| dc.description.abstract | In this research the influence of the ideology of managing for outcomes in the Department of Corrections is analysed. The focus is on the specific influence the ideology has on the strategic management of the Department. Both for the scientific literature and for the public sector of New Zealand, it is relevant to know how this ideology influences the Department of Corrections. From the information in this research, other public sector organisations (in New Zealand) can gain knowledge that will help them to deal with the ideology themselves.
The New Zealand of the 1980s was considered to be the frontrunner of New Public Management (NPM) reforms. However, during the 1990s academics and the public started to worry about the long term focus of the public sector and new initiatives were implemented that tried to put more emphasis on outcomes. The Department of Corrections was one of the public sector agencies that took part in a lot of these initiatives. Recently, the government initiated the Better Public Services programme that sets ten goals for the public sector. The goal that has been set for the Department of Corrections is to reduce reoffending by 25% in 2017. The Department of Corrections supports this goal, but also acknowledges that things need to change to achieve this. The first step is to adjust the strategic management to this new ideology. The central question in this research is: How does the ideology of managing for outcomes influence the strategic management of the Department of Corrections in New Zealand from 1995-2012?
The ideology of managing for outcomes can be defined by three main elements. First, the ideology is emphasising a broad and sustaining perspective. Second, to be able to achieve the results of the organisation, it is necessary to collaborate with (other) public organisations. And third, to achieve new ways of workings, three main roles need to be present in the organisation; a public entrepreneur, fellow-travellers and guardian angels. Strategic management can be defined in both the process and the elements. The process of strategic management is called ‘planned emergence’ and is a combination of both bottom-up and top-down decision-making. The four elements of strategic management are a long term focus, an internal integration, external perspective and political authority.
The influence of the ideology of managing for outcomes on the strategic management is noticeable in both the process and in the elements. In the process of strategic management, the number of actors that are involved increased because of the ideology of managing for outcomes. Both the central guidelines and decentralised strategy-making of the organisation are more goal- and results- oriented. In the elements of strategic management one can see the difference in internal integration; activities are all aligned to achieve the goals of reducing reoffending, rather than to achieve performance targets. The most surprising difference is the political authority; the goals that gained importance are imposed by the government which restricts the room for manoeuvre for the Department. | |
