In recognition of its 20th anniversary, The IBM Center for the Business of Government offers a retrospective of the most significant changes in government management during that period and looks forward over the next 20 years to offer alternative scenarios as to what government management might look like by the year 2040. Part I will discuss significant management improvements in the federal government over the past 20 years, based in part on a crowdsourced survey of knowledgeable government officials and public administration experts in the field. It will draw on themes and topics examined in the 350 IBM Center reports published over the past two decades. Part II will outline alternative scenarios of how government might change over the coming 20 years. The scenarios will be developed based on a series of envisioning sessions which are bringing together practitioners and academics to examine the future. The scenarios will be supplemented with short essays on various topics. Part II will also include essays by winners of the Center’s Challenge Grant competition. Challenge Grant winners will be awarded grants to identify futuristic visions of government in 2040. Contributions by Mark A. Abramson, David A. Bray, Daniel J. Chenok, Lee Feldman, Lora Frecks, Hollie Russon Gilman, Lori Gordon, John M. Kamensky, Michael J. Keegan, W. Henry Lambright, Tad McGalliard, Shelley H. Metzenbaum, Marc Ott, Sukumar Rao, and Darrell M. West.
Getting It Done was written for those who have answered the call to public service. Now, in this 2017 edition, the editors of IBM’s Center for The Business of Government series have assembled a comprehensive guide to navigating the current environment of government, and what government leaders ought to know to survive and thrive with respect to the ways it’s evolved over the years. Concise analyses of the roles and responsibilities of those involved in any political decision accompany informative and instructional chapters, each highlighting a key step any public servant must take to ensure they do all they can for the people and causes they represent. From the patient and careful study of an issue, to the assembly of a trusted advisory team and the development and execution of a focused vision and agenda, leaders of all kinds will find some part of this book to incorporate into their own leadership strategies, for which this book’s expert and pragmatic insights prove a refreshing boon.
For almost a half a century, scholars and practitioners have debated what the connections should be between public administration and the public. Does the public serve principally as citizen-owners, those to whom administrators are responsible? Are members of the public more appropriately viewed as the customers of government? Or, in an increasingly networked world, do they serve more as the partners of public administrators in the production of public services? This book starts from the premise that the public comes to government not principally in one role but in all three roles, as citizens and customers and partners. The purpose of the book is to address the dual challenge that reality implies: (1) to help public administrators and other public officials to understand the complex nature of the public they face, and (2) to provide recommendations for how public administrators can most effectively interact with the public in the different roles. Using this comprehensive perspective, Citizen, Customer, Partner helps students, practitioners, and scholars understand when and how the public should be integrated into the practice of public administration. Most chapters in Citizen, Customer, Partner include multiple boxed cases that illustrate the chapter’s content with real-world examples. The book concludes with an extremely useful Appendix that collects and summarizes the 40 Design Principles – specific advice for public organizations on working with the public as customers, partners, and citizens.
A civil service official reflects on his employment in Washington D.C., comparing his earlier stint before 2001 with his recent return in which he describes the increased partisanship, erosion of public trust, and loss of dedication by the current generation. --Publisher's description.
The authors examine some of the key strategies past presidents have used to lead the departments and agencies of the Executive Branch. Although centralizing power among the White House staff became the preferred alternative during the 20th century, the authors argue that this strategy insulates the president from valuable knowledge and experience in the departments and agencies. This shortcoming, combined with the unchecked proliferation of departments and agencies, has made it difficult for the president to develop meaningful, trusting relationships with each cabinet member. A comprehensive reorganization, such as the one recommended in 2003 by the National Commission on the Public Service (also known as the Volcker Commission) cold redress some of the inherent limitations of centralizing power in the white House. Reducing the number of cabinet secretaries, for instance, could improve the chances that these secretaries will develop more effective, direct, and hands-on relationships with future presidents. Missing from the case for comprehensive reorganization, however, is a systematic study of cabinet agency performance. Before launching into large-scale reorganization, a careful inquiry should be undertaken of the successes and failures of the largest cabinet agencies: the Departments of Defense, Health and Human Services, and Homeland Security.
This will help us customize your experience to showcase the most relevant content to your age group
Please select from below
Login
Not registered?
Sign up
Already registered?
Success – Your message will goes here
We'd love to hear from you!
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.