2. Assessment Regime
The assessment regime comprises two parts:
i) An in-depth 4,000 word essay covering a question and topic raised and covered during
This first part makes-up 90% of the overall mark.
Your essay should address any one of the questions listed in the Reading List below. You will see
from this Reading List that for every week, one or two questions is set out, and you can choose
any of these questions to address in your essay.
The objectives for this essay are as follows:
-To encourage you to process and use various types of source data material to develop an
– To prompt you to develop clear and coherent arguments.
– To allow to you explore an issue in-depth.
– To help you develop your critical faculties through evaluating the material and data you
use in your essay.
– To help ensure that you develop well-grounded and supported arguments
– To encourage analytical and conceptual precision.
The assessment criteria used will be the following:
– Focus on the question: Answering the question posed.
– Structure and coherence of the essay: Clearly and rationally presenting the issues to
develop a strong and plausible argument.
– Coverage of the relevant literature: Drawing upon the relevant literature in addressing
– Clarity of the arguments: Displaying an appreciation of the concepts and issues involved
– Analytical and critical insight: Challenging and appraising the quality of the literature
– Well grounded: Supporting and giving substance to your arguments, and avoiding
speculation, prescription and unsubstantiated views.
ii) ‘Tutorial Assessment’
This element will count for 10% of the final mark. The 10% will be broken down into 5% for
participation and 5% for a short end of term test:
– The 5% participation mark will be determined by an exercise at the beginning of each
tutorial. You will be expected to bring along a newspaper of magazine story on any
current news items which is relevant to the module and which has interested you. You
need to be prepared to talk about this item at the tutorial- why it interested you and how
it relates to the module. You will be awarded 1% per tutorial. As long as you bring this
work along to the tutorial you be awarded this mark.
– The short 5% test will be held in Week 12. You will be asked to give short answers to five
or six questions asking you to define key terms raised during the module, The
examination will last 30 minutes.
3. Reading List
There is no set textbook for this module. You are encouraged to draw upon various sources:
journals, newspapers, books and policy documents. There is one book which covers many of the
topics explored in the module:
Flynn, N. (2017) Public Sector Management (seventh edition), London: Sage.
However, you should read widely.
The reading list for the course is set out below. It comprises two or three core reading for each
week and a more extended list of additional readings. You should not feel intimidated by this
reading list. The more you read the better but you can draw selectively from the list below
Reading list should also be seen as a resource to be drawn upon for your essay work. So on the
topic you choose for your essay, you will want to explore many of the readings set out. At the
same time, you should not feel constrained by this list and if you want to look for other readings
beyond it, please do- indeed this is encouraged.
Week 1 The Nature and Role of the Government
In the age of globalisation what role does the nation state have?
What are the arguments for and against a ‘large’ and a ‘small’ state?
How has the role of the state changed over recent years?
Flynn, N. (2012) Public Sector Management (sixth edition), London: Sage. Chapt. 1
Wren, A. (2008) Comparative Perspectives on the Role of the State in the Economy in Wittman,
A. and Weingast, B. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Political Economy, Oxford: OUP.
Crouch, C. (2014) Putting Neo-liberalism in its Place, Political Quarterly, 85:2
Jackson, P. The size and scope of the public sector: An international comparison, in Bovaird, T.
and Loffler, E. (eds.) Public Management and Governance, London: Routledge.
Kay, J. (2013) Capitalism, Markets and Politics, Political Quarterly, 84:4
Mazzucato, M. (2013) The Entrepreneurial State, London: Anthem. Read the Introduction
Muir, R. and Cooke, G. (2012) The Relational State, London: IPPR. Read section 1
Dasgupta, R. (2018) The demise of the nation:
Week 2 Delivering Government Services: Context and Mechanisms
Critically evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of bureaucracies, markets and
networks as forms of public service delivery.
Hood, C. (1991) A public management for all seasons? Public Administration 69:3-19
Pollitt, C. (2003) Joined-up government: A survey, Political Studies Review, 1:34-49
Andrews, R. (2017) When bureaucracy matters for organisational performance, Public
Administration, 95:1, 115-39
Bevir, M. And O’Brien, D. (2001)New Labour and the public sector in Britain, Public
Administration Review, 61:5.
Bouvaird, T. and Loffler, E. (2003) Evaluating the quality of public governance, International
Review of Administrative Sciences, 69:313-28
Curry, C. and Van de Walle, S. (2018) A bibliometrics approach to understanding conceptual
breadth, depth and development: The case of New Public Management. Political Studies Review
Davies, J. (2009) The limits of joined up government: Towards a political analysis, Public
Administration, 87:1, 80-96.
