Målstyring på ein fredag

Hadde eigentleg tenkt å ta helga, men denne gonzoen av Njord V. Svendsen på Khrono må delast: «Mot rikare delmål å trå : Målstyring. Eit sinne sig ut frå seminarrom og opne kontorplassar på universitet og høgskular. Raknar tilliten til kontroll etter 30 år med New Public Management?»

Så skal vi etter kvart diskutere her på bloggen: Ingen snakkar om det, men har verkeleg aldri folkebiblioteket blitt del av New Public Management?

2 Comments to “Målstyring på ein fredag”

  1. Vi klipper frå denne: Düren, P., Landøy, A., & Saarti, J. (2017). New public management and libraries: A success story or just an excuse for cost reduction. Library Management, 38(8/9), 477–487. doi:10.1108/LM-01-2017-0005

    “(…) To fulfill these requirements new types of management tools have been implemented in public as well as academic libraries. “Most common and frequently used NPM tools and instruments […] are the use of performance measurement, the emphasis on output and controls that objectives are met […], the contracting and outsourcing, the disaggregation of and competition within the public sector, the emphasis on the quality of service delivery, e-government tools. In many cases private sector management styles are copied by public organizations – hands-on management, input discipline, more product instead of function-oriented management, careers organized on a professional instead of formal-legal basis, mobility increases and flexible work contracts” (De Vries and Nemec, 2013, p. 7).
    Thus, NPM means that libraries need to transform their organizational identity as a public service organization into a more business-like identity (Skålén, 2004, p. 251).
    Besides this “[…] NPM-like reforms […] have resulted in leadership approaches that are a mismatch for the unique organizational structure, the complexity in challenges […]” (Kellis and Ran, 2015, p. 616).
    All in all, “the net result is a decrease in performance resulting from NPM-based performance-focus[s]ed tactics compared to opportunities for improved organizational performance generated by a leadership-based focus on employees, values, and networks” (Kellis and Ran, 2015, p. 616).”


    “In the survey, the percentage of respondents that replied “high level of knowledge” to any of these tools is quite small, for most of them less than 10 percent. Through the interviews, it became clear that there was considerable confusion about the different tools, the definitions, content and usage. It should also be noted that the number of respondents who report a higher or lower degree of knowledge is reduced for the least known tools, meaning that there are a number of respondents to the questionnaire that either skipped the question or replied “don’t know/not applicable”.
    However; when looking at the 11 best-known tools and approaches communication, activity plans and accountancy, use of statistics/indicators, user surveys, management by objectives, work environment surveys, strategic planning, project management, knowledge-based/evidence-based praxis, education plans and value-based management, there is a clear majority of tools that point to Norwegian library leaders as knowledgeable about NPM.
    Both the Danish and Norwegian data, while having slightly different approaches and collected in more or less similar ways, find that the library leaders are knowledgeable about management tools and approaches connected with NPM. However, none of the surveys used the expression “NPM,” or had NPM as an initial focus.”

    Så nei.

  2. Interessant at de har forska på dette! Men dette kunne vel vore popularisert og på norsk? Har ikkje sett det?
    Hadde tenkt å ta opp dette på eit seinare tidspunkt, men får prøve å forsere det.

Leave a Reply

Translate »
%d bloggers like this: