here - Naspaa

Transcription

here - Naspaa

JOURNAL OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS EDUCATION
JPAE
J OURNAL
VOLUME 22
NUMBER 2
OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS EDUCATION
VOLUME 22 NO. 2
1029 Vermont Avenue NW, Suite 1100, Washington, DC 20005-3517
[email protected] • www.naspaa.org
JPAE 22_02 20160401 cover.indd 1
SPRING 2016
NASPAA – The Global Standard in Public Service Education
The journal of NASPAA — The Global Standard in Public Service Education
SPRING 2016
4/15/16 7:32 PM
NASPAA
The Global Standard in Public Service Education
C. Michelle Piskulich, President
David Birdsell, Vice President
J. Edward Kellough, Immediate Past President
Laurel McFarland, Executive Director
JPAE Oversight Committee
Ed Jennings, Paul Teske
David Schultz Co-Editor, Hamline University Marieka Klawitter Co-Editor, University of Washington
Ashley Sonoff Editorial Assistant, University of Washington
COPY EDITOR Julie Van Pelt
PUBLICATION LAYOUT AND DESIGN Val Escher, Freestyle Communications
EDITORS’ COUNCIL
H. George Frederickson Founding Editor, University of Kansas
Danny L. Balfour Grand Valley State University
Marc Holzer Rutgers University-Newark
Edward T. Jennings University of Kentucky
James L. Perry Indiana University, Bloomington
Mario A. Rivera University of New Mexico
Heather E. Campbell Claremont Graduate University
BOARD OF EDITORS
Archil Abashidze Ilia State University, Georgia
Muhittin Acar Hacettepe University, Turkey
Mohamad Alkadry Florida International University
Burt Barnow George Washington University
Peter J. Bergerson Florida Gulf Coast University
Rajade Berry-James North Carolina State University
John Bohte University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
Espiridion Borrego University of Texas Pan American
Lysa Burnier Ohio University
Douglas Carr Oakland University
Beverly Cigler Pennsylvania State University
Barbara Crosby University of Minnesota
Robert B. Cunningham University of Tennessee, Knoxville
Susan Gooden Virginia Commonwealth University
Peter Hoontis Rutgers University-Newark
Donna Lind Infeld The George Washington University
Cynthia Jackson-Elmoore Michigan State University
Timothy Johnson Willamette University
Richard Greggory Johnson III University of San Francisco
Meagan Jordan Old Dominion University
J. Edward Kellough University of Georgia
Don Kettl University of Maryland, College Park
John Kiefer The University of New Orleans
William Earle Klay Florida State University
Chris Koliba University of Vermont
Kristina Lambright Binghamton University SUNY
Laura Langbein American University
Scott Lazenby City of Sandy, Oregon
Ya Li Beijing Institute of Technology
Steven R. Maxwell Florida Southwestern State College
Barbara McCabe University of Texas-San Antonio
Lorenda A. Naylor University of Baltimore
Ashley Nickels Rutgers University-Camden
Michael Popejoy Florida International University
Dahlia Remler Baruch College CUNY
Nadia Rubaii Binghamton University SUNY
Meghna Sabharwal University of Texas at Dallas
Jodi Sandfort University of Minnesota
Robert A. Schuhmann University of Wyoming
Charles Scurr Florida International University,
Citizens Independent Transportation Trust
Patricia M. Shields Texas State University
Jessica Sowa University of Baltimore
Kendra Stewart College of Charleston
Karel Van der Molen Stellenbosch University, South Africa
Danielle Varda University of Colorado Denver
Blue Wooldridge Virginia Commonwealth University
Firuz Demir Yasamıs American University in the Emirates
CORRESPONDENTS
Edgar Ramirez Delacruz Center for Research and
Teaching in Economics (CIDE), Mexico
Charlene M. L. Roach University of the West Indies
St. Augustine Campus
INFORMATION FOR ARTICLE SUBMISSIONS
The Journal of Public Affairs Education (JPAE ) is the journal of the Network of Schools of Public
Policy, Affairs, and Administration (NASPAA). JPAE is dedicated to advancing teaching and learning
in public affairs, policy analysis, public administration, public management, public policy, and nonprofit
administration. We work to improve teaching methods and individual courses as well as public affairs
program design, management, and assessment.
