BazEkon - Biblioteka Główna Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Krakowie

BazEkon home page

Meny główne

Autor
Chowdhury Anup (East West University, Bangladesh), Shil Nikhil Chandra (East West University, Bangladesh)
Tytuł
Innovation in Public Sector Management Control Systems in the Context of New Public Management : a Case of an Australian Public Sector Organization
Źródło
Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation (JEMI), 2016, vol. 12, nr 4, s. 99-125, tab., bibliogr. s. 119-124
Tytuł własny numeru
Innovations in Organizational Strategies
Słowa kluczowe
Innowacje, System kontroli, Kontrola zarządcza, Sektor publiczny, Nowe zarządzanie publiczne
Innovations, Control system, Management control, Public sector, New public management
Uwagi
streszcz., summ.
Kraj/Region
Australia
Australia
Abstrakt
Badania dotyczą analizy systemów kontroli zarządzania innowacjami w kontekście inicjatyw w obszarze Nowego Zarządzania Publicznego (New Public Management, NPM). Inicjatywy NPM wprowadziły zmiany w strukturze i procesach organizacji sektora publicznego, wspierając lepsze nimi zarządzanie. Do badań wybrano departament rządowy w Australijskim Terytorium Stołecznym. Badania opierają się na pojedynczej perspektywie teoretycznej - teorii strukturacji Giddensa, która pozwala zrozumieć systemy kontroli zarządczej w analizowanej organizacji. Metody badań jakościowych służą pogłębieniu zrozumienia analizowanych zjawisk. Analiza studium przypadku jest wykorzystywana w celu lepszego zrozumienia względnej roli kontroli w zarządzaniu działalnością organizacji. Badacze argumentują, że analizowana organizacja wdrożyła zróżnicowane narzędzia kontroli zarządczej w celu poprawy wyników, przejrzystości i odpowiedzialności. Niektóre z wdrożonych narzędzi kontrolnych stanowią innowacje w sektorze publicznym. Analiza studium przypadku pozwala wskazuje, że stosowane narzędzia kontroli menedżerskiej wpłynęły na poprawę funkcjonowania badanej organizacji, wspierając adopcję praktyk Nowego Zarządzania Publicznego. (abstrakt oryginalny)

This study is about the exploration of innovative management control systems in the context of New Public Management (NPM) initiatives. NPM initiatives created the changes to the structure and processes of public sector organizations with the objective of getting them to run better. A government department in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) has been selected as the field for investigation. This study draws on a single theoretical perspective, Giddens's structuration theory to understand the management control systems evolved in the researched organization. Qualitative research methodology is applied to obtain a better understanding of the phenomena. Case-based research method is used in developing a complete understanding of the relative role of controls in the management of organizational performance. In this study, it is argued that the researched organization has adopted various management control tools to improve its performance and demonstrate transparency and accountability. Some of the control tools it has adopted are the innovations in the public sector. It appears from the case that these adopted management control tools forced the researched organization towards better performance supporting the rationale of adopting New Public Management practices. (original abstract)
Pełny tekst
Pokaż
Bibliografia
Pokaż
  1. ACT Government. (1994). The Public Interest Disclosure Act. Australia: ACT.
  2. Alam, M., & Lawrence, S. (1994). A new era in costing and budgeting: Implications of health sector reform in New Zealand. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 7(6), 41-51.
  3. Alam, M. (2006). Stakeholder Theory. In Z. Hoque (Ed.), Methodological Issues in Accounting Research: Theories and Methods (pp. 207-222). UK: Spiramus Press Ltd.
  4. Alam, M., & Nandan, R. (2008). Management control systems and public sector reform: A Fijian case study. Accounting, Accountability and Performance,14(1), 1-28.
  5. Anthony, R. N., & Govindarajan, V. (2007). Management Control Systems. McGraw Hill Irwin, Boston Mass.
  6. Arthur, A. R. (2000). Employee assistance programmes: The emperor's new clothes of stress management. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 28(4), 549-559.
