Mark Considine

Bureaucracy, Network, or Enterprise? Comparing Models of Governance in Australia, Britain, the Netherlands, and New Zealand

Theories of democratic government traditionally have relied on a model of organization in which officials act impartially, accept clear lines of accountability and supervision, and define their day–to–day activities through rules, procedures, and confined discretion. In the past 10 years, however, a serious challenge to this ideal has been mounted by critics and reformers who favor market, network, or “mixed–economy” models. We assess the extent to which these new models have influenced the work orientations of frontline staff using three alternative service types—corporate, market, and network—to that proposed by the traditional, procedural model of public bureaucracy. Using surveys of frontline officials in four countries where the revolution in ideas has been accompanied by a revolution in methods for organizing government services, we measure the degree to which the new models are operating as service–delivery norms. A new corporate–market hybrid (called “enterprise governance”) and a new network type have become significant models for the organization of frontline work in public programs.

The End of the Line? Accountable Governance in the Age of Networks, Partnerships, and Joined‐Up Services

In the standard works, accountability is defined as the legal obligation to respect the legitimate interests of others affected by decisions, programs, and interventions. This has usually meant that agencies obey those in the line of authority above them. However, the simplicity of this doctrine is often contradicted by the demands of contracting-out and output-based performance. Using interviews and surveys (n=1164) of front-line officials in Australia, the Netherlands, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom, this study examines accountability as different forms of responsiveness, obligation, and willingness to communicate with others. It compares traditional vertical accountability with new forms of horizontal recognition. The research shows that there is a high degree of regime consistency across these two dimensions. Horizontal accountability is mostly a problem when it is accompanied by competition between public and private agencies in the same policy fields.

Quasi-Markets and Service Delivery Flexibility Following a Decade of Employment Assistance Reform in Australia

In 1998, we were witnessing major changes in frontline social service delivery across the OECD and this was theorised as the emergence of a post-Fordist welfare state. Changes in public management thinking, known as New Public Management (NPM), informed this shift, as did public choice theory. A1998 study of Australias then partially privatised employment assistance sector provided an ideal place to test the impact of such changes upon actual service delivery. The study concluded that frontline staff behaviour did not meet all the expectations of a post-Fordist welfare state and NPM, although some signs of specialisation, flexibility and networking were certainly evident (Considine, 1999). Ten years on, in 2008, frontline staff working in Australias now fully privatised employment sector participated in a repeat study. These survey data showed convergent behaviour on the part of the different types of employment agencies and evidence that flexibility had decreased. In fact, in the ten years between the two studies there was a marked increase in the level of routinisation and standardisation on the frontline. This suggests that the sector did not achieve the enhanced levels of flexibility so often identified as a desirable outcome of reform. Rather, agencies adopted more conservative practices over time in response to more detailed external regulation and more exacting internal business methods.

Medicine, economics and agenda-setting

The filtering of potential policy issues from a large range of possibilities to a relatively small list of agenda items allows the organisation of power and influence within a policy sector to be examined. This study investigated power and influence in health policy agenda-setting in one State of Australia (Victoria) in the years 1991, 1992 and 1993. The actors seen as influential were predominantly medically trained and working in academia, health bureaucracies and public teaching hospitals. This research supports an elite model of health policy agenda-setting, in which outcomes are dependent on the structured interests within the policy field. However, while the corporate elite of the profession is influential, the frontline service providers are not, as indicated by the location of influentials in large and prestigious organisations. Politicians and professional associations and unions are less well represented, and consumer and community groups are virtually absent. In 1993 there was a sharp increase in economists being nominated as influentials, with a subsequent decrease in influentials with medical training. This relates to a (perceived or real) shift in influence from the medical profession to senior health bureaucrats. Economic concerns appear to be shaping the visible health policy agenda, through an increased number of influentials with economics training, but also through an apparent ability to shape the issues that other influentials are adding as agenda items. The corporate elite of medicine remains powerful, but their range of concerns has been effectively limited to cost containment or cost reduction, better planning and efficiency. This limiting of concerns occurs within an international policy context, where the general trends of globalisation and an emphasis on neo-liberal economics impact on the direction of health policy in individual countries.

Contract Regimes and Reflexive Governance: Comparing Employment Service Reforms in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, New Zealand and Australia

Contemporary debates concerning the nature of ‘new governance’ typically focus upon the shifting roles played by bureaucracies, networks and markets in the provision of public services (Kooiman 1993; Ormsby 1988). At the core of these recent changes we find a strong interest in having private agents deliver public services. Sometimes this is expressed as privatization and in other cases a ‘mixed economy’ of public and private participation may be devised (Williamson 1975; Moe 1984). In this study a number of central elements of neo-liberal public management are brought together in a single focus upon the ‘contract regime’ in order to examine the extent to which single initiatives might combine to produce a recognizable system of governance. Such an institutional form may then be more carefully specified and its impact compared in different governmental systems. Using a four-country comparison of employment service reform the study shows that distinctions based upon degree of privatization do not adequately explain regime types whereas distinctions based upon ‘compliance-centred’ or ‘client-centred’ forms of contracting are more powerful. The type of reflexive interaction between different elements or levels of contracting also explains country differences.

Markets, Networks and the New Welfare State: Employment Assistance Reforms in Australia

Contemporary theoretical debates point to a transformation of societies and social organisations away from universal forms of mass production and consumption, organised through mass institutions, towards smaller, diversified, entrepreneurial units linked together by new forms of market and network co-ordination. This greater diversity is also held to be a feature of service users who require individually fashioned solutions to non-standard problems and tailored products for their different tastes. Applications of these accounts of social and economic transformation to the public sector propose similar patterns to those evident in private industry and in regional communities. The large, standardised bureaucracy is seen to give way to de-coupled, multiple agency models of service delivery within a new type of welfare state. The study uses interviews and surveys (n = 365) with service delivery staff in the Australian employment assistance sector where transformations of this type have recently been sponsored by government. These data indicate that many of the key propositions of the post-Fordist account are valid. Smaller, non-unionised units dominate the new order and services are devolved to the local level. However a number of the expected patterns of flexible specialisation, diversity and networking are not found, suggesting marked differences and possible tensions between public and private sector forms of organisational development in the new order.

Market Bureaucracy? Exploring the Contending Rationalities of Contemporary Administrative Regimes

Abstract In the new ‘Post-Fordist’ public sector the previously accepted distinctions between the market and hierarchy are transformed by the advent of a new organisational form, the ‘market bureaucracy’. The article identifies four core characteristics of this new type and compares these to the organising principles of the three other administrative regimes found in contemporary public organisations. The article identifies unique patterns of selectivity as the central feature of the ‘market bureaucracy’ and argues that this is a system which is structured in direct response to problems of risk and taste. The ‘network bureaucracy’, on the other hand, provides an alternative model of restructure in which selectivity is based upon regional attributes and the guiding rationality of the administrative system is primarily cultural.

Networks and Interactivity

Abstract The systemic reform of employment services in OECD countries was driven by New Public Management (NPM) and then post-NPM reforms, when first-phase changes such as privatization were amended with ‘joined up’ processes to help manage fragmentation. This article examines the networking strategies of ‘street-level’ employment services staff for the impacts of this. Contrary to expectations, networking has generally declined over the last decade. There are signs of path dependence in networking patterns within each country, but also a convergence of patterns for the UK and Australia, but not The Netherlands. Networking appears to be mediated by policy and regulatory imperatives.

Innovation inside government: the importance of networks

This chapter delves into networks and their relationship to innovation inside government. The concept of ‘networks’ is investigated, and an analytical framework is established through which the role of networks in the innovation process can be explored. It is argued that there is value in adopting a network approach for the study of innovation inside government, since networks offer a novel approach to understanding issues of power as well as issues of innovation.

Front-line work in employment services after ten years of New Public Management reform: Governance and activation in Australia, the Netherlands and the UK

This study examines the impact of adminstrative reforms upon the work of frontline staff in the employment services of three refrom-oriented countries – Australia, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. These changes have involved greater use of private agents, more detailed performance contracts, clearer expectations about outcomes for job-seekers, and increased competition between agencies seeking government work. The study compares the work characteristics and strategies of front-line staff in agencies in the three systems in 2008 and a decade earlier, using surveys. The results show that there are substantial differences in the level of tailoring and investment in these countries. There are three relatively stable modes of governance in these cases and the most stable of these types across countries and across time is what we term the corporate-market mode – more generally labelled New Public Management (NPM). Despite the expectations of theorists and of reformers, the role of network governance proves neither as stable nor as generalised as expected.