The goal of JPAE is to publish articles that are useful to those participating in public affairs education
throughout the world. Articles should be clear, accessible, and useful to those in the public affairs fields
and subfields. The editors are particularly interested in articles that (1) use rigorous methods to analyze
the relative effectiveness of teaching methods, and (2) have international or comparative components.
Articles submitted for publication in JPAE must not already be submitted or published elsewhere. Articles
that have been presented at conferences are welcome.
Submissions should be made online at www.edmgr.com/jpae. At the site, you will be instructed to create
an account if you have not already done so or to log in under your existing account.
Submitted manuscripts should conform to the following JPAE guidelines:
• Not include author(s) names either on title page or in body of the manuscript in order
to allow for anonymous peer review.
• Not exceed 30 pages in length, including notes, references, and tables.
• Be typed in a standard 12-point serif font (such as Times New Roman), double spaced,
with margins of no less than one inch on all sides.
• Use APA-style in-text citations and references. More information on APA style can be
found at www.apastyle.org/.
Submitting authors will be asked for contact information, names of any additional authors, up to three
subject classifications to which the manuscript relates, and an abstract of approximately 150 words.
Additional instructions for registration in this system and submission of manuscripts can be found at www.
edmgr.com/jpae or the JPAE website at www.naspaa.org/jpae. Authors will receive acknowledgement of
receipt of the manuscript and can follow its progress through the review process at www.edmgr.com/jpae.
All articles are given an initial review by the editorial team. Articles must meet basic criteria including
writing quality, reasonable conformity with these guidelines, and interest to JPAE readers before they
undergo external, double-blind peer review. If accepted for publication, manuscripts cannot be published
until they conform to APA style and all of the authors have provided copyright transfer authority, full
contact information, and short biographies (of about 5 lines).
Questions about the manuscript submission, review, and publication process may be addressed to the
editorial team at [email protected].
The Journal of Public Affairs Education is published quarterly by NASPAA, the Network of Schools of Public Policy, Affairs, and Administration.
Claims for missing numbers should be made within the month following the regular month of publication. The publishers expect to supply
missing numbers free only when losses have been sustained in transit and when the reserve stock will permit.
Institution, $125; Individual, $50; Student, $40; Non-U.S., add $20 to applicable rate. JPAE articles can be accessed at
www.naspaa.org/JPAEMessenger. CHANGE OF ADDRESS: Please notify us and your local postmaster immediately of both old and new addresses.
Please allow four weeks for the change. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to JPAE, c/o NASPAA, 1029 Vermont Ave. NW, Suite 1100,
Washington, D.C., 20005-3517. EDUCATORS AND COPY CENTERS: Copyright 2015. NASPAA. All rights reserved. Educators may reproduce
any material for classroom use only, without fee, and authors may reproduce their articles without written permission. Written permission
is required to reproduce JPAE in all other instances. Please contact JPAE, c/o NASPAA, 1029 Vermont Ave. NW, Suite 1100, Washington,
D.C., 20005-3517, 202-628-8965, [email protected]. The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American
National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984. JPAE is abstracted or
indexed in JSTOR, EBSCO, Google Scholar, and Education Full Text Index. ISSN 1523-6803 (formerly 1087–7789).
SUBSCRIPTION RATES:
Because of its mission, the Journal of Public Affairs Education allows educators to reproduce any
JPAE material for classroom use, and authors may reproduce their own articles without written
permission. Written permission is required to reproduce any part of JPAE in all other instances.
4/15/16 7:32 PM
Journal of Public Affairs Education
The Journal of Public Affairs Education (JPAE) is the journal of NASPAA, the membership
association of graduate education programs in public policy, public affairs, public administration,
and public & nonprofit management. NASPAA has nearly 300 member institutions located across
the U.S. and around the globe.
NASPAA is the global standard in public service education. Its Commission on Peer Review and
Accreditation is the recognized accreditor of master’s degree programs in the field.
NASPAA has been a national and international resource since 1970, by ensuring excellence
in education and training for public service, and by promoting the ideal of public service.
