Abstract Existing scholarship widely recognises the importance of leadership as an antecedent of public‐sector innovation. As empirical research on the relationship between public‐sector innovation and leadership grows, it is important to review this scholarship to identify progress, knowledge gaps, and opportunities for future research that will help the field mature. This systematic review focuses on articles that rely on quantitative methods ( N = 62). We examine how public‐sector innovation and leadership are conceptualised and measured, the data sources and research designs used to study the relationship between the two, and the findings that emerge from this growing field of study. We identify the important contributions of this body of work as well as its limitations and conclude by presenting an analytic framework to guide future research in this area. Points for practitioners The relationship between public‐sector innovation and leadership is multifaceted: leaders at various levels in public organisations can shape innovation in different ways. Leaders often shape public‐sector innovation by affecting employee behaviours and actions, but they can also do so by shaping organisational conditions. Leaders need to better understand these nuances to be more effective in advancing public‐sector innovation.
Abstract Young people should have a say in policies that affect them. Power imbalances and limiting their involvement to consultative processes in policymaking continue to be barriers to participation. Progress has been made to involve young people directly in policymaking, but barriers to their full participation persist. The aim of this research study was to emulate a Policy Lab to learn from young people how they could be better included in this policy development method. Their reported experience of the workshop and perspectives as young people were analysed using rapid qualitative analysis and used to inform adaptations of the method. Three themes were identified: providing more information, greater accessibility, and facilitating participation. Overall, the collective feedback from young people was focused on being prepared to participate and addressing power imbalances between youth and adult participants. Implications for practice are identified. We present an adaptation of the Policy Lab method to better include young people. Points for practitioners While the importance of involving young people in the development of policy that effects their lives is understood, oftentimes practices continue to limit or restrict this involvement through persistent barriers to their involvement. Young people recognise the barriers they face to being equally involved in workshop activities with adults and have ideas on how to address them to improve their direct involvement in policy development methods. This research presents adaptations to a policy development method through providing more information, greater accessibility, and facilitating participation; that also provides direction for policy practitioners more generally.
Abstract Australian government organisations are pivotal in helping to meet the United Nations sustainable development goals. Yet while these organisations promote sustainability in their strategic plans, they struggle to embed these same commitments into their own infrastructure and construction projects. This study examines this persistent disconnect using the lens of strategic decoupling, which explains how organisations symbolically align with external expectations while internal practices remain unchanged. Using a two‐stage qualitative design, we conducted a positivist discourse analysis of strategic artefacts from six government organisations and a theoretically informed interpretivist analysis of 30 interviews with project professionals, framed by strong structuration theory. We identify widespread policy–practice decoupling, reinforced by institutional inertia and the flawed success logic in project management's iron triangle. Our findings reveal the moral burden experienced by middle managers who, as reflexively knowledgeable actors, find their professional identities in conflict with organisational mandates. We extend strategic decoupling theory by introducing the interpretive authority of middle managers and the concept of strategic recoupling. These are intentional efforts by agents to bridge the gap between rhetoric and practice. We call for systemic reform, including strengthened accountability and targeted support for managers to shift sustainability from a ceremonial commitment to an operational reality. Points for practitioners Government sustainability policies often decouple from project reality, creating persistent gaps between rhetoric and practice. Middle managers act as pivotal agents for recoupling but lack sufficient institutional authority and support. Middle managers strengthen accountability by embedding measurable sustainability targets and post‐project impact reviews into governance frameworks. Middle managers integrate sustainability ratings into design‐phase documents to avoid procurements locking in high‐emission materials.
