IPMN Newsletter
Spring 1997

IPMN Website Update

I am pleased to report that IPMN membership is growing as more people find out about us and request membership. We are growing more slowly than what is possible because Kuno Schedler and I review the type of position and nature of the work that applicants are doing to insure new members are compatible with IPMN criteria, i.e., that they are conducting research on public management and NPM-related issues or are practitioner participants in NPM implementation. The number of nations represented in our membership also has grown significantly. This fits with our long-term goal of having members of IPMN in all of the major cities in the world and as many nations as possible. We welcome new members checking to see their names on the website for the first time.

Please note that all members should check the membership data base on the website to make sure that the information listed under their names is accurate and up-to-date. We have completely reconfigured the membership system and the way to apply for membership. In the process of converting the membership file, unfortunately, some members were dropped and information from some files was lost. For this reason we ask you to please check your name and data and correct any problems you find. The membership system is set up so that you can do this by yourself if you are now a member. We no longer update this database ourselves. As a voluntary organization it is up to members to insure that their data, including links to personal or institutional web pages, are correct.

Another technical note is that we have changed the file format for all papers on the website from Microsoft Word 6.0, our former procedure, to Microsoft Word for Windows 2.0. We needed to make this change because Word Perfect could not read nor convert papers in the Word 6.0 format. You will find all current papers on the site have been converted to Word for Windows 2.0. We now must require that all future papers be submitted in Word for Windows 2.0.

IPMN Publications

Other good news includes that our St. Gallen conference book will be published by JAI Press this fall. We had hoped to complete editing the volume earlier but this task took quite some time and we had to wait for final revised versions of some chapters. The formal citation for the book is L. R. Jones and Kuno Schedler, International Perspectives on the New Public Management. (Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1997). Also, the first volume and issue of the International Public Management Journal in print will be published by JAI Press in early 1998. As you know, we have our electronic version of the journal (vol. 1, no. 1) up on the website now. The second issue of the electronic journal will be out this fall and will include papers from this summer's IPMN Workshop in addition to some papers from the St. Gallen conference that were not published in issue 1. The first issue of the printed journal will include the articles now in volume 1, no. 1 on the website, with one or two additions. Papers from the workshop will be published in issue 2 of the printed journal in 1998. We are now receiving and reviewing manuscripts for future issues of the printed journal. Our plan was to publish only two issues in our first year, 1998, but this may change if the volume of manuscripts accepted in final form warrants another issue or possibly two. The publisher is satisfied with two issues in the first two years but, as of now, it appears that more issues will be published.

Upcoming Events

Planning for the 1997 workshop for the IPMN journal editorial board and the core group has been completed and we will be meeting in Berlin/Potsdam in late June. Part of the business to be conducted at this meeting will be to plan for our full conference in 1998. The site proposed for the 1998 conference is Monterey, California. Should this not be possible, alternative potential sites include Maine and Oregon. At any rate, the 1998 conference will be held in the USA. Also, it is with pleasure that we announce that the site of our 1999 Workshop is Sienna, Italy. For our conference in 2000 we are looking to go "down under" to Australia, New Zealand or perhaps Hong Kong, Singapore or some other location in this part of the world. Future conference and workshop locations, formats and other issues of IPMN procedure are still open to debate and modification as our Network begins to mature.

NPM News & Observations

Finally, I can report briefly on a trip I made recently to Australia to attend a conference organized by IPMN editorial board member, Professor James Guthrie at the Macquarie Graduate School of Management, Macquarie University, Sydney. The conference on "Public Sector Transformation" was highly informative of recent developments in Australian and New Zealand public management. Because developments in these nations are observed closely by public management academics and practitioners throughout the world, having the most recent information on the progress and problems encountered in implementing reform is quite valuable. As is the case elsewhere, there continues to be considerable resistance to implementation of many of the principles and programs associated with NPM in Australia and New Zealand despite much evidence that reforms are achieving their objectives. Also, there are some unanticipated consequences of reform that critics seize upon in attempt to undermine continuation of change initiatives.

Two things become evident in looking closely at reform in these nations. Firstly, evaluating the effects of NPM concepts and practices is complicated by the fact the reform has been accompanied and driven by fiscal restraint, budget reduction and restructuring of government. Sorting out change effects resulting from NPM initiatives is difficult and will take some time. Secondly, there is a tendency in these countries for critics to blame everything they don't like about government on NPM. It is now fashionable in these nations, as well as in the USA, Switzerland and elsewhere to engage in "NPM bashing." The problem with much of this criticism is obvious in that NPM is used as an all purpose "whipping boy" or scapegoat, i.e., whatever is wrong must be the result of misconceived NPM philosophy and "wrong" thinking on how to reform government. Often the attacks on NPM are nakedly partisan and ideological. While this is to be expected given the amount and pace of change, evidence seems to point to the fact that NPM is being implemented by both conservative and liberal (leftist and rightist) governments throughout the world.

It appears that NPM implementation in the UK, under whatever terms and language is likely to be continued under a Labor government. In the USA, both the Clinton administration (Democrat) and the Congress (Republican) continue to push NPM-type change with no let-up in sight. In Switzerland, a coalition government has passed a sweeping legislative reform to implement NPM in the federal government. In Germany, NPM is now making headway at the level of the federal government. NPM is now being pushed to the forefront in Austria and other nations. So, my conclusion is that whether academic and other critics like it or not, NPM reform seem to be under implementation and preferred by elected officials from different points on the political/ideological spectrum in many nations. The NPM reform wave is still cresting, although we can observe it in more frothy form in Australia, New Zealand and in the UK. It is noteworthy that the economic condition of these nations has recovered significantly since the 1980s and budget deficits are lower since the institution of enhanced control and accountability in these governments. The Australian national debt as a percentage of GDP and relative to other nations is remarkably low. Can this be attributed in part to the institution of fiscal restraint accompanied by a number of NPM initiatives over more than a decade? Probably so.

Best Regards,

Larry Jones