It accomplishes its mission through direct services to its member institutions and by
•
Developing standards for master’s programs in public affairs, and representing
the objectives and needs of education in public affairs;
•
Encouraging curriculum development and innovation and providing a forum
for publication and discussion of education scholarship, practices, and issues;
•
Building the authoritative source of data on public affairs education;
•
Promoting public sector internship and employment opportunities for
students and graduates;
•
Partnering with practitioner professional organizations;
•
Engaging globally with national and regional organizations involved with
public affairs education.
Founded in 1995, JPAE was originally published as the Journal of Public Administration Education.
H. George Frederickson was the journal’s founding editor. The journal is hosted and edited by the
Daniel J. Evans School of Public Policy and Governance, a NASPAA member school, selected
through a competitive process. In addition to serving as NASPAA’s journal of record, JPAE is
affiliated with the Section on Public Administration Education of the American Society for
Public Administration.
Journal of Public Affairs Education145
Contents
Editorial Perspectives
What Keeps Our Teaching Alive?
Marieka Klawitter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
149
The Role of Values in Public Affairs Education
David Schultz. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
151
Symposium: Information Technology and Public Administration Education
Symposium Introduction: Information Technology and Public Administration Education
Sukumar Ganapati & Christopher G. Reddick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
155
Revisiting the Information Technology Skills Gap in Master of Public Administration Programs
P. Cary Christian & Trenton J. Davis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
161
Technology and Pedagogy: Information Technology Competencies
in Public Administration and Public Policy Programs
Aroon P. Manoharan & James McQuiston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
175
No MPA Left Behind: A Review of Information Technology in the Master of
Public Administration Curriculum
Marcus D. Mauldin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
187
A Conceptual Model of Information Technology Competence for Public Managers:
Designing Relevant MPA Curricula for Effective Public Service
Anna Ya Ni & Yu-Che Chen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
193
The Information Technology Gap in Public Administration: What We Can Learn From the
Certified Public Manager and Senior Executive Service Programs
Alan R. Shark. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
213
Big Data in Public Affairs Education
Ines Mergel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
231
GIS Education in U.S. Public Administration Programs: Preparing the Next Generation
of Public Servants
Nancy J. Obermeyer, Laxmi Ramasubramanian, & Lisa Warnecke. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
146
249
Symposium: Information Technology and Public Administration Education
(continued)
An Ostrich Burying Its Head in the Sand? The 2009 NASPAA Standards
and Scope of Information Technology and E-Government Curricula
Sukumar Ganapati & Christopher G. Reddick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
267
E-Government Education in Turkish Public Administration Graduate Programs:
Past, Present, and Future
Mete Yildiz, Cenay Babaoğlu, & Mehmet Akif Demircioğlu. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
287
Article
On NASPAA Accreditation: Fred Was Right…But for the Wrong Reason
Mary E. Guy & Richard Stillman.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
303
Book Review
Review of: The Art of the Watchdog: Fighting Fraud, Waste, Abuse and Corruption in Government
Reviewed by Robin J. Kempf. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
313
Information for Submissions
JPAE Reviewers. .
Articles .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
153
inside back cover
Cover Photo
Located in the heart of Florida International University, the Steven J. and Dorothea Green Library is an
iconic building for physical and virtual library services for all university students.
Cover and Interior Deslgn
Val Escher
Book design property of NASPAA.
148
What Keeps Our Teaching Alive?
Marieka Klawitter
Co-Editor
What sparks change in our teaching? What
keeps us improving the content, delivery, and
assessment in our courses? I have been teaching in public policy programs for more than
30 years, if you count summer programs and
being a teaching assistant. I do not have the
yellowed lecture notes scorned by my peers in
my student days, but I do have electronic notes,
files and syllabi that I return to year after year.
What helps me keep those files alive and inter
esting to me and my ever-changing students?
I chalk it up to inspiration, understanding,
and evidence.
Sometimes, I make changes sparked by inspiration
from reading a great article in JPAE or another
publication. Most often, an idea to change a
course comes from a hallway conversation with
a colleague, a presentation at a conference, a com
pelling story on my Facebook feed, conversations
in our teaching assessment process or core course
coordination, or an interesting newspaper article.
Inspiration flashes and I see how I can include an
important new issue (e.g., #BlackLivesMatter),
use a new technology (e.g., online books at the
library), incorporate new methods (e.g., group
futurist predictions for status quo policies in
policy analysis), and tie my core course back to
other courses (e.g., policy analysis of body cam
eras tied to the management issues of training
police officers).
