Higher Education Reform
The public sector has been reformed in all OECD countries during recent decades, with a view to ameliorating the efficiency, the effectiveness and the performance of public organisations (Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2000). In higher education (HE) similar re
- PDF / 292,845 Bytes
- 22 Pages / 612 x 792 pts (letter) Page_size
- 79 Downloads / 267 Views
2. HIGHER EDUCATION REFORM A Systematic Comparison of Ten Countries from a New Public Management Perspective
INTRODUCTION
The public sector has been reformed in all OECD countries during recent decades, with a view to ameliorating the efficiency, the effectiveness and the performance of public organisations (Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2000). In higher education (HE) similar reforms have taken place (Dobbins, Knill, & Vögtle, 2011) and these reforms have to a large extent been classified under the concept of New Public Management (NPM) (Hood, 1995). This chapter discusses NPM and investigates HE reform in 10 countries from an NPM perspective, thereby discerning (1) market-based reform, (2) budgetary reform, (3) autonomy and accountability related reform, and (4) leadership and governance reform. Until now the variable implementation of these reforms has been difficult to identify, basically due to a lack of systematic international comparison (Teichler, 2014). The present chapter seeks to counteract that deficit by identifying indicators for the four areas of reform and by using these indicators to scrutinize HE reforms in 10 different countries. We first highlight NPM, the criticism it has received and post-NPM concepts. Second, we define what NPM means in the HE sector. Third, we highlight the methodology. Fourth, reforms in the 10 countries are described. Fifth, we discuss the observed trends and the implications for NPM as a concept. NEW PUBLIC MANAGEMENT FOR PUBLIC SECTOR REFORM
Since the 1970s public administrations have been modernized to increase their efficiency and effectiveness, to enhance their performance and to orient their services more to the expectations of their citizens. This has led to the introduction of new, managerialist ideas in the public sector and has been called New Public Management (Pollitt, Van Thiel, & Homburg, 2007). Generally speaking, NPM stands for the idea that private practices, concepts, techniques and values can improve public sector performance (Hood, 1995). This perspective states the superiority of private sector techniques (such as hands-on management, entrepreneurship, performance management and audits, marketization) assuming that its implementation in the public sector automatically leads to an improved performance (Ferlie, R. M. O. Pritchard et al. (Eds.), Positioning Higher Education Institutions, 19–40. © 2016 Sense Publishers. All rights reserved.
B. Broucker et al.
Musselin, & Andresani, 2008; Gruening, 2001; Osborne, 2006; Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2000). NPM is also perceived as an umbrella concept, covering the implementation of reforms in many forms, with various levels of intensity and at different periods (Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2000). NPM has always had its opponents and advocates (Osborne, 2006). Hood (1991) posits that the advocates saw NPM as an answer to the old bureaucracy (see also Pollitt & Dan, 2011). The pro-NPM literature assumes that the application of business methods will result in a cheaper and more efficient public sector (Pollitt & Dan, 2011). The o
Data Loading...
