Porównaj metody
Przeglądaj wybrane metody obok siebie; wiersze, które się różnią, są wyróżnione.
| New Public Management Assessment× | Regulatory Enforcement Analysis× | |
|---|---|---|
| Dziedzina | Public Administration | Public Administration |
| Rodzina | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Rok powstania≠ | 1991 | 1992 |
| Twórca≠ | Christopher Hood | Ian Ayres & John Braithwaite |
| Typ≠ | Analytical assessment framework | Analytical / strategic framework |
| Źródło pierwotne≠ | Hood, C. (1991). A Public Management for All Seasons? Public Administration, 69(1), 3–19. DOI ↗ | Ayres, I., & Braithwaite, J. (1992). Responsive Regulation: Transcending the Deregulation Debate. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN: 9780195070705 |
| Inne nazwy | NPM Assessment, Managerialism Assessment, Public Management Reform Analysis, Hood NPM Doctrine Analysis | Responsive Regulation Analysis, Enforcement Pyramid Analysis, Compliance and Enforcement Analysis, Regulatory Strategy Analysis |
| Pokrewne | 4 | 4 |
| Podsumowanie≠ | 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. | Regulatory enforcement analysis examines how regulators secure compliance — when they persuade, when they punish, and how they choose between the two. Its central framework is responsive regulation, set out by Ian Ayres and John Braithwaite in their 1992 book, which argues that enforcement should be tit-for-tat and proportionate: start with dialogue and persuasion, but escalate up an enforcement pyramid to warnings, civil penalties, licence suspension and ultimately prohibition for actors who persist in non-compliance. The analysis maps a regulator's strategies onto this pyramid and assesses how well its responses are matched to the motivations of the regulated. |
| ScholarGateZbiór danych ↗ |
|
|