Search results

The public debate on change within the public sector is actually structured along a demarcation line opposing upholders of performance and efficiency who lean toward privatization of public services, and, by another side, those who linken the defense of public services and state intervention to the rejection of any kind of evolution and the rejection of any objective of performance improvement. The research program must be enriched to be able to get out of such false alternatives and to link the political question of the role of the sate and the technical one of administrative reform. We structure the debate around the theory of knowledge, showing that theses postures both relate to logical positivism and leave aside what is really at stake with change in the public sector. In the tradition of Friedrich V. Hayek, we propose another demarcation line, between evolutionism and positivism. Drawing on the Northian distinction between organizations and institutions, we analyze their respective dynamics and the link to be established between organizational and institutional innovation within the public sector. This new focus implies a return of the political philosophy as a bearing point for public management. Secondly, we define enrichment proposal for the research program in public management such as to link political philosophy issues and practical effectiveness and efficiency. Change in a uncertain environment asks for a revision of institutions underlying beliefs and call for a trial and errors learning process. According to the prevailing demarcation line, politics is an overhead. In our perspective it regains its full role in the classical sense of classical republicanism. In this way, public management may be included in the domain of moral sciences. ; Le débat public sur le changement dans le secteur public s'organise actuellement selon une ligne de démarcation qui oppose les tenants de la performance et de l'efficience qui penchent vers la privatisation des services publics, et de l'autre les tenants de ...

The public debate on change within the public sector is actually structured along a demarcation line opposing upholders of performance and efficiency who lean toward privatization of public services, and, by another side, those who linken the defense of public services and state intervention to the rejection of any kind of evolution and the rejection of any objective of performance improvement. The research program must be enriched to be able to get out of such false alternatives and to link the political question of the role of the sate and the technical one of administrative reform. We structure the debate around the theory of knowledge, showing that theses postures both relate to logical positivism and leave aside what is really at stake with change in the public sector. In the tradition of Friedrich V. Hayek, we propose another demarcation line, between evolutionism and positivism. Drawing on the Northian distinction between organizations and institutions, we analyze their respective dynamics and the link to be established between organizational and institutional innovation within the public sector. This new focus implies a return of the political philosophy as a bearing point for public management. Secondly, we define enrichment proposal for the research program in public management such as to link political philosophy issues and practical effectiveness and efficiency. Change in a uncertain environment asks for a revision of institutions underlying beliefs and call for a trial and errors learning process. According to the prevailing demarcation line, politics is an overhead. In our perspective it regains its full role in the classical sense of classical republicanism. In this way, public management may be included in the domain of moral sciences. ; Le débat public sur le changement dans le secteur public s'organise actuellement selon une ligne de démarcation qui oppose les tenants de la performance et de l'efficience qui penchent vers la privatisation des services publics, et de l'autre les tenants de ...

Abstract : The main hypothesis of this research relies on the discrepancy between the evolution of the state and that of the other components of the socio-economic system as a factor of nations competitiveness. By adopting an evolutionist and historical perspective, the state is analyzed as an actor of the nations' evolution in their ability to absorb technological progress. The framework relies on the northian distinction between organizations and institutions, focusing on innovation's dynamics within public institutions and organizations. Both are analyzed as adaptive systems co-evolving in two temporal dimensions: the braudelian long-term since the Renaissance, and the present short-term of the information technologies revolution. The first part focuses on innovation as a socio-economic process stepping from disruption to continuities. Chapter I put in perspective the evolution of the state and of the technology. Chapter II analyzes what is at stake with the information technologies revolution. Chapter III assesses the role of the state and its evolution in the history of Great Britain and the US. The second part studies what are the possibilities for the state to get transformed (chapter I) drawing on an assessment on the New Public Management movement. The analyze goes on organizations (chapter II) through a comparison between cases of organizational transformation in France and in the US. A compared analysis between the ongoing institutional change in the budgetary framework in France and Canada allows to assess how to link institutional and organizational transformation. As a conclusion, the steering of such a reform appear to be socially feasible and technically mature, but suffers from a lag of evolution at the institutional level where politicians and mainstreams ideas dally in integrating the parameters of the third industrial revolution paradigm. ; L'hypothèse principale de cette recherche est le décalage entre l'évolution de l'Etat et celle des autres composantes du système socio-économique comme facteur de compétitivité des nations. S'inscrivant dans une perspective historique évolutionniste, l'Etat est analysé comme acteur de l'évolution des nations dans leur capacité à absorber les progrès de la technologie. Le cadre d'analyse repose sur la distinction northienne entre institutions et organisations, en recherchant les dynamiques d'innovations des organisations et des institutions du secteur public et leurs liens. Ils sont analysés comme des systèmes adaptatifs co-évoluant dans deux dimensions temporelles : celle du temps long depuis la Renaissance et celle du temps court des défis de la III° révolution industrielle basée sur les technologies de l'information. La première partie étudie l'innovation comme processus socio-économique allant de ruptures en continuité. Le chapitre I met en perspective l'évolution de l'Etat et celle de la technologie. Le chapitre II analyse les enjeux de cette évolution à l'heure des technologies de l'information. Le chapitre III fait le bilan du rôle et de l'évolution de l'Etat en Grande-Bretagne et aux Etats-Unis. La seconde partie étudie les possibilités pour l'Etat de se transformer (chapitre I) à partir du bilan de la nouvelle gestion publique. L'analyse se poursuit au niveau des organisations (chapitre II) par une étude comparée de quatre cas en France et aux Etats-Unis. L'analyse comparée des réformes de la gestion publique en France et au Canada permet d'évaluer la possibilité de lier innovation organisationnelle et innovation institutionnelle (chapitre III). En conclusion, le pilotage d'une telle réforme apparaît comme socialement possible et techniquement mature au niveau organisationnel, mais souffrir d'un retard d'évolution au niveau institutionnel où le politique et les idées dominantes tardent à intégrer les données du nouveau paradigme de la III° révolution industrielle.