  7. Barrett, P. (2004). Financial management in the public sector- how accrual accounting and budgeting enhances governance and accountability. Address to the Challenge of Change: Driving Governance and Accountability, CPA Forum 2004, Australian National Audit Office.
  8. Baxter, J., & Chua, W. F. (2003). Alternative management accounting research - whence and whither. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 28(2-3), 97-126.
  9. Berry, A. J., Coad, A. F., Harris, E. P., Otley, D. T., & Stringer, C. (2009). Emerging themes in management control: A review of recent literature. British Accounting Review, 41, 2- 20.
  10. Bogdan, R. & Biklen, S. (1982). Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction to Theory and Methods. USA: Allyn and Bacon, Boston.
  11. Bourgon, J. (2008). The future of public service: A search for a new balance. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 67, 390-404.
  12. Broadbent, J., & Laughlin, R. (2005). The role of PFI in the UK government's modernisation agenda. Financial Accountability and Management, 21(1), 7597.
  13. Broadbent, J., & Guthrie, J. (2008). Public sector to public services: 20 years of contextual accounting research. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 21(2), 129-169.
  14. Brown, K., Waterhouse, J., & Flynn, C. (2003). Change management practices-is a hybrid model a better alternative for public sector agencies? The International Journal of Public Sector Management, 16(3), 230-241.
  15. Busco, C. (2009). Giddens' structuration theory and its implications for management accounting research. Journal of Management and Governance, 13(3), 249-260.
  16. Chenhall, R. H. (2003). Management control systems design within its organizational context: Findings from contingency-based research and directions for the future. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 28, 127168.
  17. Christiaens, J. & Rommel, J. (2008). Accrual accounting reforms: Only for businesslike (Parts of) governments. Financial Accountability & Management, 24(31), 59-75.
  18. Chua, W. F. (1988). Interpretive sociology and management accounting research - A critical review. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 1(2), 59- 79.
  19. Cooper, G. (2008). Conceptualising social life. In N. Gilbert (Ed), Researching Social Life (pp. 5- 20). London: Sage Publications.
  20. Corbett, D. (1996). Australian Public Sector Management. NSW: Allen & Unwin.
  21. Cresswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. California: Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks.
  22. DHCS (2006). Work Life Balance: Staff Guidelines. ACT, Australia.
  23. DHCS (2007). Union Collective Agreement 2007-2010. ACT, Australia.
  24. DHCS (2010- 2011). Budget Paper No. 4. ACT, Australia.
  25. Dooren, W. V. Bouckaert, W.G., & Halligan, J. (2010). Performance Management in the Public Sector, London: Routledge.
  26. Dunleavy, P. & Hood, C. (1994). From Old Public Administration to New Public Management. Public Money & Management, 9-16.
  27. Eckstein, H. (1975). Case study and theory in political science. In F. I. Greenstein & N. W. Polsby (Eds.), Strategies of inquiry (pp. 79-137). Addison- Wesley.
  28. Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Building theories from case study research. The Academy of Management Review, 14 (4), 532-550.
  29. Farnham, D., Horton, S., & White, G. (2003). Organizational change and staff participation and involvement in Britain's public services. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 16(6), 434- 445.
  30. Flinders, D. J. (1993). From Theory and Concepts to Educational Connoisseurship. In D. J. Flinders and G. E. Mills (Eds.), Theory and Concepts in Qualitative Research: Perspectives from the Field (pp. 117140), Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  31. Gaffkin, M. (2007). Accounting research and theory: The age of neo-empiricism. Australasian Accounting Business and Finance Journal, 1(1), 1-19.
  32. Gaffkin, M. (2008). Accounting Theory: Research, Regulation and Accounting Practice. NSW: Pearson Education, Frenchs Forest.
  33. George, A. L. (1979). Case studies and theory development: The method of structured, focused comparison. In P. G. Lauren (Ed.), Diplomacy: New approaches in history, theory, and policy (pp. 43-68), New York: Free Press.
  34. Giddens, A. (1976). New Rules of Sociological Method: A Positive Critique of Interpretative Sociologies. New York: Basic Books, Inc.
  35. Giddens, A. (1979). Central Problems in Social Theory. London: The Macmillan Press Ltd.
  36. Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  37. Girishankar, N. (2001). Evaluating Public Sector Reform: Guidelines for Assessing Country-Level impact of Structural Reform and Capacity Building in the Public Sector. World Bank Operation Evaluation Department, The World Bank, Washington.
  38. Groot, T., & Budding, T. (2008). New public management's current issues and future Prospects. Financial Accountability & Management, 24(1), 1-13.
  39. Hesse-Biber, S. N., & Leavy, P. (2006). The Practice of Qualitative Research. London: Sage Publications.
  40. Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons. Public Administration, 69, 3-19.
  41. Hood, C. (1995). The new public management in the 1980's: variations on a theme. Accounting, organizations and Society, 20(2/3), 93-109.
  42. Hoque, Z. (2005). Securing institutional legitimacy or organizational effectiveness? A case examining the impact of public sector reform initiatives in an Australian local authority. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 18(4), 367-382.
  43. Hoque, Z. (2006). Dealing with human ethical issues in research: Some advice. In Z. Hoque (Ed.), Methodological Issues in Accounting Research: Theories and Methods (pp. 487-497), UK: Spiramus Press Ltd.
  44. Hoque, Z., & Adams, C. (2011). The rise and use of balanced scorecard measures in Australian government departments. Financial Accountability and Management, 27, 308-334.
  45. Hughes, O. (1995). The new public sector management: A focus on performance. In J. Guthrie (Ed.), Making the Australian Public Sector Count in the 1990s (pp. 140-143), NSW: IIR Conferences Pty Ltd.
  46. Hussain, M. M., & Hoque, Z. (2002). Understanding non-financial performance measurement practices in Japanese banks: A new institutional sociology perspective. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 15(2), 162183.
  47. Irvine, H., & Gaffikin, M. (2006). Methodological insights: Getting in, getting on and getting out: Reflections on a qualitative research project. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 19(1), 115-145.
  48. Jacobs, K. (2012). Making sense of social practice: theoretical pluralism in public sector accounting research. Financial Accountability & Management, 28(1), 1- 25.
  49. Jansen, E. P. (2004). Performance measurement in governmental organizations: A contingent approach to measurement and management control. Managerial Finance, 30(8), 54-68.
  50. Jorgensen, D. L. (1989). Participant Observation: A Methodology for Human Studies. London: Sage Publications.
  51. Kaplan, D., & Manners, R. (1986). Culture Theory. USA: Waveland Press Prospect Heights, IL.
  52. Kinchin, N. (2007). More than writing on a wall: Evaluating the role that codes of ethics play securing accountability of public sector decision-makers. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 66, 112- 120.
  53. Layder, D. (1995). New Strategies in Social Research: An Introduction and Guide. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  54. Llewelyn, S. (2003). Methodological issues - what counts as "theory" in qualitative management and accounting research? Introducing five levels of theorizing. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 16(4), 662-708.
  55. Lodh, S. C., & Gaffkin, M. J. R. (1997). Critical studies in accounting research, rationality and habermas: A methodological reflection. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 8(5), 433-474.
  56. Luke, B. G. (2008). Financial returns from new public management: A New Zealand perspective. Pacific Accounting Review, 20(1), 29- 48.
  57. Macintosh, N. B., &Scapens, R. W.(1990). Structuration theory in management accounting. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 15(5), 455-477.
  58. Maddock, S. (2002). Making modernisation work: new narratives, change strategies and people management in the public sector. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 15(1), 13-43.
  59. Maor, M. (1999). The paradox of managerialism. Public Administration Review, 59(1), 5-18.
  60. Martin, J., & Coventry, H. (1994). Human resource management: From structural change to managerial challenge. In J. Stewart (Ed.), From Hawke to Keating- Australian Commonwealth Administration 1990-1993 (pp. 69-83), Centre for Research in Public Sector Management, University of Canberra & Royal Institute of Public Administration Australia.
