Navigation – Plan du site

Corporate Governance in the Public Sector

Ian Jordan
p. 37-50

Résumé

From that exploration of current literature, an analysis of change management approaches and research findings in the area of organizational studies will be used to support the premise that corporate governance utilizing the “board of directors” model is more successful when viewed as a framework for positive organizational change in the public sector. Examination of aspects associated with the change process is therefore considered by many academics and practitioners of organizational change management to give a full account of the purpose, scope, and success of organizational change. Best practices processes that emerge from this research will benefit the accepting organization with ways to view the best and most appropriate approach to their change management initiatives.

Since the 1990’s the role of corporate governance has been discussed as a remedy for the lack of accountability and probity in public sector organizations. Corporate governance is based on the “board of directors” model, and reflects a successful private sector management style. Although some elements of corporate governance can be transferred to the public sector, a lot of changes and modifications must be done to this concept if it is to be implemented successfully into public sector organizations. Public sector corporate governance is distinguished from the private sector by its need for significant objective diversity and management constructs. Also, the lack of a significant body of research regarding public sector corporate governance makes it distinct from the private sector.

Haut de page

Texte intégral

Introduction

  • 1 Barratt, P., Corporate Governance in the Public Sector Context: Public Services in the New Millenni (...)
  • 2 United Nations Development Programme, Institutional Reform and Change Management: (publication) Man (...)
  • 3 Corporate governance is a term that broadly refers to the rules, processes, or applicable laws by w (...)

1 Making changes in a planned and managed or systematic fashion requires the management of change.1 External events and stakeholders must also be considered in order to necessitate proper organizational change. The response to changes over which any organization exercises little or no control (e.g., natural resources, currency matters, social unrest, legislative change) and the need for timely adjustment to external events has given rise to the concept of strategic leadership in the “learning organization”.2 Such organizations are capable of continuous adaptation to the changing environment. Change management utilizing the corporate governance approach3 refers to an area of professional practice and the related body of knowledge that coalesces around this subject of the learning organization, mainly as a result of experience in the private sector. There is however governance models applicable for public sector change management as well.

  • 4 Van De Ven, & Andrew H., Poole, M.S., ‘Alternative Approaches for Studying Organizational Change’, (...)
  • 5 Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P., ‘Balancing Act: How to Capture Knowledge Without Killing It’, Harvard B (...)
  • 6 Van De Ven, & Andrew H., Poole, M.S., op. cit.
  • 7 Ibid.

2 Organizational change is a topic viewed as central and important to organizational studies, but the meaning of organizational change and how to implement it is very much still in dispute.4 According to Brown and Duguid5, organizations that reengineered certain business processes gained a sustainable competitive advantage, therefore emphasis on appropriate change management is important to the success of any organization. The major concern in organizational change management seems to be focused on the definition of what an organization is and is not. That requires viewing the organizational world in two versions : a world in which processes represent change in things, and a world of processes in which things are reifications of processes.6 Furthermore, two definitions of change are often used in organizational studies : an observed difference over time within an organizational entity, and a narrative describing a sequence of events on how development and change unfold.7

  • 8 Karp, T., ‘An Action Theory of Transformative Processes’, Journal of Change Management, 2005, 5(2): (...)
  • 9 Ibid, p. 159.

3 The point of view that change is constant and not static is very important to the change management perspective. The organizational transformative process, as an example, is considered an interaction between people, and the goal is to use the synergy generated by this interaction to produce outcomes that promote organizational systems development.8 Karp also consider this process to be constant and effective at various levels of organizational reality. Collective levels, conceptual levels, and individual levels are all considered aspects of the transformative process, and thus represent the working tiers of this conception and the tiers are thought to be acting on each other. The use of feedback mechanisms is unequivocally crucial to any process, as well as the acknowledgement that organizational processes are humanistic and nonlinear in nature. Furthermore, this nonlinear organizational model include efforts that are collective and individual, therefore it could be argued that most processes in organizations should focus on both interpersonal and intrapersonal aspects of individuals. Group identity that is form-orientated, as well as group tasks that are content-orientated represent the output from these individuals in organizations. Karp states we should similarly acknowledge organizational evolutions as complex adaptive systems. Accepting this premise, it is further argued that the evolution of social systems in the context of organizations, including the evolution of mental content, can be discussed by applying the same principles that underlie biological evolution.9

  • 10 Graetz, F., & Smith, A., ‘Organizing Forms in Change Management: the Role of Structures, Processes (...)
  • 11 Ibid.