Abstract The lands and waters now called Australia have been home to diverse political ordering and institutions for thousands of generations. The comparatively very recent arrival of settlers and the violent imposition of their political structures and institutions have forced First Nations to respond to, adapt to, resist, and refuse colonial authority. While the settler state generally operates in ignorance of or indifference to Indigenous laws and culture, First Nations are burdened with a far more difficult task: to navigate the settler order while also honouring their obligations to Country and people. At this interface, First Nations organisations and institutions operate around and through a complex entanglement of cultural ideas, norms, and values, where the reality of contested jurisdiction and authority is made visible. This article foregrounds these entangled relations to explore the possibilities and limitations presented by Indigenous political formations of diverse kinds—from Aboriginal community‐controlled organisations to Indigenous corporations to new representative bodies such as the First Peoples’ Assembly of Victoria. Rather than ‘failing’, as mainstream political discourse often suggests, these Indigenous governance institutions have adapted, responded, innovated, and evolved, pushing towards greater autonomy and self‐determination. This article focuses on the experience, challenges, and innovations of Indigenous communities as they seek to navigate complex relationships with the state using a variety of organisational vehicles. Points for practitioners First Nations governance requires Indigenous people to manage both the demands of the settler state and their own responsibilities to culture and Country. This is complex and difficult work that receives little recognition. Public administration practitioners working in this domain would benefit from recognising that they are also in a governance relationship that has been shaped by the politics of colonialism, rather than being authoritative and neutral practitioners of governance. Indigenous efforts would achieve greater success if governments and policymakers were able to relinquish control and become more responsive to Indigenous forms of governance.
Workplace incivility may seem minor compared to bullying or harassment, but its cumulative impact is profound, eroding employee well-being, team dynamics, and organisational productivity. Incivility reflects low-level behaviours and actions (e.g. being rude), which are still detrimental because they contravene workplace norms around manners and respect and can be cumulative. Unlike bullying and abusive supervision, incivility is likely to be ignored because it is seen as inconsequential. Despite this, incivility has strong evidence of having detrimental consequences. A major gap in the literature is around why employees might experience incivility. Further, unlike other destructive social behaviours, incivility has a personal focus, with incivility likely to be experienced from supervisors and peers, but also to be personally instigated. The present study explores organisational-based self-esteem to determine whether personal disposition protects public sector employees from incivility experienced and instigated. Further, high-performance work systems and perceived organisational support are included as moderators (including together) to better understand the role of organisational context in shaping incivility. Using a sample of New Zealand and Australian public sector employees (n = 356), we find strong support for our hypotheses, although interaction effects typically show that only one form of organisational context is most beneficial. We discuss the implications for the sector.Points for practitioners Public sector employees receive incivility from supervisors and peers at low levels and engage in such behaviours even less. Public sector employees are less likely to receive and engage in incivility when they have strong self-esteem and work in a context of strong HR practices supporting staff. Combinations of effects show that high self-esteem and high HR practices lead to the lowest levels of incivility received and engaged in.
This paper explores the intersection of knowledge politics and policy uptake, drawing on over a decade of collaborative work between the authors at the Tangentyere Council Research Hub. The authors, representing different knowledge systems, have developed a practice that respects both political and epistemic dimensions of their work. Drawing on conversation as a knowledge production strategy, the authors reflect on the work of the Hub in relation to the policy processes their research sought to inform. The paper examines the contested reality of life in Mparntwe/Alice Springs, focusing on the political question of whose knowledge counts in policy directed at Aboriginal people. Recognising the enduring sovereignty and knowledge practices of Aboriginal people, the paper charts how the Research Hub came into being and the role it plays in making Aboriginal perspectives visible. Recognising the dominant role Western knowledge systems play in policy processes, the authors seek to understand why Aboriginal voices and perspectives seem to remain sidelined even when made visible. The paper identifies epistemic injustice as a way to understand how Aboriginal knowledge is overlooked in policy processes, using this concept to explain why Western-derived processes marginalise Indigenous perspectives. The authors argue for the recognition of Aboriginal knowledge as valuable and essential for effective policy development. They call for a shift in how Aboriginal knowledge is positioned within policy-making, advocating for a more inclusive and equitable approach that acknowledges the impact of colonial processes, but which, importantly, is focused on recognising and strengthening local knowledge traditions.Points for practitioners Recognition and respect for Aboriginal knowledge: Aboriginal people maintain sovereignty over their lands and have complex knowledge systems that are often ignored or undervalued by Western frameworks. Recognising and respecting these systems is crucial for effective engagement and policy development. Existing policy processes are epistemic and political in nature: Existing policy processes are built on particular ways of knowing the world; assumptions about what issues are important and who the objects of policy are remain embedded in existing practices. Understanding the assumptions underlying one's own practice is essential if one is to engage with others who think and know differently. Epistemic injustice: Epistemic injustice, in which Aboriginal knowledge is often sidelined or considered inferior, should be recognised as arising in and through professional practice. This understanding can help professionals advocate for more inclusive and equitable shared knowledge practices. Dynamic and adaptive practices: The dynamic nature of Aboriginal culture, which adapts to changing circumstances while maintaining core traditions, should be recognised. This adaptability should be acknowledged and supported in professional practices. Advocacy and change: Professionals should advocate for changes in how Aboriginal knowledge is positioned within policy-making. This includes challenging existing assumptions and working towards more equitable frameworks that recognise the value of diverse knowledge systems.
