Louise Bringselius

Professionalism and organizational performance in the wake of new managerialism

With New Public Management came the idea that public organizations should be led by professional managers, rather than by professionals. This has been referred to as new managerialism. This article explores how new managerialism may affect professional autonomy in a public organization that enjoys a high – and constitutionally protected – degree of organizational autonomy. A framework distinguishing between organizational and occupational professionalism is adopted, in a 10-year case study of the Swedish National Audit Office (SNAO). The study shows how the autonomy of professionals at the SNAO was highly restricted, while management control systems were continuously expanded. At the same time, SNAO performance has been reduced. For example, the SNAO has been criticized for its high overhead costs. The study presented in this article, shows the complex interplay between professionalism, new managerialism, and organizational performance. Based on the findings from this study, the article maintains that it is equally important to consider how autonomy is distributed within agencies, as it is to consider how autonomy is distributed between the political sphere and the administration, when trying to explain organizational performance.

The Voice of Professionals—Lost in Evaluation?

Based on the merger of two Swedish university hospitals, this article examines the relationship between professionals and policymakers in public sector reform. Data from a survey to 663 physicians show that only 2 percent of physicians experienced a working dialogue in this relationship. The relationship with the hospital management was considered equally poor. The article seeks to understand why the voice of professionals was ignored. Results indicate that managers and policymakers collaborated—rather than competed—to avoid blame, by consequently ignoring the professionals’ feedback and attempts at whistle-blowing. This blame-avoidance strategy differs from that traditionally described in the agency literature. More studies in this area are encouraged.

Gaining Legitimacy as a Public Official: The Case of Supportive Employee Attitudes to the Standardization of Work

The standardization of work processes is a common feature of the public administration, aiming at both efficiency and equal treatment of citizens. Combining this standardization with employee motivation is considered a challenge. This challenge is explored, based on a survey to 261 social insurance officers (SIOs) at the Swedish Social Insurance Agency. Results reveal that, contrary to expectations, 73 per cent of these officials perceived the standardized protocols as supportive, rather than burdening. Justifications were codified in order to identify factors affecting these attitudes. Four categories emerged. These factors are discussed and it is concluded that the standardization of work increased professional status, by providing with legitimacy and authority. However, in order to ensure compliance and increase professional status, better opportunities for officials to influence protocols and contribute to the shared knowledge base are required.

Efficiency, economy and effectiveness—but what about ethics?: Supreme audit institutions at a critical juncture

Ethics is increasingly recognized as one of several important dimensions of performance. Yet, performance audit, or value-for-money audit, as conducted by supreme audit institutions (SAIs), does not typically include this dimension. Instead, the focus is on the classical ‘three Es’ (efficiency, economy and effectiveness). The reluctance to address issues of ethical misconduct has taken the audit practice of SAIs to a critical juncture, where the legitimacy of these audits ultimately is at stake. This paper explains why SAIs need to add a fourth ‘E’— ethical audit. Possible implications are discussed.