Abstract : The main hypothesis of this research relies on the discrepancy between the evolution of the state and that of the other components of the socio-economic system as a factor of nations competitiveness. By adopting an evolutionist and historical perspective, the state is analyzed as an actor of the nations' evolution in their ability to absorb technological progress. The framework relies on the northian distinction between organizations and institutions, focusing on innovation's dynamics within public institutions and organizations. Both are analyzed as adaptive systems co-evolving in two temporal dimensions: the braudelian long-term since the Renaissance, and the present short-term of the information technologies revolution. The first part focuses on innovation as a socio-economic process stepping from disruption to continuities. Chapter I put in perspective the evolution of the state and of the technology. Chapter II analyzes what is at stake with the information technologies revolution. Chapter III assesses the role of the state and its evolution in the history of Great Britain and the US. The second part studies what are the possibilities for the state to get transformed (chapter I) drawing on an assessment on the New Public Management movement. The analyze goes on organizations (chapter II) through a comparison between cases of organizational transformation in France and in the US. A compared analysis between the ongoing institutional change in the budgetary framework in France and Canada allows to assess how to link institutional and organizational transformation. As a conclusion, the steering of such a reform appear to be socially feasible and technically mature, but suffers from a lag of evolution at the institutional level where politicians and mainstreams ideas dally in integrating the parameters of the third industrial revolution paradigm. ; L'hypothèse principale de cette recherche est le décalage entre l'évolution de l'Etat et celle des autres composantes du système socio-économique comme ...

At date, there is no standardized definition of what a smart city is, in spite many apply to propose a definition that fit with their offer, subsuming the whole of the city in one of its functions (smart grid, smart mobility…). Considering the smart cities as an ecosystem, that is to say a city that has systemic auto poeitic properties that are more than the sum of its parts, we develop an approach of modeling the smartness of the city. To understand how the city may behave as a sustainable ecosystem, we need a framework to design the interactions of the city subsystems. First we define a smart city as an ecosystem that is more than the sum of its parts, where sustainability is maintained through the interactions of urban functions. Second, we present a methodology to sustain the development over time of this ecosystem: Urban Lifecycle Management. Third, we define the tasks to be carried out by an integrator of the functions that constitute the smart city, we assume public administration has to play this role. Fourth, we present what should be a smart government for the smart city and the new capabilities to be developed. ; At date, there is no standardized definition of what a smart city is, in spite many apply to propose a definition that fit with their offer, subsuming the whole of the city in one of its functions (smart grid, smart mobility…). Considering the smart cities as an ecosystem, that is to say a city that has systemic auto poeitic properties that are more than the sum of its parts, we develop an approach of modeling the smartness of the city. To understand how the city may behave as a sustainable ecosystem, we need a framework to design the interactions of the city subsystems. First we define a smart city as an ecosystem that is more than the sum of its parts, where sustainability is maintained through the interactions of urban functions. Second, we present a methodology to sustain the development over time of this ecosystem: Urban Lifecycle Management. Third, we define the tasks to be carried out by an integrator of the functions that constitute the smart city, we assume public administration has to play this role. Fourth, we present what should be a smart government for the smart city and the new capabilities to be developed.

Résumé Le secteur public serait, d'après le sens commun, caractérisé par une forte résistance au changement. Est-ce justifié ? Dans cette recherche, nous adoptons la distinction northienne entre institutions et organisations en nous focalisant sur ces dernières et leur capacité de changement. Nous tentons d'identifier tout au long de cette étude le levier stratégique le plus efficace pour opérer un changement organisationnel dans le secteur public. Pour ce faire, nous procédons à une revue de la littérature sur les stratégies de changement et leur mise en contexte dans les organisations publiques en considérant la résilience organisationnelle comme véritable vecteur stratégique du changement dans l'organisation. Pour éclairer ces propos, nous procédons à une analyse empirique de quatre cas autour de la question suivante : peut-on bâtir des organisations publiques capables de co-évolution avec leur environnement ? Nous conclurons sur l'intérêt de la crise comme vecteur de changement organisationnel dans les organisations publiques. Résumé à l'intention des praticiens Le secteur public est généralement considéré comme étant résistant au changement. Dans cet article nous montrons, au travers d'études de cas, que les organisations publiques présentent des aptitudes au changement égales au secteur privé. Nous mettons l'accent sur les crises qui fournissent dans le secteur public des occasions particulièrement propices au changement venant palier l'absence d'évaluation et de feedback court du marché et dégageons les stratégies possibles.

According to the common vision, the public sector is strongly change-resistant. Is this justified? In this research, we adopt the Northian distinction between institutions and organizations by focusing on the latter and their capability for change. We try to identify the strategically most effective lever to operate an organizational change in the public sector. We first review the literature on change strategies and their setting in the context of public organizations. Then, we synthesize the conclusions of four case studies around a question: `Is building public organizations capable of co-evolution with their environment feasible?' We will present some strategies of evolution for public organizations, in response to a state of crisis, constituting a vector of organizational change. We conclude on the interest of considering crisis as a vector of organizational change in public organizations. Points for practitioners The public sector is commonly said to be change-resistant. Through case studies we prove this opinion to be false and that change aptitudes are identical to other organizations. We emphasize crises that provide particular opportunities that allow us to offset the absence of performance evaluation and the lack of feedback from the market, and we underline possible change strategies.