I need a working model of the “black box” of
teaching to know what might work in the class
JPAE 22 (2), 149–150
room. That model, like those in a policy analy
sis problem definition, needs to be built with
an overarching narrative, a synthesis of previous
literature, and a succinct summary of current
institutions, policies, and stakeholders. Early in
my career, I found a model for teaching in
Parker Palmer’s The Courage to Teach (2007):
“[Good teachers]…are able to weave a complex
web of connections between themselves, their
subjects, and their students, so that students
can learn to weave a world for themselves.”
Using this model, I ask students to join me in
bringing their authentic selves to the classroom
where we can connect our stories to theories
and evidence in this project of making sense of
the world.
And, as always, evidence is critical. What will
work in my course to help students learn?
As in most policy analysis, good evidence
(Internal validity! External validity!) is hard to
get. In producing and assessing evidence, we ask,
Can we randomly assign students to carefully
con
trolled conditions? Do we have nat
ural
ex
per
iments? Can we use other methods to
con
trol for all the confounding factors of
student and course characteristics? When can
a single case study provide insight about inno
vation (and they most certainly can!)? When is
quantitative analysis enough and when do we
need the richness of qualitative evidence? And,
familiar to all involved in NASPAA accredi
tation, how the heck do we measure outcomes
that we care about?
M. Klawitter
I believe these same ingredients of inspiration,
understanding, and evidence drive the take-up
of ideas from JPAE articles on teaching as well
as on curriculum and program management.
Without a compelling hook and good writing
that inspire, the article will go unread. Similarly,
without a narrated model to put an idea in con
text, we cannot make sense of the innovation.
And, a lack of evidence leaves us questioning
the quality of the change. The articles that stick
with us the most, the ones that challenge and
inspire us to continuously improve, are those
with a captivating message, contextual relevance,
and supporting evidence. Those are the articles
we like to publish in JPAE.
—Marieka
Klawitter
co-editor
Evans school of public policy
and governancE
university of washington
[email protected] OR [email protected]
150
REFERENCES
Palmer, P. J. (2007). The courage to teach: Exploring the
inner landscape of a teacher’s life. San Francisco, CA:
John Wiley and Sons.
ABOUT THe co-editor
is a faculty member at the
Evans School of Public Policy and Governance
of the University of Washington. She holds a
Masters in Public Policy from the University of
Michigan and a PhD in Economics from the
University of Wisconsin. Her research focuses
on public policies that affect family work and
in
come, in
cluding studies of welfare, family
sav
ings, and anti-discrimination policies for
sexual orientation. Marieka teaches courses on
pub
lic policy anal
ysis, quantitative methods,
pro
gram evaluation, and asset building for
low income families.
Marieka Klawitter
The Role of Values in
Public Affairs Education
David Schultz
Co-Editor
A central theme of many articles in JPAE
addresses the question of what we want our
students to know or be able to do when they
graduate from our programs. The debate often
seems to oscillate between advocacy for know
ledge (such as about cultural diversity or finan
cial literacy) and the use of specific technologies
or the ability to manage diversity. Sometimes,
the line between knowledge and skills is difficult
to draw. NASPAA standards reflect the idea that
our educational programs should em
pha
size
both knowledge and skills, describing bench
marks and standards for their assessment. Few
would disagree with the need to emphasize both,
although one could debate specifically what
bodies of knowledge, skill sets, or prerequisites
are essential for assuring both proficiency upon
graduation and success in a career. However,
there is another aspect of public affairs educa
tion that is just as important but more difficult
and elusive to teach and assess—the inculcation
of values.
Values education involves many things. On
one level, it is the teaching of ethics and ethical values. As someone who taught graduate
pro
fes
sional ethics to Master’s and doctoral
students in a public, nonprofit, and business
program, I did what many other professors did:
I taught students about how to engage in ethical
decision making in order to be able to recognize issues such as conflicts of interest. But
JPAE 22 (2), 151–154
values education is even broader than that. It is
instruction in the inculcation of the basic values
and concepts that define working in public
affairs leadership positions.
Part of what it means to become a public ad
ministrator or work in a nongovernmental
organization or nonprofit is internalizing a set
of values or attitudes appropriate to that sector
or job. To use an old-fashioned concept, public
affairs education is the processing of socializing
individuals to accept certain beliefs or attitudes
as important to how one thinks about the per
formance of one’s duties. I once taught for the
U.S. Defense Department, where I was tasked
with training foreign military officers about
human rights and democracy. Among the values
I sought to impart was the concept of military
deference to civilian rule and authority. Teach
ing respect for civilian rule and why it is impor
tant was supposed to affect how military officers
deferred to elections and the choices that the
people or elected leaders made, regardless of
whether they agreed with them or not.
A large part of public affairs education is expli
citly or implicitly about this broader concept
of values education. It includes not simply the
old and perhaps no longer clear concepts of the
politics/administration dichotomy or neutral
competence but perhaps also ideas of transparency, limited discretion, and accountability.
D. Schultz
It may include newer ideas such as governance,
social equity, or cultural competence. Some ar
gue that these are inherently democratic values,
and perhaps they are. But among the most
important values is the concept of serving the
public or the public interest.
Carol Lewis (2006) contends that the public
interest is about more than respecting demo
cracy. It involves respecting the dialogue aspect
of representation and being willing to engage in
discussion with appropriate stakeholders re
garding their preferences. For Lewis, the public
interest includes democracy and mutuality as
present values and sustainability and legacy as
future-orientated values. Her schema for the
public interest emphasizes dialogue and process
(democracy) and shared interests (mutuality).
It does not stop at asking what is good for the
present generation but includes intergenerational
justice, with an eye toward asking what can be
sustained for the future and what legacy or con
tribution can be passed on. For example, the
environment might be the quintessential issue
that has a present and future dimension. Pump
ing all the oil now for present consumption and
needs may be good for the current generation,
but the legacy of greenhouse gases and global
warm
ing may not good to pass on to our
children and grandchildren. The public interest should, for either the present generation or
a future one, not be a zero-sum game if at all
possible. A viable public good is not a simple
utilitarian cost-benefit analysis.
To develop Lewis’s arguments more fully, the
public interest includes respect for other demo
cratic values such as transparency and account
ability in decision making. This recognizes that
public decisions are in fact arrived at in public,
respecting and deferring to citizen comments
(and to elected officials too, if one is an appoint
ed official or civil servant). Serving the public
good suggests that public officials are trustees
who act, not out of private interest, but to
promote something broader. This means avoid
ing conflicts of interests, self-dealing, or other
actions that create real or apparent distrust in
decision making.
152
John Rawls (1977), in describing his two prin
ciples of justice, argued that his theory of insti
tutional justice articulated a thin theory of the
good. Institutional justice, or the public good,
involves a fair decision-making process—one
that emphasizes neutrality and fair representa
tion but is also guided by substantive values.
These values for Rawls are his two principles of
justice. One may not be persuaded that his prin
ciples promote guidance, fair play, and mutual
ity, but the Kantian notion of respecting all
individuals as ends and not merely means, or
developing policies that seek to avoid promoting one set of private interests over another
(whether in the present or future), should be
part of the public interest. Finally, the public’s
opinion must be given fair deference.
This discussion of democracy, the public inter
est, values, and public affairs education is central
to the articles in this current issue of JPAE. On
the surface, this issue is mostly devoted to the
teaching of information technology (IT). It ad
dresses the topic from a variety of perspectives,
ranging from a definition of big data, to who
teach what about IT, to why such knowledge
and skills are needed for employment, and fin
ally to where NASPAA standards and accredi
tation fit in. Collectively, these articles ask ques
tions about what professionals need to know
when acting in the public interest, inquiring
also into normative issues about how they should
act or make judgments when they control or
have access to all types of new or emerging data
and technology. If the articles in this issue are
correct, public affairs programs are in danger
in falling behind in providing the type of
instruction we really need to be offering our
students. I am sure that the articles here do not
represent the last word on the topic of IT, but
they are an important first step and reminder
that with technological advances comes the
need to make ethical and pedagogical choices
about how to use such advances for the public
good and integrate them into our teaching.
As always, I encourage you to contact me with
suggestions for symposia, specific articles, or
even suggestions about how to do our job better
as editors and what you would like to see in
JPAE in the future.
—David
call for reviewers
Schultz
Co-editor
hamline university
[email protected]
opportunities
are available in 2016–2017
REFERENCES
Lewis, Carol. (2006). In pursuit of the public interest.
Public Administration Review, 66(5), 694–701.
Rawls, John. (1977). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge,
MA: Belknap Press.
to qualify for a JPAE reviewership:
ABOUT THe co-editor
is professor of political science at
Hamline University and professor at the Ham
line and University of Minnesota Schools of
Law. He is a three-time Fulbright Scholar and
the author of more than 30 books and 100+
articles on various aspects of American politics,
election law, and the media and politics. Schultz
is regularly interviewed and quoted on these
subjects in the local, national, and international
media, including the New York Times, Wall
Street Journal, Washington Post, Economist, and
National Public Radio. His most recent book is
Presidential Swing States: Why Only Ten Matter
(Lexington Books, 2015).
David Schultz
Update or Register
manage your jpae profile online at:
edmgr.com/jpae
Make these profile updates:
•update your
contact info
•update your
personal
interests
•register to
become
a reviewer
Update
yo u r p r
tod ofile
ay !
D. Schultz
About Us
The Journal of Public Affairs Education [JPAE ) is the journal of NASPAA, the membership
association of graduate education programs in public policy, public affairs, public administration,
and public & nonprofit management. More information about us is printed within this issue:
Subscription Information & Rates. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . inside front cover
Reproduction Policy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . inside front cover
Mission Statements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 145
Information for Article Submissions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . inside back cover
Contact Us
Online contacts. Send your questions, suggestions or comments to JPAE ’s current editorial
office housed at the Evans School of Public Policy and Governance of the University of Washington,
located in Seattle, Washington, USA.
email address for questions, comments or suggestions. . . . . . . . . . . . [email protected]
article submission and peer review system . . . . . . . . . . . . http:/www.edmgr.com/jpae
follow us on Twitter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . https://twitter.com/JPAEJournal
Find More
Find articles and more online. Access free JPAE articles from NASPAA’s website or discover
what is available at JPAE through independent sources:
articleshttp://www.naspaa.org/initiatives/jpae/jpae.asp
abstracts JPAE is abstracted or indexed in JSTOR, EBSCO, Google Scholar,
and Education Full Text Index.
ISSN 1523-6803 (formerly 1087–7789)
154
Symposium Introduction
Information Technology in
Public Administration Education
Sukumar Ganapati
Florida International University
Christopher G. Reddick
University of Texas at San Antonio
Should we, as public administration educators,
care about including information and commun
ications technology in the curriculum? The
question is not new, but it has taken on a new
sense of urgency in the present context,
especially when the 2009 Network of Schools
of Public Policy, Affairs, and Administration
(NASPAA) standards do not even mention
information technology (IT). When the first
set of standards was created in the 1970s, IT
education was in its infancy in public admin
istration schools. In 1985, NASPAA’s Ad Hoc
Committee on Computers in Public Manage
ment Education highlighted the significance of
computer education for public administrators
(Kraemer et al., 1986). The NASPAA standards
have since evolved from being input-oriented
to output-oriented. The 2009 standards are
arguably outcome-oriented, shifting from an
emphasis on specific subject area knowledge to
core competencies. IT is not explicitly reflected
in the competencies. This JPAE issue examines
the role of IT and related skills in public admin
istration pedagogy. We suggest that NASPAA
JPAE 22 (2), 155–160
consider forming an ad hoc committee again
to consider the inclusion of IT in the public
administration curriculum. Otherwise, we will
forfeit the strides made in the last three decades.
Why should we care about teaching IT in pub
lic administration schools? The most basic
answer is that we live in a digital world. At the
2014 NASPAA conference, the authors in this
issue began a conversation with other leading
scholars about IT in the context of the 2009
NASPAA standards. The Internet boom has
moved IT from handling only internal manage
ment processes to becoming a key tool in inter
acting with public organizations’ external con
stituencies (an interface called electronic government, or e-government). Research on IT
and e-government has proliferated over the last
decade. The E-Government Reference Library
(EGRL) at the University of Washington saw a
fivefold increase in such research between 2005
and 2015 and lists eight journals that specialize
in IT and e-government. Only a very small share
(3.4%) of this research, however, appears in
S. Ganapati & C. G. Reddick
main
stream public administration journals
(Moon, Lee, & Roh, 2014). Research on IT is
marginalized in public administration and
management (Buffat, 2015; Hood & Margetts,
2010; Pollitt, 2011). IT’s absence from the
2009 NASPAA standards also indicates the
lack of importance given to IT competency in
public administration education. We hope this
JPAE issue will spur further conversation about
whether and how to include IT and e-govern
ment training in public administration schools.