The Public Service Logic (PSL) user-centric perspective on value creation has been one of its main critiques. Scholars argue that for some real-world applications, such as emergency services, where users cannot engage with service offerings, the PSL must consider the roles of other service actors beyond just facilitators. We conducted 41 semi-structured interviews within the Brazilian rescue services to explore paramedics' experiences working in life-threatening accidents and to understand how private value is created when citizens are unresponsive. In such a life-and-death situation, we identify the peripheral value that shifts from a user-centric perspective to a context- and provider-stakeholder-centric perspective. Hence, our study contributes to the PSL literature by reconciling PSL's user-centric criticism and exploring how service providers can create value without citizen engagement with the service offerings.Points for practitioners For practitioners who adopt the PSL perspective, this study underscores the need to reconsider the traditional view of public officials as mere facilitators of value. In service contexts where co-production is inherently constrained, such as emergency or critical care, providers may need to assume a more active and situated role in shaping value outcomes. The study encourages public managers to reflect on how service design and delivery can better accommodate situations where users are reluctant. Rather than assuming co-production is always feasible, practitioners can benefit from a more nuanced understanding of users' circumstances, capabilities, and vulnerabilities when shaping service processes. Value creation/destruction can move beyond user engagement, relying on closer stakeholders. This highlights the importance of providing focused training to enhance providers' active intervening role and empowerment. This is important because providers act as public officials, assuming the best care for 'incapacitated' users based on their knowledge, experience, and environmental evidence.
The need to improve students' political fluency and produce graduates equipped for the 'real world of policy-making' has led to the creation of an experimental course. In this course, students use Parliamentary primary source documents to track a policy issue through the political decision-making process, identifying the factors impacting the outcome. The detailed engagement with the primary sources in the policy development process makes this a rich applied learning experience that takes students into real-world policy-making. However, a high level of explicit instruction is required to empower students to navigate the complexity of this task. This article outlines the lessons learnt about the guidance required to facilitate this valuable learning experience so that others might build upon it.
When Victoria introduced legislation requiring all 79 councils to adopt deliberative engagement, 92% continued practices the legislation had just removed. This paradox reveals a fundamental challenge in embedding democratic innovations within existing systems of government: legislation signals commitment but cannot disrupt entrenched institutional practices. Drawing on interviews, observations, and surveys across all Victorian local governments during initial implementation of the Local Government Act 2020 (Vic), this paper demonstrates how path dependency and mimetic behaviours enable established participation mechanisms to persist, dilute, or undermine mandated innovations. The analysis shows that public exhibition, a consultation process removed from statutory requirements, was narratively recast as necessary for legitimacy while simultaneously privileging existing stakeholders and eroding the legitimacy of deliberative engagement practices. The paper makes both analytical and practical contributions by identifying drivers and constraints that government actors navigate when implementing democratic innovations. These findings reveal that institutionalising democratic innovations requires more than legislative mandates: it demands active reshaping of organisational cultures, sector-wide narratives, and the authorising environments that determine what counts as legitimate participation. Without confronting these deeper institutional logics, mandated reforms will continue to be absorbed into familiar routines, with their transformative potential neutralised before it can take hold.Points for practitioners Legislative ambiguity enables path dependency. Without clear definitions, organisations default to familiar practices. Deliberative principles need to be articulated to prevent established practices being rebranded as deliberative. How new requirements relate to existing engagement mechanisms should be explicitly addressed. Ambiguity allows layering that dilutes rather than embeds deliberative principles. Mimetic behaviours spread misalignment. When staff imitate peers rather than seeking expert guidance, flawed interpretations become sector norms through information cascades. Capacity should be built before legislation takes effect. Implementation without prior understanding leads to risk-averse imitation rather than principled innovation.
This paper examines the role of trust as an element of effective co-production in collaborative governance, with particular focus on the reciprocal nature of trust. Co-production offers a way for governments to develop more effective policies through actively engaging stakeholders by connecting institutional goals with lived experience. However, neither developing trust nor engaging in co-production is a straightforward process. Governments and communities can face numerous obstacles to co-producing policies and programmes. These include power imbalances, citizen and government scepticism, and historical and contemporary tensions that can undermine co-production efforts. Trust is reciprocal, so if communities are to trust government, government must also establish and demonstrate trust in communities to make co-production work. We draw on research conducted between 2021 and 2023 in Victoria, Australia, that examined reciprocal government-community trust relationships in developing resilience to social harms to argue that trust is not only fundamental for co-production but also requires ongoing effort and attention throughout the co-production process. Our data suggest that three key themes are relevant in building trust as part of the co-production process: (1) Balance of power and control over programme design and funding: whether governments are willing to share power and include communities in decision-making around programme design and funding; (2) Community diversity, representation, and cultural awareness: whether governments are able to establish representative engagement and are willing to become familiar with and account for community diversity; and (3) Investment in trust building: whether governments are willing to invest both time and resources to build and maintain trust-building activities. Based on our data, we argue that deliberate trust-building behaviours on the part of government, such as power sharing, transparency, building familiarity, and demonstrating cross-cultural awareness and genuine recognition of community contributions, can facilitate trust and help establish meaningful and effective co-production processes.Points for practitioners Reciprocal trust between government and communities is an important yet overlooked element of government-community co-production. Acknowledging the role of trust and examining mechanisms for, or barriers to, building trust can support sustainable co-design and co-production processes. We identified three key themes relating to trust and co-production: Balance of power and control over programme design and funding: whether governments are willing to share power and include communities in decision-making around programme design and funding; Community diversity, representation, and cultural awareness: whether governments are able to establish representative engagement and are willing to become familiar with and account for community diversity; and Investment in trust building: whether governments are willing to invest both time and resources to build and maintain trust-building activities. Deliberate trust-building behaviours such as power sharing, transparency, building familiarity, and demonstrating cross-cultural awareness and genuine recognition of community contributions can facilitate trust and help establish meaningful and effective co-production processes.
This research note presents preliminary findings from exploratory research examining how Australian public servants understand and use generative AI (GenAI) in government work. Drawing on 37 interviews across 22 agencies, we highlight the importance of a relational view of GenAI adoption, that is, the co-creation of meanings that emerges from the relations between users, technologies, and organisational contexts. Based on our empirical work, we offer three propositions as an initial research agenda: GenAI's equivocal nature triggers fragmented sensemaking processes across agencies; GenAI's affordances become entangled with bureaucratic institutional norms that require negotiation; and GenAI adoption necessitates reconstituting public sector legitimacy. These findings challenge narratives of straightforward technological integration, demonstrating that GenAI adoption is a fundamental renegotiation of core public sector work aspects.Points for practitioners Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) promises to deliver a number of positive impacts on productivity, and governments are under pressure to use these tools. However, there is a range of risks that these tools raise for how governments work. Public agencies are grappling with how to enable controlled experimentation with GenAI while maintaining accountability frameworks. GenAI adoption fundamentally involves relational processes that require moving beyond treating technology as a fixed entity to examine the evolving relations between users, technologies, and organisational contexts.