4 As organizations endeavor to control and manage this phenomenon, great pressure is placed on structures, processes, and boundaries of the organizational entity10. Grates and Smith posit that as organizations try to understand how to be more attentive and responsive to environmental trends, customer needs, and expectations, emphasis is placed on experimentation with various forms of organizational management models. Focus is placed on changes to structures that allow for more autonomous decision-making as well as increased collaborative information sharing.11 According to Grates and Smith, a quantitative method of measuring and evaluating process change must consider a management performance framework that tracks all services to micro measures and specific accountabilities.

  • 12 Bresnen, M., Goussevskaia, A., & Swan, J., ‘Organizational Routines, Situated Learning and Processe (...)
  • 13 By, R.T., ‘Organisational Change Management: A Critical Review’, Journal of Change Management, 2005 (...)

5 Bresnen et al. argue that project-based organizations present a particularly complex and dynamic change management issue because of the idiosyncrasies of such organizations.12The applicability of project-based organizational change is further complicated by the unique nature of project tasks and the finite duration of project lifecycles in these types of organizations. Overall, the concept of organizational change has been studied and evaluated extensively. A review of the literature suggests the views of academics and practitioners vary and conflict with each other. By states that “theories and approaches to change management currently available to academics and practitioners are often contradictory, mostly lacking empirical evidence and supported by unchallenged hypotheses concerning the nature of organizational change management”.13

  • 14 By, R.T., ‘Ready or Not’, Journal of Change Management, 2007, 7(1): 3-11.
  • 15 Oakland, J. S., Tanner, S., ‘Successful Change Management’, Total Quality Management & Business Exc (...)

6 The grounded theory approach, considered exploratory in nature, was employed to conduct the research By performed using a constant comparative method. By recommends further empirical research of organizational change management in order to develop a better framework, and to further expand the research into the nature of change. By makes the assertion that failure rates of change initiatives hover at approximately 70 per cent, and recommends an “implicit communications strategy, a stronger emphasis on the importance of continuous change and a more explicit link between change readiness and the successful management of change”.14 Oakland and Tanner conducted similar research and found that change initiatives often fail to deliver the desired outcome.15 Furthermore these changes initiatives do not always totally fail, but get stalled, misdirected, or only partially achieve the desired results.

Change Initiatives and the Model of Governance

  • 16 Ferlie, E., & Ashburner, L., ‘Corporate Governance and the Public Sector: some Issues and Evidence (...)
  • 17 Lynn Jr., L. E., Heinrich, C. J., & Hill, C. J., ‘Studying Governance and Public Management: Challe (...)
  • 18 Hodges, R., Wright, M., & Keasey, K., ‘Corporate Governance in the Public Services: Concepts and Is (...)
  • 19 Clatworthy, M., & Mellett, H., & Peel, M., ‘Corporate Governance under ‘New Public Management’: an (...)
  • 20 Ferlie, E., & Ashburner, L., op. cit.
  • 21 Hodges, R., Wright, M., & Keasey, K., op.cit.; Van Wyk, M. F., ‘The Quality of Corporate Governance (...)
  • 22 Laurent, W., ‘The Town Hall Model in Governance’, Information Management (1521-2912), 2009, 19(6): (...)
  • 23 Ferlie, E., & Ashburner, L., op. cit.
  • 24 Ibid.
  • 25 Board of Directors is a body of elected or appointed members who jointly oversee the activities of (...)
  • 26 Ferlie, E., & Ashburner, L., op. cit.
  • 27 Ibid.

