APA RESEARCH PAPER

APA Research Paper

APA Research Paper

Introduction

Our era is a time span of change. This is not odd in the annals of mankind. What perhaps is distinct this time is thead covering change shall be managed. This is true for societies and individuals but in particular for organizations. Organizational change management does not only happen in business organizations but increasingly also in public sector organizations. And there is a particular understanding based on neo-liberalism about the nature and objectives of organizational change which dominates discourses and policies - new public management (Dent and Barry, 2004, p. 7; Pollitt, 1990). It is a (inconsistent) set of assumptions and conclusions about how public sector-organizations should be organized, run and function in a quasi-business manner. It might be defined as a strategic initiative, if not ideology, to make public sector organizations - and the people working in them - “market-oriented” and “business-like”, i.e. performance-, cost-, effectiveness- and audit-oriented (Deem and Brehony, 2005; Deem, 2004; Shattock, 2003; Newton, 2003; Kezar and Eckel, 2002; Spencer-Matthews, 2001; Deem, 2001, pp. 10-3; Vickers and Kouzmin, 2001; pp. 109, 110; McAuley et al., 2000,p. 89; Cohen et al., 1999, pp. 477, 478).

There is convincing empirical evidence that managerialism is on the agenda not only in industrialized Western nations such as USA and Canada, UK and continental Europe, Australia and New Zealand (Torres, 2004; Pina and Torres, 2003; Pollitt, 1990; Aronowitz and Giroux, 1985, 1991), but also in many industrialized and even developing countries in Asia and Africa (Haque, 1999, pp. 468, 469). It is a “global occurrence” (Kirkpatrick et al., 2005,p. 13).

Reasons for change - scaring people helps

Under a new vice-chancellor IU has started in 2002 another strategic change initiative which cuts deeply into all levels of the organization. Kezar and Eckel (2002,p. 299) sharp out that change “often asks for risk and an unsure future or place visited, so having a convincing cause for change and a suggested direction is crucial”. Before we arrive to the change initiative's itself and its intended as well as accidental penalties it is worth to glimpse how it is justified by its proponents and how the article unfolds.

The justification of the paternalistic type of leadership

For the proponents of managerialistic approaches there is not only an “enemy outside” but also an “enemy inside” - the people. Austin and Currie (2003,p. 236) are quite usual demonstrations for such thinking:

One of the by-products of change is confusion, and without clear communication of what is and is not over; people are expected to do one of three things:

not challenge give up anything and set alight out endeavouring to do everything;

make their own conclusions on what to hold and give up; and

Toss out everything that was finished in the past.

In other words: if people dare to make their own decisions and/or trying to do what they think is best this can cause (serious) damage - to the “grand plan” of the change initiative. For the proponent's two aspects, therefore, are very ...