Diefenbach, T. (2009) New Public Management in Public Sector Organizations: The Dark Sides of
Managerialistic Enlightenment, Public Administration, 87:4, 892-909
Dunleavy, P. And Hood, C. (1994) From old public administration to new public management,
Public Management and Money, July-Sept.
Exworthy, M. Powell, M. and Mohan, J. (1999) Markets, bureaucracy and public management;
The NHS quasi market, quasi hierarchy and quasi network, Public Money and Management,
Goldfinch, S. and Wallis, J. (2010) Two myths of convergence in public management reform,
Public Administration, 88:4, 1099-1115
Hansen, M. (2011) Antecedents of organizational innovation: The diffusion of new public
management into Danish local government, Public Administration, 89:2, 285-306
Hayden, C. and Bennington, J., (2000) The Modernisation and Importance of Public Services:
Multi level Networked Governance, Public Money and Management, 20: 2, 27-34.
Jacobson, C. and Jakobsen, M. (2018) Perceived organisational red tape and organisational
performance in the public services, Public Administration review, 78:1, 24
Jordan, B. and Johns, N. New Labour: Trust, equality of opportunity and diversity, Social and
Public Policy, 1:1
Koffijberg, J. Bruijn, H., and Priemus, H. (2012) Combining hierarchical and network strategies:
Successful changes in Dutch social Housing, Public Administration, 90:1, 262-75
Ling, T. (2002) Delivering Joined up government in the UK: Dimensions, issues and problems,
Public Administration, 80:4, 615-642
Lynne, L. (2005) Public Management: A Concise History of Field in Ferlie, E., Lynne, L. And
Pollitt, C (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Public Management, Oxford: OUP.
Mascini, P. and Brasher, s. (2017) Choice and competition in education: Do they advance
performance, voice and equity? Public Administration, 95(2) 482-97.
McGhee, D. (2003) Joined up government. Community, Safety and Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and
Transgender ‘active citizens, Critical Social Policy, 23:3, 345-74
McGuire, M. and Agranoff, R. (2011) The limits of public management networks, Public
Administration, 89:2, 265-84
McTavish, D. (2017) Re-defining the role of the state, Public Management and Money, 37:2, 76-8
Perkins, N. Smith, K, Hunter, D. Bambra and Joyce, K. (2010) What counts is what works? New
Labour and partnerships in public health, Policy and Politics, 38:1, 101-17
Suzuki, K. & Hur, H. (2020) Bureaucratic structures and organizational commitment:
findings from a comparative study of 20 European countries, Public Management Review,
Week 3 Stakeholders (1): The Manager
To what extent do you agree that management in the public sector is no different to
management in the private sector?
Ackroyd, S., Hughes, J. and Soothill, K. (1989) Public Sector Services and their Management,
Journal of Management Studies, 26:6
Boyne, G. (2002) Public and private management: What’s the difference? Journal of Management
Stewart, J. and Ranson, S. (1988) Management in the public domain, Public Money and
Management, 8:1-2, 13-9
Ashburner, L. Ferlie, E., Fitzgerald, L. (1996) Organizational transformation and top down
change: The case of the NHS, British Journal of Management, 7:1-6
Baker, R. (1969) Organization theory and the public sector, Journal of Management Studies, 6:1,
Barnes, C. and Henley, J. (2018) They are underpaid and understaffed: How clients interpret
encounters with street level bureaucrats, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory,
Bezes, P. and Jeanot, G. (2018) Autonomy and managerial reforms in Europe: Let or make
managers manage, Public Administration, 96(1): 3-22.
Bolton, S. (2004) A simple matter of control: NHS hospital nurses and new management, Jounral
of Management Studies, 41:2
Mike Bresnen, Damian Hodgson, Simon Bailey (2019) Hybrid managers, career narratives and
identity work: A contextual analysis of UK healthcare organizations, Human Relations, 72(8)
Brunsson, N. and Sahlin-Andersson, K. (2000) Constructing Organizations: The example of
public sector reform, Organization Studies, 21:721
Chapman, C. (2016) How public service leadership is studied, Public Administration 94:1, 89-
Clarke, J. (2004) Dissolving the public realm? The logics and limits of neo-liberalism, Journal of
Social Policy, 33:1, 27-48
Davis, R. and Stayk, E. (2016) Senior Mangers’ Engagement in Networked Environments and
goal and role ambiguity, Journal of Public Administration and Research, 26:3, 433-47
Dopson, S. and Stewart, R. (1990) Public and private sector management: The case for a wider
debate, Public Money and Management, 10:1, 37-40
Fottler, M. (1981) Is management really generic? Academy of Management Review, 6:1, 1-12
Gianluca, V., Kirkpatrick, Ian Altanlar, Ali (2019) Are Public Sector Managers a “Bureaucratic
Burden”? The Case of English Public Hospitals. Journal of Public Administration Research and
Theory, 29 (2):193209.
