Algorithmic Bureaucracy: Managing Competence, Complexity, and Problem Solving in the Age of Artificial Intelligence

Public administration and governance must adapt to the changing socio-economic environment, improving quality, process efficiency, and collaboration. Hence, public administration and public governance models have been significantly modified multiple times, resulting in differences in public governance practices. This paper examines different public governance models’ principles in Slovene and Japanese public administration. It quantifies elements based on the models' principles and applies them to an empirical case using a survey of 55 Slovene and 135 Japanese public managers. The independent samples t-test examines the differences in characteristics of public governance practices between state administration and local government in Slovenia and Japan. The results show that state administration institutions in both countries are strongly characterised by the (Neo)Weberian model’s principles, while Slovenia's local government leans towards Digital-era governance (DEG) and good governance (GG) principles. Japan's state and local administrations show equal presence of New public management (NPM), DEG, and GG models. The study aims to bridge a research gap by providing new findings on how different public governance models can be found at various Slovene and Japanese public administration levels and offers insights for public managers and policymakers for future public administration reforms.

This chapter introduces the ‘New Digital Era Governance’ as a new paradigm in public administration scholarship by compounding on the changing roles of digital technologies in public governance. Particularly, the chapter highlights the challenges inflicted upon public administration and society with the advancements of new digital technologies, such as big data, artificial intelligence, and blockchain. By comparing the changing role of digital technologies in government functions, public value creation, human resources, and governance, the chapter asserts that the theoretical and practical implications of ‘New Digital Era Governance’ differ from Dunleavy et al.’s ‘Digital Era Governance’.

This article argues that Thailand’s public-sector digitalisation has so far failed to realise the principles of Digital Era Governance (DEG) because it remains institutionally and politically anchored in New Public Management (NPM) logic. Rather than enabling platform-based integration and citizen-centric services, digital initiatives have often reproduced audit-centric, siloed practices that prioritise measurable outputs and compliance. Using a policy-analytic approach, document review of national strategies and agency plans, and synthesis of recent literature and sectoral case examples; the article identifies three mechanisms by which NPM logic is perpetuated in Thailand’s digital transition: (1) proliferation of discrete applications driven by performance reporting and agency visibility; (2) digital tools as instruments of control and compliance rather than coordination; and (3) governance fragmentation and weak interoperability governance. The paper concludes with targeted policy recommendations to reorient Thailand’s digitalisation toward DEG: consolidate digital architecture around shared platforms and standards, redesign performance regimes to reward integration and outcomes, and strengthen cross-agency data governance.

The literatures on public management and on the characteristics of policy instruments have developed independently. The two literatures should, however, be related, given that instruments are rarely capable of being effective in implementing policy without adequate management. Further, public management should be understood in the context of achieving policy goals and hence of a relationship to policy. This article makes a preliminary linkage of those two approaches to policy and administration. It demonstrates that each approach helps to illuminate the other and also helps to understand contemporary reforms in the public sector.

Over the past decades there has been a remarkable paradigm shift in Public Administration. Traditional Public Administration was in dire need for a change of a New Public Administration (NPA) approach in the 1980s. From early 2000s, the NPA began to be subjected to heavy criticism, which influenced public administration to take complete control of different reforms and approaches regardless of their diversity, complexity, hybrid and contradictory situations rather than offering the perfect approach and reform to the public sector. The New Public Management (NPM) and Post-New Public Management (Post-NPM) paradigms emerged in times whereby the NPA was already experiencing a massive deconstruction and reconfiguration of the public sector management. To scan and understand the remarkable paradigm shift in the field and practice of public administration, this study applies both NPM and Post-NMP to examine different views, principles, values and norms, and reform proposals for South African Public Administration. Methodologically, this study used qualitative research methods with the aid of secondary data to evaluate both the NPM and post-NPM paradigms, criticisms, arguments, challenges, and changes in public policy implementations. Recommendations are provided based on the existing challenges confronting the current public administration in South Africa. This study contributes to literature, new policy proposals and research within public administration.

