Search results

The aims of the paper are to: present a theoretical framework for analysing the functioning and consequences of control systems; understand and compare the structure and impact of control systems on two Italian public administrations also in relation to possible situations of crisis and failure; and examine the possible link between the organisational impact of control systems (and their failure if this is the case) and the characteristics of the sectors involved.

The proposed theoretical framework (analysis of the concept, methods, bodies, uses, coherence and impact of control) is applied through a parallel examination of two cases: control systems in Italian universities and ministries over the past 15 years. The objective is to understand why similar rules concerning control systems bring about different consequences and results.

Analysis over a 15 years period shows the effects of two very different strategic approaches and organisational choices in the face of very similar rules. Acceptance or otherwise of control, professional ability and competence, coherence between methods and the object of control and transparency all appear as discriminating factors in the failure or success of control systems. In universities, taking advantage of existing knowledge and professional skills, combining new internationally recognised assessment techniques with academic tradition and culture, focusing methods on specific activities such as teaching and research and arousing attention through transparency of evaluation outputs are the main factors which keep the risk of failure at bay. Evaluation has to cope with the allocation of resource and power issues, but is beginning to take on importance in change management. On the other hand, the case of the ministries shows how the new public management‐type of control exist in a closed cultural context where methods and instruments are taken up without adapting to core processes and where there is secrecy regarding control outputs.

This is an exploratory study that will have to be confirmed by further verification in the future that could include new cases to make the analysis even more exhaustive. The subject of the paper does not lend itself to quantitative studies.

Not to concentrate only on the methodological aspects of control activities, but also focus on all those features of control systems that permit the actual use of output and bring about concrete results in public administrations.

In the past few years, control systems have very often been introduced into the public sector without paying enough attention to how they really work and their true outcome. This paper faces the problem by putting forward a theoretical framework and empirical evidence that may be used by the academic world and public administration.

The chapter develops a conceptual framework for linking the phenomena included in the field labeled “organizational change” (OC). The objective is to design an OC model that makes selective use of existing theories and creates a premise for further development but avoids proposing a unifying synthesis with a normative value. At the center is the critical circuit of the relationship between the processes of organizational learning, resource development and power management which originates the triple helix of change. The framework explains a variety of change management experiences along a continuum between two poles – “turnaround” and “continuous and fluid transformation.”

The first annual volume of Research in Organization Change and Development was published in 1987. Since then, ROCD has provided a special platform for scholars and practitioners to share new research-based insights.

Allan H. Church is VP of Global Talent Development for PepsiCo, where he is responsible for leading the talent management and people development agenda for the enterprise. Previously he spent nine years as an external OD consultant working for Warner Burke Associates, and several years at IBM. On the side, he has served as Adjunct Professor at Columbia University, a Visiting Scholar at Benedictine University, and past Chair of the Mayflower Group. Allan received his Ph.D. in Organizational Psychology from Columbia University. He is Fellow of the Society for Industrial-Organizational Psychology, the American Psychological Association, and the Association for Psychological Science.