Jacobs, L. (2014) The contested politics of public value, Public Administration Review, 74:4
Jilke, S. et al (2018) Discrimination and Administrative Burden in Public Service Markets: Does a
Public-Private Difference Exist? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory,
Jordan, J. (2018) Evidence form the frontline? An ethnographic problematisation of welfare-towork administrator opinions, Work, Employment and Society, 32(1): 57-74.
Magee, J. and Frasier, C. (2014) Status and power: The principal inputs to influence for public
managers, Public Administration Review, 74:3
Marquand, D. (2004) The public domain is a gift of history, Now it is at risk, New Statesman, 19
Martin, G. And Currie, G., and Finn, R. (2009) Leadership, service reform and public service
networks: The case of cancer-genetics pilots in the English NHS, Journal of Public
Administration Research and Theory, 19:769-94
Murray, M. (19775) Comparing public and private management: An exploratory essay, Public
Administration Review, 35:4, 364-71
Noordegraaf, M. And Ven der Meulen, M., (2008) Professional power play: Organizing
management in health care, Public Administration, 86:4, 1055-69
Pandey, S. (2016) Transformational leaders and the use of normative values, Public
Administration, 94:1, 204-222
Perry, J. and Rainer, H. (1988) The public-private distinction in organisation theory, Academy of
Management Review, 13:2, 182-201
Ring, P. And Perry, J. (1985) Strategic management in public and private organizations:
Implications of distinctive contexts and constraints, Academy of Management Review, 10;2, 276-
Stewart, J. and Clarke, M. (1987) The public service orientation: Issues and dilemmas, Public
Administration, 65: summer, 161-77
Waring. J & Crompton, A, (2020)The struggles for (and of) network management: an
ethnographic study of non-dominant policy actors in the English healthcare system, Public
Management Review, 22:2
Whorton, J. and Worthley, J. (1984) A perspective on the challenge of public management,
Academy of Management Review, 6:3, 357-61
Week 4 Stakeholders (2): The Service User
Does the co-production of public services threaten the authority and status of public
service professionals, and if so why and how?
Given the imbalance in power and status between public service users and professionals,
any attempt to co-produce is likely to be ineffective and tokenistic. Discuss.
Evaluate the different ways in which the service user might be involved in the delivery of
public services. Is their one ‘best’ way?
Hyde, P. and Huw, T. (2004) Service design, culture and performance: Collusion and coproduction in health care, Human Relations, 57:11, 1407-26.
Newman, J. and Vilder, E. (2006) Discriminating Customers, responsible patients, empowered
users: consumerism and the modernisation of healthcare, Journal of Social Policy, 36:2, 193-209
Brown, P and Head, B. (2019) Navigating tensions in co production: A missing link in leadership for ‐
public value, Public Administration, 97:2
Andreassen, T. (2018) From democratic consultation to user employment. Journal of Social
Askheim, O. (2005) Personal assistance- direct payments or alternative public service, Disability
and Society 20:3, 247-60
Barnes, M. Et al (2008) Designing citizen centred governance, York: Joseph Rowntree
Bartenberger, M. and Szescilo, D. (2016) The Benefits and Risks of experimental co-production,
Public Administration, 94:2, 509-25
Bellemere, G. (2000) End users: Actors in the industrial relations system? British Journal of
Industrial Relations,38:3, 383-405
Beresford, P. (2006) Developing inclusive partnerships: User-defined outcomes, networking and
knowledge- a case study, Health and Social Care in the Community, 14:5, 436-44
Bolton, S.(2002) Consumer as king in the NHS, International Journal of Public Sector
Management, 15:2, 129-39
Brandsen, T. and Honingh, M. (2016) Distinguishing different types of co-production, Public
Administration Review, 76:3, 427-38
Buckwater, N. (2014) The potential for public empowerment through government-organized
participation, Public Administration Review, 74:5
Dibben, P. And Bartlett, Local government and service users: Empowerment through user-led
innovation? Local Government Studies, 27:3, 43-58
Fletcher, D. and Wright, S. (2018) A hand-up or a step down? Criminalising benefit claimants in
Britain, Critical Social Policy, 38(2): 223-44
Fotaki, M. (2011) Towards developing new partnerships in public serves, Public Administration,
Fuertes, S. and Lindsay, C. (2016) Personalisation and Street Level Practice, Public
Administration, 94:2, 526-41.