7 Governance has been a major topic of discussion among private and public sector entities for at least the past twenty five years.16 Governance in the public and private sectors involves global and local organizations, and therefore both elements must be considered when defining corporate governance.17 Corporate governance was not generally seen in professional literature prior to 1980, and is described as procedures associated with decision-making, performance, and control of organizations.18 Resurgence in the desire to find new efficient and effective governing alternatives that promoted accountability, transparency, and probity has fuelled this debate in the public sector. Furthermore, existing literature on corporate governance in the private sector is seen as more developed than in the public sector.19 The literature on public sector corporate governance suggests that it is accepted as a viable alternative to more traditional leadership models currently practiced in public organizations, and has emerged as an alternative to traditional leadership in these entities. In the past, most of the focus for investigators of this process was on public financial and healthcare organizations20, but the process of corporate governance can be successfully applied to other public entities such as insurance and the environment, as well as the public utilities. The structural context of what is generally called corporate governance in the public sector originated in the United Kingdom, which has led the way in the implementation of corporate governance practices within public sector organizations.21 The British Commonwealth countries were also quick to follow this trend in their public sector organizations, while the United States has only recently put the use of this style of governance to work at the highest levels of government. The Obama administration was the first presidential office to use “social networking” and other forms of citizenship participation in the governance process.22 The key drivers of this phenomenon seem to be great concern regarding the breakdown of integrity and uprightness in these organizations.23 For example, within the public sector in the United Kingdom, the rising concern over governance in the public sector culminated with the Cadbury report (1992) in which the Public Accounts Committee investigated serious incidents in the National Health Service. The report found unacceptable failures at the West Midlands Regional Health Authority (WMRHA) and evidence of ineffective control by management over the organization. Since similar findings were evident in other regionally operated public sector health organizations24, reform of these institutions was seen as necessary, but, for the reform to be carried out properly, required an importation of the private sector “board of directors”25 model of governance.26 The Chairman of the WMRHA was singled out by the Public Accounts Committee for failing to maintain a strong system of effectiveness and control of the organization. This reinforced the idea that the traditional public sector management processes involved were flawed and easily undermined because of the antiquated strategic leadership structure of the organization. Ferlie therefore recommended learning from past mistakes and supported the “board of directors” model as an alternative.27

  • 28 Ibid.
  • 29 Hodges, R., Wright, M., & Keasey, K., op. cit.
  • 30 Ibid.; Ferlie, E., & Ashburner, L., op.cit.; Van Wyk, M. F., op. cit.: 48.
  • 31 McVeigh, J., ‘Promoting Better Corporate Governance in Nl’s Public Sector: an Inside Story from the (...)
  • 32 Lynn Jr., L. E., Heinrich, C. J., & Hill, C. J., op. cit.: 233.

8 Importation of the private sector “board of directors” model into public organizations like the NHS was not direct. It required the tweaking of some of the rules and processes associated with its functionality. Research into this indicated some benefit overall, but the risk of non-executives having different values undermined the potential performance of the board.28 This model was seen to promote openness, integrity, honesty, and accountability.29 Since the 1990, public sector boards have quickly replaced the traditional officer based executive management systems inside public sector organizations throughout the British commonwealth30, and today, this model is still viewed as a viable leadership tool inside the commonwealth nations’ public sector organizations.31 This movement was in response to citizen and stakeholder interests and concerns.32

Methodology

  • 33 Edmondson, A. C., & McManus, S. E., ‘Methodological Fit in Management Field Research’, Academy of M (...)
  • 34 Effectiveness is the capability of producing a desired result. Efficiency is the competency in perf (...)
  • 35 Van Wyk, M. F., op. cit.: 48.
  • 36 Howard, C., & Seth-Purdue, R., ‘Governance Issues for Public Sector Boards’, Australian Journal of (...)
  • 37 Lynn Jr., L.E., Heinrich, C.J., & Hill, C.J., op. cit.: 233.

9 The studies of changes relating to the application of public sector corporate governance in the literature seem to indicate mostly qualitative assessments. Most of the articles on the subject of corporate governance in the public sector seem to be qualitative in their research methodology, but some quantitative research has been conducted as well. The lack of quantitative research relating to the measurable performance of public sector corporate governance needs to be addressed through the implementation of more quantitative research on the subject. Empirical study of this process utilizing the appropriate “methodological fit”33 is beneficial to the literature on this subject. Furthermore, proper research instruments must be developed in order to fully determine the actual effectiveness and efficiency34 of corporate governance as practiced in public sector organizations.35 Howard and Seth-Purdue argue that it is crucial to establish empirically how the corporate governance mechanisms operate in practice, inclusive of measurements that indicate adherence to effective processes and structures, with clarity of roles and responsibilities.36 Research considered in this context must include questions that encompass empirical testing of contingent propositions, content analysis, and the implications of normative propositions37.