  61. Mascarenhas, R. C. (1996). The evolution of public enterprise organization: A critique. In J. Halligan (Ed.), Public Administration Under Scrutiny: Essays in Honour of Roger Wettenhall (pp. 59-76),, Centre for Research in Public Sector Management, University of Canberra and Institute of Public Administration, Australia.
  62. Mason, J. (2002). Qualitative Researching, London: Sage Publications Ltd.
  63. Maxwell, J. A. (2009). Designing a qualitative study. In L. Bickman and D. J. Rog (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Applied Social Research Methods (pp. 214- 253), London: Sage Publications.
  64. Merchant, K. A., & Van der Stede, W. A. (2012). Management Control Systems. Pearson Education Limited.
  65. Metcalfe, L., & Richards, S. (1992). Improving Public Management. London: Sage Publications.
  66. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. London: Sage Publications.
  67. Modell, S. (2004). Performance measurement myths in the public sector: A research note. Financial Accountability & Management, 20(1), pp. 39-55.
  68. Moon, J. M. (2000). Organizational commitment revisited in new public management. Public Performance & Management Review, 24(2), 177194.
  69. Moynihan, D. P. (2006). Managing for results in state government: Evaluating a decade of reform. Public Administration and Review, 66(1), 77- 80.
  70. Mulgan, R. (2000). Comparing accountability in the public and private sectors. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 59(1), 87-97.
  71. Mulgan, G. & Albury, D. (2003). Innovations in the public sector. Cabinet Office Strategy Unit, United Kingdom Cabinet Office.
  72. OECD. (1995). Governance in Transition: Public Management Reforms in OECD Countries. OECD, Paris.
  73. Osborne, D., & Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit Is Transforming the Public Sector, Addison- Wesley, Reading, MA.
  74. Parker, L. D., & Guthrie, J. (1993). The Australian public sector in the 1990s: New accountability regimes in motion. Journal of International Accounting Auditing & Taxation, 2(1), 59-81.
  75. Perrons, D. (2003). The new economy and the work-life balance: Conceptual explorations and a case study of new media. Gender, Work & Organization, 10, 65-93.
  76. Piotrowski, S. J., & Rosenbloom, D. H. (2002). Nonmission-based values in results-oriented public management: The case of freedom of information. Public Administration Review, 62, 643-657.
  77. Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2004). Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis. Oxford University Press.
  78. Quattrone, P., & Hopper, T. (2001). What does organizational change mean? Speculations on a taken for granted category. Management Accounting Research, 12(4), 403-435.
  79. Robbins, G. (2007). Obstacles to implementation of new public management in an Irish hospital. Financial Accountability & Management, 23(1), 5571.
  80. Roberts, A. S. (2000). Less government, more secrecy: reinvention and the weakening of freedom of information law. Public Administration Review, 60, 308-320.
  81. Schutz, A. (1967). Collected Papers. Monton.
  82. Simons, R. (1995). Levers of control: how managers use innovative control systems to drive strategic renewal. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Massachusetts.
  83. Stake, R. E. (1995). The Art of Case Study Research. London: SAGE Publications.
  84. Tooley, S. (2001). Observations on the imposition of new public management in the New Zealand state education system. In L. R. Jones, J. Guthrie, & P. Steane (Eds.), Research in Public Policy Analysis and Management. Learning from International Public Management Reform (pp. 233-255), 11-A Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, Oxford.
  85. Walker, R. M., & Boyne, G. A. (2010). Introduction: determinants of performance in public organizations. Public Administration, 87(3), 433-439.
  86. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. California: Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks.
Cytowane przez
Pokaż
ISSN
2299-7075
Język
eng
URI / DOI
http://dx.doi.org/10.7341/20161245
Udostępnij na Facebooku Udostępnij na Twitterze Udostępnij na Google+ Udostępnij na Pinterest Udostępnij na LinkedIn Wyślij znajomemu