| Basis | Traditional Public Administration (TPA) | New Public Administration (NPA) |
| Main Objective | Efficiency, rule-following, hierarchy, and control | Social justice, public welfare, and citizen service |
| Approach | Mechanical, bureaucratic | Humanistic, citizen-centered |
| Nature of Administration | Neutral and politically detached | Socially responsive and ethically aware |
| Flexibility | Rigid and process-driven | Flexible and adaptable to situations |
| Value System | Value-neutral | Value-oriented |
| Aspect | Minnowbrook I (1968) | Minnowbrook II (1988) |
| Chairman | Dwight Waldo | H. George Frederickson |
| Composition | Narrow : Participants primarily from political science backgrounds. | Wider : Participants from diverse fields including law, economics, planning, policy analysis, policy studies, and urban studies. |
| Mood,Orientation | Contentious, confrontational, radical, and revolutionary. | More civil, practical, pragmatic, less radical, and more respectful to senior professionals. |
| Emphasis | Relevance, values, social equity, change, and client-focus. | Leadership, constitutional and legal perspectives, technology policy, and economic perspectives. |
| Behavioral Science Perspective | Decidedly anti-behavioural. | More perceptive to contributions of social and behavioral sciences to public administration. |
| Social Environment | Marked by strong cynicism towards government, challenging public administration to be pro-active on major social issues. | Growing demand for the retreat of the state, emphasizing governmental cutbacks, privatization, voluntarism, social capacity building, and third-party government. |
The New Public Administration (NPA) refers to a movement within the field of Public Administration that emerged following deliberations in the first Minnowbrook Conference held in 1968.
- NPA gives significance to ‘Public’ rather than ‘administration’, emphasizing ‘values’ and ‘philosophy’ rather than ‘principles’ and ‘procedures’, and prioritizing ‘effectiveness’ and ‘service efficiency’ rather than ‘efficiency’ and ‘economy’.
- Landmarks attributed to the emergence of NPA: 1) The Honey Report,1967 (USA), 2) The Philadelphia Conference 1967 (US, Chairman James C. Charlesworth), and 3) Publication of “Public Administration in a Time of Revolution,” 1968, an article by Dwight Waldo.
Anti-Goals of the NPA : Robert T. Golambiewski mentions three anti-goals of the NPA. These are:
- Anti-positivism: Rejects value-free administration and advocates for a problem-solving approach.
- Anti-technical: Opposes dehumanization in favor of human-centric approaches.
- Anti-bureaucratic and anti-hierarchical: Aims to debureaucratize and promote flexible, democratic organization over rigid hierarchy. (Mera BTP ho gya complete)
Five (Positive) Goals or Themes : Frank Marini summarizes the themes of new public administration under five heads:
- Relevance: Emphasizes the need for public administration to address contemporary issues and become meaningful in social life.
- Values: Rejects value-neutral stance and advocates transparency about the values guiding administrative action.
- Social Equity: Prioritizes championing underprivileged sections and promoting their interests.
- Change: Advocates for active participation in social change and innovation in administrative practices.
- Client-focus: Stresses providing goods and services while empowering clients with a voice and ensuring proactive and responsive administration.
(Chanchal Chaudhry ne VRS liya hai )
Further on the goals of NPA, Nigro and Nigro recommend client-focused administration, debureaucratization, democratic decision-making, and decentralization for more effective and humane public service delivery.
Thus, the NPA reconnects public administration with societal needs, moving away from dehumanizing principles and alienation