Harris, J. (1999) State social work and social citizenship in Britain: From clientelism to
consumerism. British Journal of Social Work, 29: 915-937
Hodge, S. Participation, discourse and power: A case study in service user involvement, Critical
Social Policy 25:2, 164-79
Hudson, B. (2018) Citizen accountability in the New NHS in England, Critical Social Policy, 38(2):
Jilke, S. (2015) Choice and equality: Are vulnerable citizens worse off after liberalisation? Public
Administration, 93(1): 68-85.
Joshi, A. and Moore, M. (2004) Institutionalised Co-production: Unorthodox public service
delivery in challenging environment, Journal of Development Studies, 40:4, 31-49
Kessler, I. and Bach, S. (2011) The citizen-consumer as industrial relations actor: New ways of
working and the end use in social care, British Journal of Industrial Relations, 49:1, 80-102
Lindsay, C. et al (2018) Co-production as a route to employability, Public Administration, 96(2)
Leadbetter, C. (2004) Personalisation through Participation: A New Script for Public Services,
Marinetto, M. (2003) Who wants to be an active citizen? Sociology, 31:1
Needham, C. (2009) Policing with a smile: Narratives of consumerism in New Labour’s criminal
justice policy, Public Administration, 87:1, 97-116
Needham, C. (2103) Personalization: From day centres to community hubs, Critical Social Policy,
Needham, C. and Carr, S. (2012) Co-production: an emerging evidence base for adult social care
transformation, Social Care Institute of Excellence Research Briefing 31.
Newman, J. (2005) Enter the transformational leader: Network governance and the micro
politics of modernization, Sociology, 39:4, 717-34
O’Reilly, D. And Reed, M.(2010) Leaderism: An evolution of managerialism in UK public service
reform, Public Administration, 88:4, 960-78
Park, S. (2020) Beyond patient-centred care: a conceptual framework of co-production
mechanisms with vulnerable groups in health and social service settings, Public
Management Review, 22:3
Pedersen, J. et al (2018) Punishment on the frontline of public services, Journal of Public
Administration Research and Theory. 28(3): 339-54
Rosenthal, P. And Peccei, R. (2006) The social construction of clients by services in reformed
welfare administration, Human Relations, 59: 1633-58
Scourfield, P. (2007) Social care and the modern citizen: client, consumer, service user, manager
and entrepreneur, British Journal of Social Work, 37: 107-22
Zambrano, J et al (2017) Type of co-production and differential effects on organisation
performance, Public Administration, 95(3): 776-70
Week 5 Stakeholders (3): The Professional
How and why does new public management represent a threat to the public service
Why and how do professions develop?
Are public sector professionals distinctive and if so how and why?
How and why is the role of the professional changing in the public services?
Ackroyd, S., Kirkpatrick, I., and Walker, R. (2007) Public management reform in the UL
and its consequences for professional organization: A comparative analysis, Public
Administration, 85:1, 9-26
Evetts, J. (2009), New Professionalism and New Public Management: Changes, Continuities and
Consequences Comparative Sociology, 8:2, pp. 247-266
Ferlie, E. And Geraghty, K. (2005) Professionals in public service organizations: Implications for
public sector reforming in Ferlie, E. et al (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Public Management,
Alaszewski, A. and Manthorpe, G. (1990) Literature review: The new right and the professions,
British Journal of Social Work, 20: 237-51
Andrews, T. And Waerness, K. (2011) De-professionalisation of a female occupation: Challenges
for the sociology of professions, Current Sociology,59:1, 42-58
Aneleu, S.(1992) The professionalization of social work? A case study of three organisational
settings, Sociology, 26:1, 23-43
Beck, J. (2008) Governmental professionalism: Re-professionalising or de-professionalising
teachers in England, Journal of Education Studies, 56:2, 119-43
Currie, G. Koteyko, N. and Nerlich, B. (2009) The dynamics of professions and development of
new roles in public services organisations; The case of modern matrons in the English NHS,
Public Administration, 87:2, 295-311
Davies, C. (1996) The sociology of professions and the profession of gender, Sociology, 30:4, 661-
Evans, T. and Harris, H. (2004) Street level bureaucracy, social work and the (exaggerated) death
of discretion, British Journal of Social Work, 34:871-95
Filson, G. (1988) Ontario Teachers’ deprofessionalistion and proletarianization, Comparative
Education Review, 32:3, 298-317
Fitzgerald, L. And Ferlie, E. (2000) Professionals – Back to the future, Human Relations, 53:5,
Friedson, E. (1984) The changing nature of professional control, Annual Review of Sociology, 10:
Harris, J. (1998) Scientific management, bureau-professionalism, new managerial: The labour
process of state social work, British Journal of Social Work, 20:839-63
Kislov, R. (2016) Professionals as knowledge brokers, Public Administration, 94:2, 472-89
Kitchener, M. Kirkpatrick, I., and Whipp, R. (2000) Supervising professional worker under NPM,
British Journal of Management, 11:213-26
Kitchener, M.(2000) The bureaucractization’ of professional roles: The case of clinical directors
in UK hospitals, Organization, 7:129
McGiven, G (2015) Hybrid managers-professional identity work- The maintenance of medical
professionalism is a managerial context, Public Administration, 93(2): 412-423.