Within the broader field of public administration, no topic has been more controversial in recent years than that of the new public management (NPM) or managerialism. Books, journals, conferences have abounded on this theme and its variants. As could be expected, there is much confusion, much argument, much in the way of contrary claims. There is even some doubt as to whether there is any change at all. For example, Lynn (1996) argues that he is skeptical as to whether new public management is an international phenomenon or even a phenomenon at all. From the perspective of the UK, New Zealand and Australia, such claims seem to fly in the face of what has happened. There has been a period of managerial reform unlike any other this century. While it can be argued that 'the pace of change is greater in some countries, for example New Zealand, Australia and the UK than in others, such as the US and Germany' (Nunberg, 1995, p. 4), this is only a partial answer. It is also possible, along with the institutional differences that might slow the pace of change, that the debate over the new public management shows a further decline in the explanatory power of public administration. From being a world leader over much of the twentieth century, public administration, particularly American public administration has been left behind. Practical inventions are evidenced more in other countries, while intellectual leadership may have passed to institutional economics. The May/June 1998 issue of Public Administration Review advertised a 'symposium* where a number of writers - including another article by Lynn (1998) - put forward their arguments about the new public management. While many cogent points are made, the overall point seems to be missed. At the same time as there is little more than academic debate in the US, the public services in other countries have been transformed and, in some cases, torn apart. There are theoretical changes of some moment in other countries that have not received the attention or understanding they deserve. Something has happened in recent years. Whether or not it is a change of paradigm, or mere reform, or even business as usual is open to debate. The aim here is to look at NPM from a parliamentary perspective, and more particularly an Antipodean one, where more change has occurred than in the US. Rather than the absence of marked change in the US - contra Osborne and Gaebler (1992) and Gore (1993) - being proof that the new public management is a flawed set of reforms, it is argued that what has happened is another kind of American exceptionalism. Despite being the original home of much of the theory behind NPM, particularly economic theory, the political system in the US diffuses and ameliorates major change of any kind. The effects of NPM can be seen more clearly in parliamentary systems where elected governments have far more effective power over their bureaucracies.

There are different interpretations of which core values e-government build on and promote. Some scholars see egovernment as a direct follower to New Public Management (NPM), and as such supporting and promoting values and principles from the business sector. Others see e-government as a promoter of bureaucratic values supporting and promoting the values of traditional weberian ideal bureaucracy. The main issue in this paper is management strategy for public administration. Three examples of such management strategies are examined and compared: traditional bureaucracy, New Public Management and e-government. When investigating these strategies it is necessary to distinguish between strategy as idea and strategy in action. Core values of the management strategies are reconstructed and used as a lens through which a case study of e-government is analyzed. The implemented egovernment-solution comprise values from both NPM and bureaucracy. Neither bureaucracy nor NPM alone supply the core values for e-government as a practical management strategy. The paper concludes with a dialectical structure where Bureaucracy is the thesis, NPM the anti-thesis and e-government the practical synthesis.

The study focused on the role played by public sector management in South Africa towards the country’s total development and improvement. This article also analyses how through the Whole School Evaluation (WSE) process, the education system in South Africa seeks to ensure that the schooling is effective. This paper examines public management, public administration as well as new public management (NPM). The aim is to illustrate a view of how education fits in the broader public management and how the WSE process assists schooling in South Africa and Mpumalanga in particular. This is to ensure that the schooling is effective and contribute towards service delivery and the country’s overall development and improvement. Furthermore, WSE as a process, is viewed through five of NPM undisputable and debatable characteristics of accountability for performance; performance measurement; performance auditing; policy analysis and evaluation; and strategic planning and management. Public management functions and public management principles are discussed from a point of how the WSE process strives to ensure that it complies with these function and principles, and how this compliance benefit school improvement. This paper came to a number of conclusions regarding education within public management from a WSE perspective. Firstly, education through the external WSE process conforms to this principle of New Public Management in that evaluation is aimed at improving the quality of education. Also, the external WSE, as a process, and education in general, through the NPM principles can be performed within public management. Furthermore, external WSE conforms to public management principles as well as Batho Pele principles.

There are evaluated the problems of welfare models relation to public administration models by presenting the notions of traditional-hierarchical, new public management and new governance models and their relation to welfare models. There are presented also the countries cases of social policy, which represent the “nearest states”– standing closest to “ideal welfare models”. The aim of the article is to analyse welfare states comparison possibilities and to what to refer in their comparison. There is stressed the difference between “ideal welfare states models” and these models, which are found in the real life. KEY WORDS: welfare state, social policy, public administration, new public management, new governance.