There are at least four reasons why we should
care about including IT in public administration education. First, IT is a large force reshaping the public sector, to borrow Alasdair Rob
erts’s (2014) wording. The change has not been
instantaneous—it has evolved in spurts since
World War II. Computers were adopted for
increasing efficiency in accounting and financial
operations in the 1950s. Payroll, budgeting, tax
billing, and inventory management were among
the early areas where the impact of computers
on work became noticeable. The introduction
of the personal computer in the 1980s trans
formed public offices, including a myriad of ap
plications for word processing, accounting,
design, and enterprise management. Computers
became the means of increasing internal organ
izational efficiency, but with mixed results.
The Internet, which has grown by leaps and
bounds since the 1990s, is arguably one of the
most significant innovations affecting the 21st
century. It is transforming our daily lives in ways
we have yet to fully comprehend. Communi
cation costs have decreased and wireless devices
have proliferated. E-mail has supplanted snail
mail; social media platforms have become per
vasive; online transactions are routine; and data
management using cloud computing is a hot
topic, as are big data. The disruptive effects of
the Internet are evident in the so-called sharing
economy, where mobile devices have enabled
peer-to-peer services. The digital economy has
both destroyed jobs and created new ones.
The effects are palpable in public organizations, where routine jobs are being phased out.
156
The Internet has enabled new means of internal organizational management (e.g., through
cloud computing) and new means of public
engagement (e.g., social media). The techno
logical diffusion has been very quick, rapidly
changing the landscape. Consider that, since its
invention, the mobile phone took only about
25 years to reach half of the world’s population
(comparatively, it took over 50 years for land
lines to reach half of the U.S. population). If
public administration schools ignore the rapid
growth and diffusion of IT, we will be in danger
of becoming outdated and outmoded very soon.
Public organizations are themselves accused—
sometimes unfairly—of being behind the times
in terms of IT. Public administration students
should be trained to be competitive in the job
market. They need to understand the prospects
and problems of using technology to increase
an organization’s internal efficiency and effec
tiveness and to engage the external constituents
it serves.
The second reason that public administration
schools should include IT education is that the
use of IT in public organizations is rife with
problems. Public agencies are vast repositories
of sensitive digital data that they collect to ful
fill their mission. The information is often in
the public domain, but there are privacy con
siderations. Cybersecurity is a major concern.
These issues are not only technical but also
managerial. Although federal, state, and local
governments spend billions of dollars on IT
projects, many such projects have not been
successfully implemented. The U.S. Govern
ment Accountability Office (2015) has singled
out “Improving the Management of IT Acqui
sitions and Operations” as a high-risk category,
and examples of IT project failures abound.
The most recent glaring debacle was the launch
of the Affordable Care Act website, HealthCare.
gov. The problems of these projects are far from
technological; rather, the problems are related
to management, planning, and oversight. Ad
dressing such issues is the domain of public
administrators, not technical experts. If ade
quately trained, public administrators should be
able to work in coordination with technology
specialists to address project management issues.
The third reason to include IT education in the
public administration curriculum is that with
out adequate IT training, our graduates will
not be prepared for the modern workforce. We
will have trained students who cannot compete in the marketplace of the digital world,
where the skills required are rapidly changing.
Whereas computer education was the emphasis
of NASPAA’s 1985 ad hoc committee, such
education is too basic for the present generation.
The millennial and forthcoming generation are
growing up in a world of ubiquitous digital
devices—tablets, smartphones, and wearables.
Texting and social media are taken for granted.
Several educators have pondered what a public
administration IT course should cover; clearly,
the subject matter must be dynamic, responding
to the rapidly changing technological environ
ment. This JPAE issue offers glimpses into the
topics of the future (such as big data) as well as
those that are already prevalent (such as geo
graphic information systems).