Governments are seeking innovative ways to address complex policy issues in increasingly fragmented and fiscally constrained service contexts. Co-governance is a relatively new mechanism for facilitating collective decision-making between government and other stakeholders. Effective co-governance can be difficult to establish and resource- and time-intensive to implement. This article presents findings from a study that aimed to develop a model for implementing effective co-governance-relevant to both government and non-government stakeholders. First, we developed a conceptual model of the co-governance process based on a review of the literature. We then tested it in three very different co-governance arrangements in Australia. Cross-case analysis identified the drivers and process of co-governance, components within each stage of the process, and factors that enabled its implementation. The model of co-governance developed has practical application by guiding the implementation and evaluation of co-governance and serving as a platform for future research.Points for practitioners Co-governance-government and community sharing decision-making-is being used to respond to complex issues but is not well understood. We develop an evidence-based model of co-governance using three Australian case studies. The model describes when to consider co-governance, such as addressing complex, long-term issues, where there are fragmented responsibilities, and where there is low trust. The model sets out the process to establish, implement, and monitor co-governance and the factors that support this process. The model can be used by government and community organisations to consider whether co-governance is appropriate and, if so, how to implement it. The model can also be a platform for future research.
Despite co-production's potential to address democratic deficits, the role of representation in co-production and its impact on public perceptions remain largely under-analysed empirically. Employing a vignette survey design, this study tests how representation in co-production affects citizens' intentions to get involved. Our findings show that when a co-production programme features demographically representative participants, willingness to co-produce increases, but the presence of minority leadership alone does not significantly affect citizens' willingness to participate. These results present the impact of participatory parity, input legitimacy, and initiatives that resonate with a community's experiences on willingness to co-produce; however, they also challenge the long-held assumption that mere symbolic displays of diversity by figureheads are sufficient to drive citizen participation.Points for practitioners The study suggests that practitioners should prioritise inclusive and representative participant selection in a co-production programme to improve perceptions of fairness and procedural justice. While symbolic display of diversity is often valued, it may not be sufficient to encourage citizen involvement in co-production. Initiatives should actively promote minority interests and focus on achieving tangible policy outcomes to avoid superficial representation by figureheads. Findings suggest that policy-makers could improve citizen participation by providing clear, accessible information that resonates with participants' experiences, as individuals more attentive to co-production details respond differently.
It is widely recognised that many policy systems are complex, requiring collaboration across different organisations and sectors to address socioeconomic outcomes and inequalities. Yet, the public policy literature is dominated by rational-technical frameworks that struggle to understand complex systems. This paper applies ideas from the field of applied systems to demonstrate their utility in a public administration context. We do so by applying a systems framework to analysis of the Australian National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) launched a decade ago as a new approach to the funding and provision of services and supports for people with disabilities. Over the implementation period, a critical narrative has developed regarding quality and safeguards. Drawing on systems thinking, we explore evidence from five independent reviews of the NDIS to identify why these issues might have occurred. We demonstrate that the NDIS may have become 'stuck' because it has encountered common system traps. We find the NDIS exhibits elements of three dominant system traps as conceptualised in the systems thinking literature: seeking the wrong goal, policy resistance, and shifting the burden to an intervenor. In doing so, we show the necessity of a systems lens to explore the challenges of complex policy interventions.Points for practitioners Complex policy interventions require frameworks that enable their interrogation in a holistic way, but there are limitations to the dominant tools currently used in public administration. Identifying where systems are 'stuck' in a structured way offers an alternative lens with which to create solutions. Systems thinking provides new knowledge of how system features can explain how traps emerge and are sustained. In applying this insight to the National Disability Insurance Scheme, we have demonstrated the utility of these ideas within the context of public administration.