  • 38 Johnson, G., & Leavitt, W., ‘Building on Success: Transforming Organizations Through an Appreciativ (...)
  • 39 Ibid.
  • 40 Schooley, S. E., ‘Appreciative Democracy: the Feasibility of Using Appreciative Inquiry at the Loca (...)
  • 41 Salopek, J. J., ‘Appreciative Inquiry at 20: Questioning David Cooperrider’, American Society for T (...)
  • 42 Sharma, R., ‘Celebrating Change: The New Paradigm of Organizational Development’, ICFAI Journal of (...)
  • 43 Ibid.
  • 44 Locander, W. B., & Luechauer, D. L., ‘Leader as Inquirer’, Marketing Management, 2007, 16(5): 46-49
  • 45 Srithika, T. M., & Bhattacharyya, S., ‘Facilitating Organizational Unlearning using Appreciative In (...)
  • 46 Ibid.

10 Appreciative inquiry is deemed an appropriate methodological fit when taking the aforementioned elements into consideration. Since 1978, appreciative inquiry has been used as a successful alternative method of starting the processes of change in private organizations, and public sector organizations can benefit from the use of this approach when considering changes to their structure as well. The application of appreciative inquiry to the change process in public sector organizations can be just as successful as in private establishments.38 A successful example of such a public sector endeavor involved the city of Hampton, Virginia, in 1998. The city government of Hampton used appreciative inquiry to establish a process of moving the organization forward while concentrating only on positive issues. The experience was a great success, and management and staff of the city government used the feedback to develop provocative propositions which led to an action agenda that they collaboratively developed, adopted and implemented.39 The feasibility of utilizing appreciative inquiry as a way of getting positive citizen participation in government is an example of the public sector use of appreciative inquiry.40 This process is seen as a new and innovative way of increasing the participation of citizens in the governance process. The application of appreciative inquiry principles has also been viewed as a positive option for citizen participation in local governments instead of referendums, commenting, and other government forums. The 4-D cycle of appreciative inquiry fits all types of organizations and can be adapted to either private or public organization change management strategies. During an interview with author and scholar David Cooperrider, Jennifer Salopek asked : “How critical is support from top leadership in conducting appreciative inquiry ?”, and his response was : “Not at all. Anyone can conduct an appreciative inquiry. People love to give advice and share their opinions. And who’s going to stop you from asking powerful, positive questions ?”.41 This statement by Dr. Cooperrider clearly supports the use of appreciative inquiry to examine positive changes in organizations, and the application of such a process is valid when also considering positive change in public sector organizations. Appreciative inquiry is the selected method of research because it fits the positive model, and the 4-D design allows for a more inclusionary change process. The focus of appreciative inquiry is to generate knowledge that shows competence and performance that can be used to power the change process in an organization.42 The concept of appreciative inquiry consists of a constructionist principle, simultaneity principle, anticipatory principle, heliotropic principle, and the poetic principle.43 These positive views of situations offer best practices that can be utilized for positive change management processes. The goal of appreciative inquiry is to drill down to the best practices of organizations and build on this data in a more positive way. Leaders must be able to inquire about the happenings inside and outside of the organization. Appreciative inquiry is a method that leaders can use to probe the organization and keep vigil on “best practices”. Appreciative inquiry offers a positive view of organizations as opposed to seeing the problems with the organization. Case studies have shown that application of appreciative inquiry can yield positive change.44 Organizational “unlearning” can also be performed with the appreciative inquiry process.45 Continuous change in organizations mandates that some type of unlearning occur. The process can be complicated if viewed as a problem, but through the appreciative inquiry process it is perceived to be an aspect of positive organizational change.46

Strengths and Weaknesses of Corporate Governance

  • 47 Clatworthy, M., Mellett, H., & Peel, M., ‘Corporate Governance under ‘New Public Management’: an Ex (...)
  • 48 Ryan, C., & & Ng, C., ‘Public Sector Corporate Governance Disclosures: An Examination of Annual Rep (...)
  • 49 Ibid.
  • 50 Ibid.
  • 51 Barratt, P., op.cit.
  • 52 Howard, C., & Seth-Purdue, R., op. cit.

