Search results

The South Korean government launched the proactive administration initiative in mid-2017, which has been widely implemented throughout the public sector. Accordingly, the purpose of this paper is to review a behavioral approach to promote proactive administration in the South Korean government.

The research questions are as follows: (1) How did the South Korean government initiate a behavioral approach to administrative reform by promoting proactive administration? (2) What systems or mechanisms has the South Korean government utilized to promote proactive administration? (3) What kind of constraints did the government face in the process of administrative reform and how did it resolve them? (4) What was the preliminary reaction to or evaluation of such reforms in public administration communities?

Although it is still too early to evaluate the overall impact of administrative reform to promote proactive administration on civil servants’ behavior, it has nonetheless contributed greatly to the substantial change in perception that public officials in the administrative field should pursue their work as actively as they can.

This study is meaningful because while many countries have promoted administrative reforms such as structural reorganization, downsizing of human resources, cutback management and fiscal innovation, privatization, regulatory reform and promotion of digital government, cases of behavioral innovation, such as proactive administration, have been relatively scarce. Since a behavioral approach to administrative reform would be essential in many countries, this paper will serve as a useful reference for the consideration of their governments.

This article examines the rhetoric of recent civil service reform measures in Korea, their initial implementation, and growing concerns about their sustainability. Civil service reform in Korea was initiated by an enthusiasm for New Public Management (NPM) and public calls for reform. The changes initiated by the Korean Civil Service Commission and other government organizations have sought to encourage openness, competition, flexibility, diversity, and performance-based management. Despite the bold rhetoric heralding the reform initiatives, outcomes have fallen short of expectations, and many civil servants are losing their confidence and esprit de corps. Considering both the initial promise and the ultimate reality of Korean civil service reform, this article investigates problems and limitations confronting the sustainability of these reform measures

The quality approach has now become a familiar trend which is injecting a fresh impetus into the world economy. It would be unfathomable for this world-wide move towards quality to be ignored in modern public administration. The move from the tradition of an authoritarian administration, towards a service oriented administration is the principal element of administrative modernization today. The objective of creating such a responsive administration, which is attuned to the citizen's perspective, is the major characteristic of the reform movement of the new public administration as it approaches the 21st century. Service quality initiatives relate to enhancing the public sector by making it more responsive. Service quality initiatives change the public's perception of public services, the way public servants interact with the public, the way the public service is organized and delivered, and the types of services provided.

Since South Korea gained a substantial degree of political and economic development, the South Korean government has tried to eradicate corruption by introducing institutional frameworks in addition to a number of new laws and institutions. As a matter of fact, the Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index score of South Korea is improving over time, but it still far behind other leading countries. The purpose of this chapter is to review the South Korean government's efforts at curbing corruption. This chapter first reviews the development of major anti-corruption infrastructure such as the anti-corruption legislation and the South Korean government's independent agency for anti-corruption, followed by discussion of the development of major anti-corruption measures, the international evaluation on corruption, and the role of civil society in curbing corruption. After that, there is a discussion of policy implications and the conclusion.

Contemporary management theory is not a single theory. By its very nature, management is a complex process and a multidisciplinary field of study. Contemporary management is a synthesis of the classical, behavioural, quantitative and modern management movements. One of the keys to successful management is the ability to understand and apply modern management principles and techniques effectively. Studying fundamental concepts provides a foundation that effective managers of the future need in terms of understanding techniques, organizational cultures and theories. Awareness and willingness of management to incorporate a variety of management theories and tools as the organization constantly changes are keys to gaining and maintaining competitive advantage over others.

As the 21st century moves ahead, it is increasingly evident that globalization and democratization are strong forces playing crucial roles in shaping public sector transformation around the world. For Asian countries, the key questions are, how should selected reform ideas from other countries be diffused, and which parts of one's traditional government and culture should be retained? A common choice among Asian countries is to replace government with governance. Transforming bureaucracies from government to governance involves the acceptance of certain democratic principles such as accountability, openness, transparency, integrity, corruption-free, and high performance standards (Bowornwathana, 2006, pp. 667–680).

Bidhya Bowornwathana is associate professor at the Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Political Science, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand. His research interests are on governance and administrative reform. His writings appear in journals such as Governance: An International Journal of Policy and Administration, Public Administration and Development, Australian Journal of Public Administration, Asian Survey, Public Administration Quarterly, Public Administration: An International Quarterly, Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration, Asian Review of Public Administration, and Asian Journal of Political Science. He has written several books in Thai on administrative reform and public administration. He co-edited a book with John P. Burns on Civil Services Systems in Asia (Edward Elgar, 2001). He also has chapters in recent books such as in Christopher Pollitt and Colin Talbot, eds., Unbundled Government (Taylor and Francis, 2004), Ron Hodges, ed., Governance and the Public Sector (Edward Elgar, 2005), Eric E. Otenyo and Nancy S. Lind, eds., Comparative Public Administration: The Essential Readings (Elsevier, 2006), and Kuno Schedler and Isabella Proeller, eds., Cultural Aspects of Public Management Reform (Elsevier, 2007). He was Chairman of Department of Pubic Administration, Chulalongkorn University. He has served several times as member and secretary of the national administrative reform commissions appointed by Thai governments.

My interest in public administration as a discipline was sparked by Dr Joseph P.L. Jiang, who was a student of the late Professor Fred W. Riggs at Indiana University, in 1968 when I took his course in public administration during my final year at the Department of Political Science, University of Singapore. I also remember fondly my first meeting with Professor Riggs during the same year when he gave a guest lecture in Dr Jiang's course (Quah, 2008d). I met Fred again many years later at various international conferences but I remember fondly our meetings in Chiangmai in June 1993 and in Honolulu in June 1996. I have also remained in touch with Dr Jiang after his return to Taipei.