Convergence: The Useful Myth?

In: Public administration: an international quarterly, Band 79, Heft 4, S. 933-947

Abstract

Many academics have questioned the thesis (most prominently associated with Osborne & Gaebler's Re-Inventing Government [1992]) that there is an inevitable & global convergence towards a particular, new style of public management. Yet, despite the ongoing production of scholarly evidence of global diversity, pronouncements of convergence continue to be made by politicians, civil servants, & some academics. In this paper it is suggested that, better to understand this apparent controversy, a subtler conceptualization of convergence is needed. First, convergence can take place at different stages or levels -- ie, there can be convergence in debate, convergence in reform decisions, convergence in actual practices, or, ultimately, convergence in results. There is no automatic succession from one stage to the next: the momentum of convergence can (& frequently does) stall or dwindle at any point. Furthermore, it should be recognized that convergence claims may have a value of their own, whether or not they lead to actual convergence of practice or improvements in outcomes. Convergence, in short, may be a useful myth. 52 References. Adapted from the source document.