11Corporate governance has been extensively studied as it relates to the private sector.47 The efficiency and effectiveness of this management approach has been proven by research to be beneficial in the private sector, particularly when applied to managing and controlling those organizations. Some of this efficiency and effectiveness is transferable when corporate governance is applied to public entities.48 An increase has been seen worldwide in the attention paid to corporate governance in the public sector.49 Public entity performance is viewed as an important dimension, so concern with how the structure of governance motivates the executives in control to meet their performance objectives in an efficient and effective way is the base of good public sector corporate governance.50 The Australian government for example took an aggressive approach to implementation and practice of the corporate governance model.51 The British took a cautious view of public sector corporate governance but the practices of this leadership model helped them transform the British healthcare system. Emphasis on “best practices” associated with corporate governance guide the implementation of these practices in the public sector. Prominence has been associated with the implementation of public sector corporate governance (governing boards) within public organizations.52 The positive response to the implementation of corporate governance as an alternative to traditional hierarchical organizational leadership structure is supported by the successes of the British Commonwealth nations in implementing this concept.

  • 53 Van Wyk, M. F., op. cit. 48.
  • 54 Clatworthy, M., Mellett, H., Peel, M., op.cit.: 166.
  • 55 Ryan, C., Ng, C., op. cit.: 11.
  • 56 Clatworthy, M., Mellett, H., & Peel, M., op. cit.: 166.

12 The lack of empirical qualitative study on the topic of corporate governance in the public sector is seen as a major issue. Additional qualitative and quantitative research of the processes and structures of corporate governance is deemed necessary for a more definitive understanding of how this process works in the public sector.53 There is no real body of research on corporate governance that applies to the public sector.54 Although there has been a measurable increase worldwide in the attention paid to public sector corporate governance, the practice and implementation of corporate governance in the public sector has been slow in countries other than the British Commonwealth.55 The most significant conclusion from the study of literature on corporate governance in the public sector suggests that private sector governance models cannot be directly applied to public entities without some modifications, and most public sector organizations are not structurally designed for a one model fits all approach.56

Conclusion

13From this exploration of current literature, an analysis of change management approaches and research findings in the area of organizational studies is used to support the premise that organizational change management is more successful when viewed as the framework of a process in flux, rather than as a series of separate steps. Prior academic and practitioner research into this matter shows that each aspect of the change process is deemed related and dependent on both past and future change management aspects in order for the change to be successful. A process view is also considered by many academics and practitioners of organizational change management to give a full account of the purpose, scope, and success of organizational change. Process has emerged to be the accepted way to view the approach to change management. From this literature review we can focus on specific approaches to gathering data through the qualitative method in order to expand the body of knowledge in relation to organizational change management.

  • 57 Hayat, U., ‘Obstacles to Good Corporate Governance’, Economic Review (05318955), 2003, 34(7): 3-4.

14 Although the processes and framework associated with corporate governance in public sector organizations has been studied for the past twenty five years, most of the body of research has been in the quantitative side of research. Also, the locations of where this evaluation has been conducted are limited and need to be expanded to other countries outside the British Commonwealth. There has been some research done on the empirical methodology in other countries such as Pakistan57, but the volume of literature seems to be limited in scope and application. Evidence of a need for an expansion and exploration of qualitative and quantitative research on the effectiveness and efficiency of public sector corporate governance appears to be an area of focus that can be further developed by additional research into its effectiveness and efficiency in other countries around the world. All public sector stakeholders appreciate good corporate governance that can increase effectiveness and efficiency throughout such organizations. Nevertheless, the primary responsibility for ensuring good public sector corporate governance rests with leaders of public sector organizations. It is therefore important for the leaders of public organizations who want to increase their effectiveness and efficiency to focus on identifying the key aspects of both public sector and private sector corporate governance models and how each aspect of those models should be considered in the organization. Those identified “best practices” from this investigation could be used to form the most effective and efficient public sector corporate governance structure unique to the needs of the organization, which will increase the potential effectiveness and efficiency of that public sector organization.

  • 58 Ferlie, E., & Ashburner, L., op.cit.

15 These findings reinforce the ideology that traditional public sector management systems involved in current organizational strategic planning are flawed and easily undermined. Traditional management models have flaws in their strategic leadership performance, and a review of the literature recommends learning from past mistakes and prescribes several contingent public sector corporate governance models including the board of directors’ model as alternatives.58 Although leadership is a critical aspect of management, it tends to be as individual as the person performing the leadership activities, according to research. As a result of this development, public sector corporate governance models like the board of directors model has been determined by research to facilitate a co-determinate process of organizational decision-making that increases effectiveness and efficiency.