Muzio, D., Brock, D., and Suddaby, R. (2013). Professional and institutional change: Towards an
institutionalist sociology of the professions. Journal of Management Studies, 50(5), 699-712.
Nancarrow, S. and Borthwick, A. (2005) Dynamic professional boundaries in the healthcare
workforce, Sociology of Health and Illness, p 897-919
Noordegraaf, M. (2007) From pure to hybrid professionalism: Present day professionals in
ambiguous public domains, Administration and Society, 39:761
Ozga, J. (1988) Schoolwork: Interpreting the labour process of teaching, British Journal of
Sociology of Education, 9:3, 323-36.
Turner, S. (2016) Hybrids and professional communities, Public Administration, 94(3):700-16
Visser, L. et al (2018) Prying eyes: a dramaturgical approach to professional surveillance, Journal
of Management Studies, 55(4):703-727
Week 6 Stakeholders (4) – The Employee: Public
Service Ethos and Motivation
Is the public service ethos a myth or reality?
To what extent do you agree that the public service ethos exist but is changing?
Perry, J. (1997) Antecedent of public service motivation, Journal of Public Administration
Research and Theory, 2:181-97
Horton, S. (2006) The public service ethos in the British civil service: An historical institutional
analysis, Public Policy and Administration, 21:1
Steen, T. and Schott, T. (2019) Public sector employees in a challenging work
Environment, Public Administration, 97:1.
Vandenabeete, W. (2015) Past, present and future public service motivation research, Public
Administration 92(4): 779-789 (and see whole of this issue of Public Administration.)
Bolton, S. and Wibberly, G. (2013) Domiciliary care: The formal and informal labour process,
Crewson, P. (1997) Public service motivation: Building empirical evidence of incidence and
effect, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 4:99-518
Gregg, P. Grout, P., Ratcliffe, A., Smith, S.and Windmeijer, F. (2008) How important is pro social
behaviour in the delivery of public services, Centre for Market and Public Organisation, Working
Giauque, D. Et al (2012) Resigned but Satisfied: The Negative Impact of Public Service
Motivation and Red Tape on Work Satisfaction, Public Administration, 90:1, 175-193.
Harari, M. (2017) Organizational correlate of public service motivation: A meta-analysis
of two decades of empirical research, Journal of Public Administration Research and
Theory, 27: 698-84
Hebson, G. Grimshaw, D. And Marchington, M. (2003) PPPs and the changing public sector ethos:
Case study evidence from the health and local authority sectors, Work, Employment and Society,
House of Commons Public Administration Select Committee (2002) The Public Service Ethos.
Vol.1. London: House of Commons
Koumenta, M. (2011) Modernisation, Privatisation and the Public Sector Ethos, in Marsden, D.
(ed.) Employment in Leans Years, Oxford: OUP
Qing Miao, M., Eva, N., Newman A. and Schwarz, G. (2019), Public service motivation
and performance: The role of organizational identification, Public Money and
Moynihan, D and Pandey, S. (2007) The role of organization in fostering public service
motivation, Public Administration Review Jan/Feb,40-52
Morgan, J., Dill, J. and Kalleberg, A. (2013) The quality of healthcare jobs: can intrinsic rewards
compensate for low extrinsic rewards?, Work, Employment and Society, 27:5
OECD (1996) Ethics in the Public Service: Current Issues and Practice, Public Management
Occasional Papers, No. 14. OECD: Washington
Perry, J. And Wise, L. (1990) The motivational bases of public service, Public Administration
Review, 50:3, 267
Pratchett, L. and Wingfield,