• Explain the impact from political governance approaches upon the provision of public service
• Compare and contrast theories on change and public value, including the role of the manager in these processes
• Apply concepts and theories to analyse cases of change and public value creation
• Critically evaluate and discuss when and how change in public service provision is relevant

This elective provides students with a fundamental understanding of the conditions for creating change and public value within the public service field. The outset is that both public and private organizations need to take the political context into account when they attempt to create changes in the provision of public service. This way the elective addresses the growing interest in exploring how changes in public service provision can be obtained, but also the discussions about how public service can be said to create public ‘value’.

The students are introduced to contemporary political governance approaches with an impact on the provision of public service. This includes the traditional bureaucracy, New Public Management and network governance. These approaches create different conditions and drivers for change. The students will also become familiar with different forms of change processes and the role of managers in creating public value, implementing new organizational models and steering methods, creating innovation etc. The course involves discussions about the desirability of change in the provision of public service, and the potential changes in roles and relationships between politicians, public managers, private companies, and citizens.

Summarizing some of the central issues of the course:

• Insights into the political context for creating changes in the provision of public service
• Conceptualization of contemporary governance approaches  such as traditional bureaucracy, New Public Management and network governance
• Theorization of change and public value, including the role of the manager in these processes
• Discussions of potential changes in the roles and relationships between politicians, public managers, private companies, and citizens
• Discussions of when and how change in public service provision might be relevant

Students learn to navigate in the fault-line between the public and private sectors and to combine business skills with knowledge of a highly political context, where the provision of public services and the chosen managerial approaches are constantly negotiated. Such knowledge might be useful for employment in larger public organizations, in larger NGOs, or in private companies providing public service such as health care or elderly care in collaboration with the public sector, or in companies offering supportive products and technologies such as information systems, engineering expertise, or maintenance capabilities.

This course is part of the minor in 'Public Private relations'.

• Brunsson, N. (2006). Administrative reforms as routines. Scandinavian Journal of Management, pp 243-252.
• du Gay, P. (2008). “Without Affection or Enthusiasm’’: problems of involvement and attachment in responsive public management.  Organization, Vol. 15, No. 3, 2008, pp 335-353.
• Edelenbos, J. &  Klijn, E.H. (2009) Project Versus Process Management in Public-Private Partnership: Relation Between Management Style and Outcomes, International Public Management Journal, 12:3, 310-331.
• Fernandez, S. & Rainey, H. G. (2006). Managing Successful Organizational Change in the Public Sector. Public Administration Review, March/April, pp 168-176.
• Hood, C. (1991), A public management for all seasons ? Public Administration, 69, pp 3–19.
• Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in Group Dynamics. Human Relations 1, pp 143-153.
• Moore, M. H. (2000). Managing for Value. Organizational Strategy in For-Profit, Nonprofit and Governmental Organizations.  Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 29(1), pp. 183-204
• O’Flynn, Janine (2007). ”From New Public Management to Public Value: Paradigmatic Change and Managerial Implications” Australian Journal of Public Administration Vol. 66. No. 3., pp 353-366.
• Pollitt, Christopher. & Bouckaert, Geert (2011): Public Management Reform. A Comparative Analysis: New Public Management, Governance, and the Neo-Weberian State. 3nd edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Sonenshein, S. (2010). We’re changing—or are we? Untangling the role of progressive, regressive, and stability narratives during strategic change implementation. Academy of Management Journal, vol. 53, no. 3, pp 477–512
• Sørensen, E. (2007). Metagovernance. In Public Administration in Transition, pp 107-130
• Sørensen, E. & Torfing, J. (2011). Enhancing Collaborative Innovation in the Public Sector. Administration & Society, pp 1-27.
• Sørensen, E. & Waldorff, S.B. (2014). Collaborative policy innovation: Problems and potential. The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal, Volume 19(3), 2014, article 2.
• Waldorff, S. B., Reay, T. & Goodrick, E. (2013). A tale of two countries: How different constellations of logics impact action. In Lounsbury, M. & Boxenbaum, E. (Eds.) Institutional Logics in Action – Part A (Research in the Sociology of Organizations, Volume 39a), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp 99-129.
• Waldorff, S.B., Ebbesen B.V. & Kristensen, L.S. (2014). ”The Complexity of Governance: Challenges for Public Sector Innovation” in Ansell, C. and Torfing, J. (Eds). Public Innovation Through Collaboration and Design. New York, NY: Routledge, pp 70-88.
• Weick, K.E. & Quinn, E. (1999). Organizational change and development. Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 50, No. 1, pp 361-386.