Public managers worldwide face a persistent dilemma: navigating rigid formal rules to achieve results. Hybrid governance literature often depicts a synergistic blend of hierarchy and networks. However, it seldom explores the dysfunctional, compensatory relationship between them. Drawing on an in-depth qualitative study of the Indonesian civil aviation authority, this research develops the concept of 'compensatory informality': a governance mode where informal networks and practices become the primary mechanism not to complement but to actively bypass and compensate for the deficiencies of a malfunctioning formal bureaucracy. Findings reveal how practices such as personal messaging to circumvent official channels and ad hoc collaborative budgeting ensure operational continuity. However, this study argues that compensatory informality is a paradox: (1) while it enables the system to function day to day, (2) it simultaneously entrenches the formal system's flaws by alleviating the pressure for fundamental reform, (3) thereby creating long-term risks for accountability and sustainability. The primary contribution is a novel concept that offers a critical refinement to hybrid governance theory. Furthermore, it provides a new, realistic lens for analysing the persistent struggles within public sector bureaucracies.Points for practitioners This study suggests that managers should view staff workarounds not just as ingenuity but as valuable diagnostic signals. Each informal shortcut that employees create pinpoints a specific bottleneck or flaw within the formal system, offering a clear target for procedural reform. The focus should shift from merely praising the patch to fixing the underlying process it was designed to circumvent. Our findings also highlight a key paradox: the most effective informal fixes often carry the greatest long-term risks. While ad hoc collaborations solve immediate problems, they erode formal accountability and mask the urgency for systemic change. By making a dysfunctional formal system seem tolerable, these successful workarounds inadvertently reduce the pressure on leadership to undertake essential, though difficult, institutional reforms. A central lesson from this research is that celebrating informal 'heroes' can delay necessary improvement. The ultimate strategic goal for public leaders, therefore, is not to foster a culture of more effective workarounds, but to redesign the formal 'rules of the game' to be so robust and adaptive that such workarounds are no longer necessary for organisational survival.
This study investigates how the interorganisational coordination of disaster response organisations across the social media platform, X highlighted specific organisations and support functions as central during Hurricane Irma in Central Florida. Utilising X API, policy/plan documents, social network analysis, and focus group interviews, this study uses this context to highlight how social media communication priorities can be tested. Results note that in this case, agencies like the Red Cross and Duke Energy were most central to the networks, and while some functions like information and planning or mass care and sheltering were unsurprisingly central, there were some emergent, unique ones like search and rescue, and logistics, that were more central functions. Interviews identify the current uses for social media, as well as how these are incorporated in polices and plans. This study posits what type of social media communication people may engage with during disasters and provides implications for how public sector organisations can engage in future use of social media.Points for practitioners Identifying key players and information flow: Analysing organisational networks and communication patterns through specific functions can help agencies identify key players and understand information flow on social media during disasters. This analysis allows for the identification of best practices for effective online disaster communication. Tailoring communication to specific information needs: Social media platforms like X can provide valuable insights into the type of public engagement best suited for this form of information dissemination, allowing organisations to tailor their communication on this platform to the specific information needs of the public during disasters. Understanding the role of social media in emergency management: Integrating social media analytics with organisational disaster response policies helps bridge the gap in understanding the role and potential use of social media in disaster management. This understanding can lead to more effective utilisation of social media in future disaster response efforts.
This paper investigates the influence of organisational culture, transformational leadership, and stakeholder engagement on the performance of public organisations and the effectiveness of public policy implementation in Banten Province, Indonesia. We examine examines these impacts within the complex socio-cultural context of Indonesia, providing new insights into how local variables influence the effectiveness of implementation. Using data form 300 respondents in Indonesia, the study confirms a significant and positive impact, consistent with theoretical propositions, showing that a supportive organisational culture, effective transformational leadership, and comprehensive stakeholder engagement improve the performance of public organisations. This organisational performance has a significant and positive impact on the effectiveness of public policy implementation. The findings provide original insights into the synergistic effects of these variables in the context of a developing country, contributing to debates in existing public administration literature.Points for practitioners Building a strong and adaptive public organisation culture is essential. This study found that an organisational culture that emphasises transparency, accountability, and innovation has been proven to improve the performance of public institutions. The results of this study found that transformational leadership has a significant effect on organisational performance in the public sector. This serves as a guideline for practitioners to inspire and motivate their members to improve performance. This study also found that stakeholder engagement affects organisational performance in the public sector. This serves as a reference for practitioners (especially organisational leaders) on how to use dialogue forums, public consultations, and transparent participatory mechanisms to build support. The findings of this study emphasise that the better an organisation's performance in the public sector, the more effectively it will be able to drive policy implementation. Therefore, this study serves as a guide for practitioners to ensure that the application of organisational performance indicators aligns with organisational objectives.
