Please respond to at least two of the following questions posed (suggested length 2-5 paragraphs per question; should take you approximately 60 minutes to write once you have completed this week’s readings for Module 1):  

• In their contrast of “Old Public Administration” (OPA) and “New Public Management” (NPM), Denhardt and Denhardt argue that both have merits and detrimental consequences for public service organizations, and that NPM should not be viewed as the “end all-be all” model for administering the public’s work (Chapter 1).  Where do you think NPM has helped public service organizations specifically and the field of public administration more generally evolve?  Where do you think the reliance of public administrators on NPM is detrimental to the future outlook for American public administration? Overall, do you agree with their assessment/analysis of the shortcomings of NPM? Why or why not?

• Denhardt and Denhart offer a set of organizing principles for creating a more contemporary alternative to NPM (Chapter 2) based on democratic citizenship, community action and civil society and organizational humanism.  What are your initial thoughts about the practicalities of implementing the 7 guiding lessons that serve as the framework of the New Public Service?  What initial questions or concerns do you contemplate in implementing some of these lessons in an existing public service organization? 

• Hill & Lynn emphasize the important role of the public manager as a "creator", particularly with respect to following the rule of law (Chapter 1; pgs. 18-19):  “Operationally, public management necessarily reflects the tensions inherent in three features of the American Constitutional scheme:  the Madisonian interplay of faction and power, the separation of powers, and checks and balances. Public managers must live with and respond creatively to the challenges presented by these tensions.....Public managers have ample opportunity to exercise their judgement, that is, to be creators. But in doing so, they are not free agents:  they are creatures managing according to the rule of law.” Reflect on a current situation in recent news where we have witnessed leaders/managers of public service organizations tackling challenges in sometimes creative, and other times highly unorthodox ways. What were some of the learnings you took away from these experiences, observations, or examples? Do you agree with Hill & Lynn’s inference that overall public administrators should be held accountable for managing affairs of the public according to the rule of law? Can the rule of law sometimes be used by political leaders to constrain the ability of public officials to effectively address issues pertaining to the public good? How can public administrators use the rule of law to protect the interests of the public good against acts among politicians that may be deemed unconstitutional?  Can you give an example of how the rule of law was effectively used to protect, preserve and administer the public good?