Sammenlign metoder

	Institutional Capacity Assessment	New Public Management Assessment
Fagområde	Public Administration	Public Administration
Familie	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Oprindelsesår	2008	1991
Ophavsperson	UNDP / World Bank capacity-development practice	Christopher Hood
Type	Diagnostic assessment framework	Analytical assessment framework
Oprindelig kilde	United Nations Development Programme. Capacity Assessment Methodology and supporting practice notes. UNDP.	Hood, C. (1991). A Public Management for All Seasons? Public Administration, 69(1), 3–19.
Aliasser	Capacity Assessment Framework, Organisational Capacity Assessment, Institutional Capacity Diagnostic, Public-Sector Capacity Appraisal	NPM Assessment, Managerialism Assessment, Public Management Reform Analysis, Hood NPM Doctrine Analysis
Relaterede	4	4
Resumé	Institutional capacity assessment is a structured diagnostic that gauges the ability of public-sector organisations and systems to perform their functions, deliver services and sustain results over time. Drawing on frameworks such as the UNDP Capacity Assessment Methodology and World Bank capacity-development practice, it examines capacity at multiple levels — the enabling environment, the organisation, and individuals — across functional dimensions like leadership, accountability, resources and skills. Capacities are rated against defined criteria, gaps between desired and actual capacity are identified, and the findings drive targeted capacity-development responses. It complements outcome-level measures such as the Worldwide Governance Indicators.	New Public Management (NPM) assessment evaluates how far a public organisation or system has adopted the cluster of managerial reform doctrines that swept the public sector from the 1980s — and with what effects. Christopher Hood's 1991 article A Public Management for All Seasons? gave NPM its name and identified its core doctrines: hands-on professional management, explicit performance standards, output controls, disaggregation into units, competition, private-sector management styles, and discipline in resource use. The assessment scores adoption of these doctrines, evaluates their effects, and appraises the trade-offs against enduring public-service values such as equity and accountability.