Failureof Canada’s New Public Management
TheNew Public Management, (NPM) is one of the development systems thatmost countries, agencies, and institutions use today. The system hasthe role of emphasizing the theory that the ideas employed in theprivate sector should be thriving in the public sector. Besides, NPMis also a more efficient way of achieving the same service or ratherproduct however, the citizens are considered as consumers while thepublic is the servers or administrators who hold the title of thePublic Manager (Jenkins,p,g98). Moreover, NPM, in other words, isdefined as a vision, philosophy or rather a pack of particularmanagement approaches and systems. NPM is a brand that incarcerates abroad range of reforms that is being motivated by the design thatprivate entity management methods and market mean to increase thepublic sector competence.
TheNPM variety reforms include, for example, quantification, the prefaceof performance running systems, the rise in the accountability ofpublic administrators, the introduction of market mechanisms to thepublic sector, the introduction of superior management methods amongothers (Hartle, p.g382). Under the New Public Management reforms, thegeneral managers can offer a broad range of choices as of which theconsumers can decide which includes opting out of the servicedelivery system entirely. This paper is set to discuss why the NewPublic Management reforms were not successful in Canada. It alsoincludes the impediments that NPM encountered. Furthermore, the paperalso is set to look at the innovations that emerged from NPM.
InCanada, the NPM reforms failed to work since there was a lack ofrationality amid the management program and the government’s widerpolicy and their fiscal schema, which is caused by the inefficiencyof political precedence in Canada to reform public service.Therefore, this explains why there is a limited success of the NPMreforms in Canada. Furthermore, in Canada, the management agenda hasnot been fully incorporated into the state’s budgetary program andits broad plan programs (Jenkins, p. 73-103). In Canada, thepolitical culture, public service management, and the related reformstend to catch the attention of political interest, hence sighted inpartisan terms, this means that there is a little political advantageperceptible in underneath the reforms.
Inthe government system of Canada, the management of the public serviceis usually shared by the chosen and appointed officials in thecountry. It symbolizes that the Ministers and the elected officialsare responsible for influencing the policies and the setting theoverall standards and the deep structure for most features ofcommunity service management. However, the management is mostly leftto the deputy ministers to manage the teams individually andcollectively, and this acts as a huge barrier towards the success ofthe NPM reforms in Canada. Most matters such as the community servicestaffing are a private sphere of influence of the appointed officials(Hartle, p. 366-382).
Anothermajor factor that led to unsuccessful reform of the NPM in Canada isthe lack of effective and efficient accountability for managementchange. When the reforms got introduced, the procedure of running thechange ran up against major obstacles in the country. There aresignificant flaws in the accountability processes for appraising thehuman resource management, and this is one of the major issues thatare significantly contributing to not having successful reforms inCanada (Jenkins, p. 73-103). Additionally, there is also restrictedprecise data available on the staff force and other more issues underthe human resource management. It is a result of the insufficiency ofskills and incompetency in handling the human resource data systemthat has to ensure information is successfully collected and used.
Furthermore,the change of leadership in Canada also is another challenge thatleads to unsuccessful NPM reforms. Different leaders come with thevarious aspects of power they have to prove to achieve what theprevious manager did not but also the new elected leaders might havedifferent interest while in authority hence not considering what wasalready in place. The change of management leads to high turnover oftop officials in the country. Moreover, this kind of change requiresconsistent direction which is far easier said than done with thecontinuous shifts at the summit (Hartle, p. 366-382).
Also,there is a weak relationship between the government and the unionswhich a major contributor to the unsuccessful NPM reform in Canada.In Canada, over the years the relationship amid the union and thegovernment is deteriorating hence making the unions less involvedwith the changes. It is brought about by the different goals thatboth have such as the extension of bargaining civil liberties so thatjob classification and staffing gets included. Therefore, this hashampered the two parties to jointly work together hence not beingable to put more effort as a team towards ensuring that the NewPublic Management reforms are successful in the Canada.
Nevertheless,there are no regular assessments of the progress due to the lack ofadministrative review. The parliament does not play a role in publicservice reform for extended time hence limiting its role in thecountry. The parliament has to ensure that human resource planningand management are incorporated into the departmental businessstrategy so to ensure the success of the NPM reforms (Hartle, p.366-382). Moreover, the progress must get regularly addressed so asto identify the problems which need a solution, and this means thatfull evaluation of the impacts of reform and renewal efforts must bechecked upon so as to ensure that the progress is notch high.
Despitethe fact that there are so many reasons towards not having successfulreforms in Canada, there were innovations that come upon during theimplementation of the reforms such as the market testing, which callsfor government associations to agree on whether their services couldbe conveyed perfectly by the private sector. The Citizen`s Charterinitiative, under which communal entities, which includes theagencies, have to give statements of the service principles that thepublic must be able to expect, and the performance pay, whichconnects part of a civil servant`s income to her annual performance(Mallory, p.g 516-529). Additionally, the groups have also got to setup a five-year financial plan setting out of their policy forlong-term progress and an annual commerce plan with details on howthey intend to get together their performance objectives.
Ina nutshell, New Planning Management reforms in any country are verycrucial. There are so many barriers that hinder the success of NPM inmany countries however, the obstacles can be solved by thegovernment because it is the key to ensuring the success of thereforms in any given country. There are specific constituents of NewPlanning Management that have become the archetypal replica forchanges projects international, hence setting up itself as aprototype for the transformation of public management making it verycrucial in any country.
Hartle,Douglas G. "The Reports of the Royal Commission on FinancialManagement and Accountability (The Lambert Report): A Review.Canadian Public Policy, No. 3, Summer 2012, p 366 to 382.
Jenkins,Bill, and Andrew Grey. "Reshaping of the Management of theGovernment: The Next Steps Initiative of the United Kingdom" F.Leslie Seidle, ed., The Rethinking Government: Reform or Reinvention?Institute for Research on Public Policy, Montreal, Quebec, 2014, p.73-103.
Mallory& James R.-The Lambert Report: Central Control andResponsibilities." Canadian Public Administration, No. 22,Winter 2011, p. 516-529.