PARADIGM MODEL OF CULTURAL PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

Abstract

The objectives of this research were  1) to study the cause of the change in the paradigm of public administration, 2) to search the model of the culture public administration paradigm and 3) to propose the model of the culture public administration paradigm.

            The research format was the qualitative research, collecting data by purposive sampling from the 21 key informants from the Office of the Public Sector Development Commission and 5 key informants from the Department of Cultural Promotion, purposefully selected, with structured in-depth interview form and 9 participants in the focus group discussion. Data were also collected from documents, concepts, theories and related literatures and were analyzed by content analysis technique and descriptive interpretation.

            Findings were as follows:

1. Formation and Causes of Public Administration Paradigm Change.

            The old paradigm of public management arose from the idea of Max Weber who proposed the rules and regulations must be enforced strictly in every agency to avoid the mistake. The causes of change shifting to new public management (NPM), were the bureaucratic structure was too big and cumbersome in solving problems which lead to corruption and ineffective bureaucracy. The paradigm of new public administration arose from the need to solve the bureaucratic corruption problems by authoring private sectors to handle business that they can do better and the reason for the new public service (NPS) was the government officers treated themselves as entrepreneurs looking at people as the customers, not the owners of the country and another cause of change arose from democratic foundation looked at people as the owners of the country, not customers, with public service rendering, not mastering people.

1. The forms of culture of public administration paradigm model in public sector management meant applying good culture in duty performance and solving bureaucratic problems consisted of important components as 1) organization lacked of strength, 2) government officers lacked of virtual ethics, 3) service rendering was not satisfactory and 4) government officers lack of democratic mind and did not apply. ten royal virtues to protect and to be immunity for government officers.

            3. The proposed new culture of public administration paradigm model in public sector management named “state good governance paradigm” consisted of 4 new paradigms, each paradigm has ten royal virtues as;              3.1 Organizational strength creation culture paradigm referred to officer’s performance inducing organizational strength included, 1) honesty 2) sacrifice for common interest 3) harmony 4) vision 5) change leader and 6) dare to make right decision. the ten royal virtues are ajjava: working honestly, pariccaga: working selflessly and sila: maintaining good conduct.              3.2 Ethics and virtual government officer’s culture paradigm creation referred to government officers performed duties with higher ethics and virtue including duty knowing and strictly abiding by rules and regulations and ethics. the royal virtues are ajjava: working honestly, avihimsa: bringing tranquility through nonviolence and dana: sharing with the populace.              3.3 Satisfaction-Based creation culture paradigm referred to the process of service rendering was responsive to people real needs. the royal virtues are ajjava: working honestly, maddava: deporting himself with gentleness, congeniality and akkodha: adhering to reason, no anger.              3.4 Democratic creation culture paradigm referred to government officers perform duties with democratic practice including, 1) faith and trust in democratic system 2) respecting right and freedom of each other and 3) respecting equality and the royal virtues are tapa: rejecting indulgence through austerity, khanti: overcoming difficulties with patience and avihimsa: bringing tranquility through nonviolence.