Haut de page

Bibliographie

Barratt, P., Corporate Governance in the Public Sector Context: Public Services in the New Millennium, Minter Ellison Seminar Series, 2001.

Bresnen, M., Goussevskaia, A., Swan, J., ‘Organizational Routines, Situated Learning and Processes of Change in Project-Based Organizations’, Project Management Journal, 2005, 36(3) : 27-41.

Brown, J. S., Duguid, P., ‘Balancing Act : How to Capture Knowledge Without Killing It’, Harvard Business Review, 2000, 78(3) : 73-80.

By, R. T., ‘Organisational Change Management : A Critical Review’, Journal of Change Management, 2005, 5(4) : 369-380.

By, R. T., ‘Ready or Not’, Journal of Change Management, 2007, 7(1) : 3-11.

Clatworthy, M., Mellett, H., Peel, M., ‘Corporate Governance under ‘New Public Management’ : an Exemplification’, Corporate Governance : An International Review, 2000, 8(2) : 166. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Edmondson, A. C., McManus, S. E., ‘Methodological Fit in Management Field Research’, Academy of Management Review, 2007, 32(4) : 1155-1179. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Ferlie, E., Ashburner, L., ‘Corporate Governance and the Public Sector : some Issues and Evidence from the NHS’, Public Administration, 1995, 73(3) : 375-392. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Graetz, F., Smith, A., ‘Organizing Forms in Change Management : the Role of Structures, Processes and Boundaries in a Longitudinal Case Analysis’, Journal of Change Management, 2005, 5(3) : 311-328.

Hayat, U., ‘Obstacles to Good Corporate Governance’, Economic Review (05318955), 2003, 34(7) : 3-4. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Hodges, R., Wright, M., Keasey, K., ‘Corporate Governance in the Public Services : Concepts and Issues’, Public Money & Management, 1996, 16(2) : 7-13. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Howard, C., Seth-Purdue, R., ‘Governance Issues for Public Sector Boards’, Australian Journal of Public Administration, 2005, 64(3) : 56-68. doi :10.1111/j.1467-8500.2005.00452.x

Johnson, G., Leavitt, W., ‘Building on Success : Transforming Organizations Through an Appreciative Inquiry’, Public Personnel Management, 2001, 30(1) : 129.

Karp, T., ‘An Action Theory of Transformative Processes’, Journal of Change Management, 2005, 5(2) : 153-175.

Laurent, W., ‘The Town Hall Model in Governance’, Information Management (1521-2912), 2009, 19(6) : 40. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Locander, W. B., Luechauer, D. L., ‘Leader as Inquirer’, Marketing Management, 2007, 16(5) : 46-49.

Lomi, A., Larsen, E. R., Freeman, J. H., ‘Things Change : Dynamic Resource Constraints and System-Dependent Selection in the Evolution of Organizational Populations’, Management Science, 2005, 51(6) : 882-903.

Lynn Jr., L. E., Heinrich, C. J., Hill, C. J., ‘Studying Governance and Public Management : Challenges and Prospects’, Journal of Public Administration Research & Theory, 2000, 10(2) : 233. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

McVeigh, J., ‘Promoting Better Corporate Governance in Nl’s Public Sector : an Inside Story from the NIHE’, Accountancy Ireland, 2010, 42(3) : 20-21. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Oakland, J. S., Tanner, S., ‘Successful Change Management’, Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 2007, 18(1/2) : 1-19.

Ryan, C., Ng, C., ‘Public Sector Corporate Governance Disclosures : An Examination of Annual Reporting Practices in Queensland’, Australian Journal of Public Administration, 2000, 59(2) : 11. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Salopek, J. J., ‘Appreciative Inquiry at 20 : Questioning David Cooperrider’, American Society for Training & Development, 2006, 60 : 21-22.

Schooley, S. E., ‘Appreciative Democracy : the Feasibility of Using Appreciative Inquiry at the Local Government Level by Public Administrators to Increase Citizen Participation’, Public Administration Quarterly, 2008, 32(2) : 243-281.

Sharma, R., ‘Celebrating Change : The New Paradigm of Organizational Development’, ICFAI Journal of Soft Skills, 2008, 2(3) : 23-28.

Srithika, T. M., Bhattacharyya, S., ‘Facilitating Organizational Unlearning using Appreciative Inquiry as an Intervention’, Vikalpa : The Journal for Decision Makers, 2009, 34(4) : 67-77.

United Nations Development Programme, Institutional Reform and Change Management : (publication) Managing Change In Public Sector Organizations : A UNDP Capacity Development Resource, conference paper #5 working draft, November 2006.

Van De Ven, Andrew H., Poole, M.S., ‘Alternative Approaches for Studying Organizational Change’, Organization Studies, 2005, 26(9) : 1377-1404.

Van Wyk, M. F., ‘The Quality of Corporate Governance in South Africa : Comparing the Parastatal and Listed Industrial’, South African Journal of Business Management, 1999, 30(2) : 48. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Haut de page

Notes

1 Barratt, P., Corporate Governance in the Public Sector Context: Public Services in the New Millennium, Minter Ellison Seminar Series, 2001.

2 United Nations Development Programme, Institutional Reform and Change Management: (publication) Managing Change In Public Sector Organizations: A UNDP Capacity Development Resource, conference paper #5 working draft, November 2006.

3 Corporate governance is a term that broadly refers to the rules, processes, or applicable laws by which businesses are operated, regulated, and controlled. The term can refer to internal policies and procedures defined by the leadership of a corporation, as well as to external stakeholders, clients, and governmental regulations.

4 Van De Ven, & Andrew H., Poole, M.S., ‘Alternative Approaches for Studying Organizational Change’, Organization Studies, 2005, 26(9): 1377-1404.

5 Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P., ‘Balancing Act: How to Capture Knowledge Without Killing It’, Harvard Business Review, 2000, 78(3): 73-80.

6 Van De Ven, & Andrew H., Poole, M.S., op. cit.

7 Ibid.

8 Karp, T., ‘An Action Theory of Transformative Processes’, Journal of Change Management, 2005, 5(2): 153-175.

9 Ibid, p. 159.

10 Graetz, F., & Smith, A., ‘Organizing Forms in Change Management: the Role of Structures, Processes and Boundaries in a Longitudinal Case Analysis’, Journal of Change Management, 2005, 5(3): 311-328.

11 Ibid.

12 Bresnen, M., Goussevskaia, A., & Swan, J., ‘Organizational Routines, Situated Learning and Processes of Change in Project-Based Organizations’, Project Management Journal, 2005, 36(3): 27-41.

13 By, R.T., ‘Organisational Change Management: A Critical Review’, Journal of Change Management, 2005, 5(4): 369-380, abstract.

14 By, R.T., ‘Ready or Not’, Journal of Change Management, 2007, 7(1): 3-11.

15 Oakland, J. S., Tanner, S., ‘Successful Change Management’, Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 2007, 18(1/2): 1-19.

16 Ferlie, E., & Ashburner, L., ‘Corporate Governance and the Public Sector: some Issues and Evidence from the NHS’, Public Administration, 1995, 73(3): 375-392.

17 Lynn Jr., L. E., Heinrich, C. J., & Hill, C. J., ‘Studying Governance and Public Management: Challenges and Prospects’, Journal of Public Administration Research & Theory, 2000, 10(2): 233.

18 Hodges, R., Wright, M., & Keasey, K., ‘Corporate Governance in the Public Services: Concepts and Issues’, Public Money & Management, 1996, 16(2): 7-13.

19 Clatworthy, M., & Mellett, H., & Peel, M., ‘Corporate Governance under ‘New Public Management’: an Exemplification’, Corporate Governance: An International Review, 2000, 8(2): 166.

20 Ferlie, E., & Ashburner, L., op. cit.

21 Hodges, R., Wright, M., & Keasey, K., op.cit.; Van Wyk, M. F., ‘The Quality of Corporate Governance in South Africa: Comparing the Parastatal and Listed Industrial’, South African Journal of Business Management, 1999, 30(2): 48.

22 Laurent, W., ‘The Town Hall Model in Governance’, Information Management (1521-2912), 2009, 19(6): 40.

23 Ferlie, E., & Ashburner, L., op. cit.

24 Ibid.

25 Board of Directors is a body of elected or appointed members who jointly oversee the activities of a company or organization.