‘Classical’ public administration theories, principles and paradigms continually fascinate scholars given their relevance to government practices especially in Africa. As used here, ‘public administration’ (in lower case) denotes government activities whereas ‘Public Administration’, often associated with Woodrow Wilson’s renowned 1887 essay, refers to the subject matter. However, New Public Management (NPM) dominated Public Administration from the 1970s-1990s when it was replaced by ‘Governance’. This article examines Public Administration theory, practice and related theories and how the centuries-old discipline developed from their introduction, interpretation and application in the public sector during each era. It will conclude that these developments have had mixed consequences for Africa, on which the article focuses, owing largely to the effect of colonialism on the continent’s public administration. Using the selected examples of African countries’ experiences, this article relies on a qualitative and literature analysis of the issues discussed. Africa, like other ‘Third World’ or developing regions, is largely perceived as a consumer of the mostly western-dominated or inclined Public Administration, New Public Management and governance models which it inherited primarily through colonialism. Key words: Public administration theory, new public management, governance, Africa.

Performance management has become a ubiquitous part of public administration thanks to the New Public Management (NPM) reforms, which were introduced in Anglo-Saxon countries at the end of the 20th century and diffused later into different settings (e.g. the EU). It plays a central role in improving public sector management and fixing bureaucratic issues. This entry discusses the key ideas about performance management in public administration. It first demonstrates the background, definition and development of the concept of performance over the last decades. It examines the link between performance and NPM and the debate surrounding its definition and multi-dimensional nature in the public context. It briefly describes three successively evident multidimensional performance measurement frameworks: Inputs- Outputs-Outcomes (IOO), Balanced Scorecard (BSC) and Total Quality Management (TQM). The entry also notes the recent studies of identifying new dimensions for measuring performance. The entry concludes with a demonstration of the main challenges to integrating performance into public administration management.

The article provides an overview of the evolution of public administration paradigms, focusing on the transition from Classical Public Administration to New Public Management (NPM) and the emergence of Public-Private Partnerships (PPP). It discusses how NPM, which originated in the 1980s, sought to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of public services by incorporating principles from the private sector. Key features of NPM include decentralization, increased accountability, and a strong emphasis on results and performance metrics. Furthermore, the concept of Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) arose as a response to the limitations of privatization policies. PPPs involve collaboration between the public and private sectors to deliver services or implement projects, sharing both risks and responsibilities. The article traces the historical development of PPPs and highlights their widespread adoption in various sectors globally, such as infrastructure, healthcare, and education. By leveraging the strengths of both sectors, PPPs aim to improve service delivery and project implementation, offering a more flexible and innovative approach to public administration. The article underscores the significance of these paradigms in shaping contemporary public administration, illustrating how NPM and PPPs have redefined roles, responsibilities, and methodologies within the field. Overall, it highlights the shift towards more dynamic, flexible, and results-oriented approaches in public sector management, reflecting broader trends in governance and public policy.

The impact the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) has on business has been considered by various authors, such as Jones and Higgins (2006). However, there has not been the same research conducted with respect to local government. As Australia and New Zealand are leading the world by being the first to introduce IFRS into local government financial reporting, this study is timely in order todetermine the impact of compliance on local government. With the New Public Management (NPM) introduced in the late 1970s, accrual accounting and the desire to enhance transparency became embedded in financial reporting across the world. The paper adds to the growing literature on institutional theory with results of the study suggesting that a form of coercive isomorphism is present in regards to local government compliance with IFRS. It also suggests that the philosophy behind NPM – especially that espousing the benefits of public sector reporting in a private sector vein–may not be as relevant to Australian local government as the policy makers would have us believe. The thrust to implement IFRS may have finally pushed local government into a world they struggle to cope with. For example, findings indicate that there is now, more than ever, a perception in the community that the bottom line is an important indicator of a council's performance. Results reported here determined that the implementation process was time-consuming and costly with, in general, very little perceived benefit. Councils are conforming to the coercive pressure from legislative bodies, but they are not converging as part of the ‘transaction-neutral’ reporting regime.

This research paper presents a comprehensive overview of paradigm shifts in public administration over time and their implications for public service delivery. The paper starts with the Old Public Administration and moves into the New Public Management. It then delves into post-NPM trends, including the New Public Service, New Public Governance, Public Value Management, Digital Era Governance, and the Whole of Government approach. Each paradigm is discussed in detail, highlighting its unique features and their effects on public service delivery. Overall, this paper makes a significant contribution to the field of public service, offering valuable insights for policymakers, administrators, service providers, scholars, and practitioners.

The Impact of Health Sector Reform on State and Society in Bangladesh, 1995-2005