of staffing and monopolisation. It was necessary for the government to acknowledge that the private sector played a large part in their planned reforms due to their huge effect on the economy of the country, mainly due to their ability to resource private finance. Examples needed to be learned from the private sector and the reforms required stepping up a gear to be in line with the practices and utilities used within the private sector. It was the governments desire to create a mixed economy welfare state.  Competition within the public sector was necessary.  The public sector could not merely be fed money, an efficiency agenda was necessary.  The public sector needed to be reduced in size and become less complacent. The government further desired to break down and diminish dominant groups such as trade unions e.g. Nalgo/Unison and monopolies held by some professional groups e.g. medical professions.

In 1988 the Margaret Thatcher led Conservative government introduced the Education Reform Act (ERA).  This was arguably hailed as the most influential piece of education legislation since the 1944 Education Act.  It made the decisive break with welfare state principles (and) in contrast was about individual entrepreneurism and competitiveness, being achieved through bringing education into the market place by consumer choice. School funding was then directly linked to the number of pupils each school attracted and had in attendance.  The range of schools available to parents to consider for their children’s schooling was extended. The result was that the school budgets were set dependent upon the number of pupils it had in enrolled. According to Powell (Electronic Journal of Sociology 2002), during the period 1988-1996, market competition and consumer rights became the driving force behind educational reform. Ranson (1994:77) sums up the strategy for reform thus: "parent power in a market place of schools that are made more accountable to their consumers would improve educational standards”. The concept of competition was further embedded via the 1992 Education (Schools) Act and the 1993 Education (Schools Inspection) Regulations which set up the Office for Standards in Education (OFSTED). Failing schools could now be readily identified and parents as consumers could choose the best ‘educational products’ for their children. Performance management of schools was now a key element of the reforms.  Schools now had to publish and promote their exam and test results.  The performance of Health Trusts was also judged strongly against the standards of the Citizens Charter, which was introduced in 1991. The Citizens Charter 1991 was one such initiative which outlined the minimum standards citizens should expect from services, and introduced mechanisms to ensure that these were met (e.g. Charter Mark). John Major, addressing the Conservative Central Council in Southport, outlined plans for a "citizen's charter" to maintain standards and improve ''every part of the public services''. ''People who depend on public services - patients, passengers, parents, pupils, benefit claimants - all must know where they stand and what service they have a right to expect,'' he said. Labour then expanded on the charter, introducing their Best Value concept, and widely expanding their feedback programmes such as People’s Panel.

Join now!

Technology has also played a large part in efficiency gains and cost reductions in the public sector. The technological advances have afforded some public information/services to be available in an automated fashion, which has had a huge impact upon production, delivery and distribution of services. The internet has been a valuable tool and service delivery on-line has added to the approach organisations have taken with regard to market comparisons, competition and performance.  

The lack of under investment by the government in housing leading up to the 1980’s led to the implementation of the 1985 Housing Act. This allowed local ...

This is a preview of the whole essay