In the article “What Right Do Public Managers Have to Lead?” Behn (1998) undertakes a critical review of the American system of governance and examines various failures the system experiences in different branches of government such as the legislature, executive, judiciary, and political. It is in the context of the failures that Behn (1998) explores the roles of public managers in providing leadership to their agencies to overcome the governance challenges. Public managers refer to people who have managerial responsibilities with any government agency. For example, political appointees like cabinet secretaries and supervisors are mandated with ensuring that workers are motivated to achieve the agencies’ goals. The article succinctly builds the argument by referring to different situations that affect the governance system; for example, the failures by the stakeholders who ensure that checks and balances are maintained.
The main argument that surfaces in the analysis is the need for managers to ensure public participation and provision of clear direction and motivation of people. As a result, Behn (1998) states, “The citizenry needs to be informed about the important issues and actively engaged in the policy debate” (p.210). The word “citizenry” as used in the article refers to various stakeholders from the key branches of the governance structure. Further, Behn (1998) expounds on the issue of public management by exploring different scenarios of failures and the possible measures that should be taken to set directions and align people with their mandate of public service. Thus, Behn (1998) points out to the mandate of public managers in applying enterprising leadership to achieve agencies’ purpose and create capacity for future goals.
The article provides an in-depth understanding of the difficult situation that relates to management of public entities due to citizenry involvement. It shows the importance of checks and balances. Also, it adds knowledge about the critical role of the checks and balances in ensuring that managers do not exercise discretion. At the same time, it shows that the checks and balances can gag managers and confine them to a state of status quo. This is due to the administrative frameworks in their agencies where they are always being monitored by all stakeholders. It is in this context that Behn (1998) presented different scenarios under which managers face the dilemma of being either heroic or conservatory leaders. Hence, the article has enhanced the knowledge about the right of public managers in applying enterprising initiatives to motivate people in order to deliver services efficiently despite the complicated work conditions.
Also, the article has refined and enlarged the view about citizenry involvement in management of public resources in order to improve accountability. For example, Behn (1998) notes, “Public managers have to lead in order to promote general welfare. They need to articulate their organization’s purpose and motivate people to achieve it” (p. 212). This assertion denotes the responsibilities of managers and the special mandate of applying leadership styles that can address inherent shortcomings in the public governance system. For instance, applying intellect to provide guidance to workers in case of crisis that affects service delivery.
The rich knowledge about managers’ roles in providing leadership can be applied to address issues that affect service delivery in public sector and avoid subjugation which is common in bureaucratic governance systems. For example, designing unique frameworks that can enable managers to exercise their leadership roles and create capacities for the agencies.
Reference
Behn, R. (1998). What right do public managers have to lead? Public Administration Review, 58(3), 209-224.