The ongoing debate between New Public Management (NPM) and post-New Public Management (post-NPM) represents a central tension in contemporary public administration, yet its implications for personnel management remain insufficiently explored. NPM reforms, with their focus on efficiency, performance measurement, and market-oriented mechanisms, have been criticised for fragmenting organisations and neglecting the human dimension of governance. In contrast, post-NPM emphasises trust, collaboration, employee empowerment, and public value creation. This article critically analyses personnel management through the lens of post-NPM, arguing that it redefines employee roles, reshapes motivation, and repositions human resources as a core element of governance capacity. Drawing on recent theoretical and empirical studies, the paper advances three key contributions: (1) it conceptualises four evolving dimensions of personnel management-employee roles, professional development, well-being, and leadership-within post-NPM frameworks; (2) it integrates insights from public service motivation, networked governance, and collaborative governance theories to illuminate attitudinal and institutional dynamics; and (3) it outlines practical strategies and future research directions addressing challenges such as digital transformation, work-life balance, and sustaining motivation in complex governance settings. Ultimately, the article calls for a shift beyond managerialism toward a more human-centred, trust-based, and sustainable model of personnel management in the public sector.Points for practitioners Transitioning from New Public Management to post-NPM requires reorienting personnel management toward collaboration, trust, and employee empowerment rather than rigid managerial control. Evidence shows that participatory decision-making and decentralised personnel structures enhance employee engagement, job satisfaction, and accountability in public organisations. Empowering employees and leveraging their professional expertise supports innovation and improves the responsiveness and quality of public service delivery. Integrating democratic values into personnel management practices strengthens institutional legitimacy and fosters a sustained commitment to public service among employees.
This Forum Article integrates a range of four contributions which are all underpinned by the conviction that the rediscovery of the humanities may be beneficial to the field of public administration. The first piece examines the contribution that philosophy, as a key discipline of the humanities, can provide to the field of public administration; notably, the piece reflects on the ‘fixation with numbers’ that seems to characterise large part of research in public administration and it argues how, against this drift, a philosophy critical of a reality construed in and through numbers can help attain the level of reasoning required for successful public administration scholarship. The second piece reflects on how literature can foster an understanding and humanistic sensitivity towards constitutional values as well as the basic humane and humanising sympathy for the anguish of vulnerable individuals, thus revisiting the value of literature for the education and training of civil servants. The third piece revisits theological and religious studies and reflects on the continuing relevance of religion in and for public administration studies, notably in the current post‐secular era. The fourth and final piece focuses on the discipline of historiography within the humanities and reflects on key issues which require being addressed to establish a mature role for historical research in our discipline. The Forum Article as a whole provides an argument for the continuing relevance of the humanities for the development of the field of public administration. This article argues why the humanities can be beneficial for the practice of public administration, including by bringing a different and complementary perspective: in fact, the reasoning of the humanities and that of the social sciences can be seen as complementary to each other. The humanities enable us to rediscover the significance of moral sentiments, imagination, and compassion—and to apply a more humane perspective to the practice of public services management. Integrating the humanities into public administration provides a deeper and broader understanding of ‘context’ and how it affects the functioning of public administrative systems. Integrating the humanities into the practice of public administration enables the overcoming of dangerous drifts in the field of public administration, including ‘fixation with numbers’.
In May 2025, the City of Melbourne hosted the M2050 Summit, one of the largest deliberative democracy initiatives in Australian local government history. The Summit engaged over 1000 participants, including policymakers, community leaders, and residents, through a three-stage process: a pre-summit survey, a full-day citizens' summit, and a post-summit People's Panel. As someone closely involved in the Summit's origins, operations, and outcomes, I aim to share insights with the academic community and senior public service practitioners on what worked well-and to argue that M2050 offers a scalable model for cities and national governments seeking to rebuild public trust, co-produce policy, and define long-term strategic goals. To that end, practitioners and public administration scholars could enhance the process. Participants would gain substantial value from explicit guidance that delineates strategic, long-term aspirations from more immediate policy problems. Moreover, cultivating stronger partnerships with universities and philanthropic bodies would further enhance the methodological robustness of the exercise. Ultimately, the Summit's framework provides a robust blueprint for advancing deliberative governance, provided the necessary political will exists.
