Managing for inclusion: balancing control and participation

Abstract

Participation and control are both necessary in a democracy. In the two main models of public management, control trumps participation. The traditional model, Managing for Process, relies on centralized authority over process and emphasizes rules and regulations. The newer model, Managing for Results, permits decentralized control over process but relies on centralized control of results. We propose a third model, Managing for Inclusion, which has the potential to balance participation and control. Our model permits decentralized control over both process and results and requires centralized control over the implementation of participation. The tools of empowerment, teamwork, and continuous improvement take on new meanings in this model. We show how management tools such as training and rewarding can implement participation and control the process of inclusion.

Generating Resources and Energizing Frameworks Through Inclusive Public Management

“…In this paper, we explore its link with inclusive management (Feldman and Khademian 2000;. We illustrate how inclusive management operates as a particular way of knowing that enables public managers to recognize and intervene in resourcing in specific ways.…”

“…Building upon prior research (Feldman and Khademian 2000;Quick and Feldman 2007), we characterize inclusive management by reference to three broad principles. First, inclusiveness involves bringing different perspectives to bear on issues.…”

Örgüt Ortamında Artarak Yükselen Olumluluk: Pozitif Örgüt Okulu Bakış Perpektifi

“…Günümüzde, çalışanın güçlendirilmesi iç ve dış faktörlere uyum açısından önemli bir yardımcı araç olarak kabul edilmektedir (Cameron vd., 2003a). Feldman & Khademian (2000) gibi pozitif örgüt bilimcilere göre, güçlendirme çalışanların kurumun hedeflerini benimsemesine ve bu hedeflere ulaşmak için çaba göstermelerine sebep olur. Conger & Kanungo'ya (1988) göre güçlendirme kişilerin bir işi başarabileceklerine dair kendilerine olan güvenlerini ve öz yeterlilik duygularını arttırır.…”

Australian experience: Civic engagement as symbol and substance

“…Service-users tend to have important insights into how services actually operate and what improvements would be most valuable (Feldman and Khademian, 2000;Walters et al, 2000;OECD, 2001). Programme evaluations aiming to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of services need to take full account of these stakeholder perspectives.…”