26 Ferlie, E., & Ashburner, L., op. cit.

27 Ibid.

28 Ibid.

29 Hodges, R., Wright, M., & Keasey, K., op. cit.

30 Ibid.; Ferlie, E., & Ashburner, L., op.cit.; Van Wyk, M. F., op. cit.: 48.

31 McVeigh, J., ‘Promoting Better Corporate Governance in Nl’s Public Sector: an Inside Story from the NIHE’, Accountancy Ireland, 2010, 42(3): 20-21.

32 Lynn Jr., L. E., Heinrich, C. J., & Hill, C. J., op. cit.: 233.

33 Edmondson, A. C., & McManus, S. E., ‘Methodological Fit in Management Field Research’, Academy of Management Review, 2007, 32(4): 1155-1179.

34 Effectiveness is the capability of producing a desired result. Efficiency is the competency in performance of an operation or function using the least amount of work.

35 Van Wyk, M. F., op. cit.: 48.

36 Howard, C., & Seth-Purdue, R., ‘Governance Issues for Public Sector Boards’, Australian Journal of Public Administration, 2005, 64(3): 56-68.

37 Lynn Jr., L.E., Heinrich, C.J., & Hill, C.J., op. cit.: 233.

38 Johnson, G., & Leavitt, W., ‘Building on Success: Transforming Organizations Through an Appreciative Inquiry’, Public Personnel Management, 2001, 30(1): 129.

39 Ibid.

40 Schooley, S. E., ‘Appreciative Democracy: the Feasibility of Using Appreciative Inquiry at the Local Government Level by Public Administrators to Increase Citizen Participation’, Public Administration Quarterly, 2008, 32(2): 243-281

41 Salopek, J. J., ‘Appreciative Inquiry at 20: Questioning David Cooperrider’, American Society for Training & Development, 2006, 60: 21-22.

42 Sharma, R., ‘Celebrating Change: The New Paradigm of Organizational Development’, ICFAI Journal of Soft Skills, 2008, 2(3): 23-28.

43 Ibid.

44 Locander, W. B., & Luechauer, D. L., ‘Leader as Inquirer’, Marketing Management, 2007, 16(5): 46-49.

45 Srithika, T. M., & Bhattacharyya, S., ‘Facilitating Organizational Unlearning using Appreciative Inquiry as an Intervention’, Vikalpa: The Journal for Decision Makers, 2009, 34(4): 67-77.

46 Ibid.

47 Clatworthy, M., Mellett, H., & Peel, M., ‘Corporate Governance under ‘New Public Management’: an Exemplification’, Corporate Governance: An International Review, 2000, 8(2): 166.

48 Ryan, C., & & Ng, C., ‘Public Sector Corporate Governance Disclosures: An Examination of Annual Reporting Practices in Queensland’, Australian Journal of Public Administration, 2000, 59(2): 11.

49 Ibid.

50 Ibid.

51 Barratt, P., op.cit.

52 Howard, C., & Seth-Purdue, R., op. cit.

53 Van Wyk, M. F., op. cit. 48.

54 Clatworthy, M., Mellett, H., Peel, M., op.cit.: 166.

55 Ryan, C., Ng, C., op. cit.: 11.

56 Clatworthy, M., Mellett, H., & Peel, M., op. cit.: 166.

57 Hayat, U., ‘Obstacles to Good Corporate Governance’, Economic Review (05318955), 2003, 34(7): 3-4.

58 Ferlie, E., & Ashburner, L., op.cit.

Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence papier

Ian Jordan, « Corporate Governance in the Public Sector », Observatoire de la société britannique, 16 | 2014, 37-50.

Référence électronique

Ian Jordan, « Corporate Governance in the Public Sector », Observatoire de la société britannique [En ligne], 16 | 2014, mis en ligne le 01 novembre 2015, consulté le 24 juillet 2017. URL : http://osb.revues.org/1706 ; DOI : 10.4000/osb.1706

Haut de page

Auteur

Ian Jordan

Administrateur au New York State Department of Environmental Conservation

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

Observatoire de la société britannique

Haut de page
  • Logo Université de Toulon
  • Logo Laboratoire Babel
  • Revues.org