Content area
Abstract
In the study and practice of public administration the questions surrounding efficiency, effectiveness, and economy have consistently become issues of discussion. Recently, Reinventing Government and the New Public Management movements have suggested that governments should be run like businesses. The literature showed that some scholars have been critical of these notions implying that such managerial and entrepreneurial techniques conflict with the traditional role of government. The dissertation explored and investigated the extent to which NPM's administrative technologies impact and influence procedural due process in the field of human services. A mailed survey was sent to 1,500 senior level managers requesting their opinion on the implementation of NPM and its effects on procedural due process. A 58% response rate was obtained and non-parametric statistics were used to analyze the data. The analysis warranted a rejection of the null hypothesis of no difference. The research showed that NPM is being implemented while emphasis on procedural due process continues in these agencies. NPM was positively correlated with procedural due process and no adverse impact was detected. This correlation was explained by suggesting that (1) agencies scrutinized their operations under the guise of NPM. (2) Efficiency and effectiveness was seen as being just and equitable in the tradition of service delivery. And (3) laws, rules, policies, and procedures were the mechanisms that primarily prevented due process from being discarded. It was proposed that a Constitutional filter be used to filter out unwanted business techniques, thus protecting the integrity of procedural due process.