The fourth reason to teach IT in public admin
istration schools involves the important role
that such programs play in society. The 2009
NASPAA standards rightly emphasize the pub
lic service values in the accreditation process.
Public service is what distinguishes public ad
ministration from other fields such as business
administration or information science. Business
schools prepare their students for success in the
private sector (though many work in the public
and nonprofit sectors); and, despite debates
about how to include IT (e.g., Navarro, 2008),
it is a skill area required for accreditation by the
Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of
Business. Information science students are field
specialists in technology, working across many
sectors. That business and information science
students graduate with better technological
preparedness should concern us regarding the
employment prospects of public administration
graduates. At the same time, business and
information science schools are not adequate
training grounds for maintaining public values.
As the digital world evolves, so too will the
nature of the demands for preserving public
service values. For example, in the ongoing
debate about the benefits and problems of the
sharing economy, public administration
students can play a key role in maintaining the
public interest. We should adequately prepare
our students to be engaged in preserving public
service values in the digital world.
The articles in this JPAE issue raise many of the
above questions in the context of the 2009
NASPAA standards. The articles complement
each other and provide insights about the scope
of IT in the public administration curriculum
from different perspectives. The first three
articles discuss the divide between IT compet
encies required in the marketplace and what is
taught in public administration schools. In the
first article, P. Cary Christian and Trenton J.
Davis report their findings from a content
analysis of Master of Public Administration
(MPA) program curricula and surveys of alumni
and the government employers of graduates in
Georgia and Florida. They find that very few
programs offer IT as a core or elective course;
of those that do, many focus on geographic information systems (GIS). Their survey analysis
of the MPA alumni shows that many did not
acquire IT skills from their MPA program—
they had to obtain such skills on the job or
independently. Both alumni and employers
generally agreed that computer literacy is neces
sary and that MPA students should be exposed
to information policies and procedures, records
retention, and system security.
The second article, by Aroon P. Manoharan
and James McQuiston, is based on content
analysis of IT course syllabi across public
administration schools. The authors find that
the courses typically cover e-government (service
provision and e-procurement), GIS, privacy,
infrastructure, and cybersecurity and pay rela
tively less attention to emerging topics such as
social media, big data, cloud computing, and
crowdfunding. The article provides a useful
analysis of what IT topics are taught and iden
tifies gaps in coverage. Marcus D. Mauldin’s
brief note following this article reinforces the
findings of the first two articles using a different
method—content analysis of the curriculum
information gleaned from program websites.
He finds that the majority of programs do not
offer IT concentrations, core courses, or electives.
In the third article, Anna Ya Ni and Yu-Che
Chen propose a conceptual model of IT
competence for public managers that comprises
three dimensions: its components (knowledge,
skills, and personal attributes); a focus on
performance (at individual, organizational, and
professional levels); and public service duty (of
a general public manager or an IT manager).
The model allows the authors to distinguish be
tween the IT competency required of a general
public manager versus a specialist public man
ager. They outline the differences in learning
outcomes for public managers, which could
serve as a guide for designing IT curricula based
on audience requirements.
The fourth article, by Alan R. Shark, describes
how two professional managerial and leadership
dev
elopment initiatives, the Certified Public
Manager program (CPM) and the federal Sen
ior Executive Service (SES), incorporate IT
competency. The CPM program, geared toward
state and local government senior managers,
focuses on strategic information management
and suffers from problems similar to NASPAA
pro
grams (lack of qualified faculty, diffuse
subject matter, etc.). The SES is designed for
senior public administrators in federal agencies
and includes some technology aspects, especially
those related to e-government laws (e.g., the
1996 Clinger-Cohen Act).
The next two articles discuss the coverage of
substantive technologies in the public admini
stration curriculum. Ines Mergel examines the
role of big data in public affairs education, and
Nancy J. Obermeyer, Laxmi Ramasubramanian,
and Lisa Warnecke examine the importance of
teaching GIS. Mergel’s article is timely in
dealing with a cutting-edge topic. Big data are
creat
ed through online interactions between
158
government entities and the public (e.g., social
media, government apps). She highlights the
importance of expanding public management
skills while managing big data. These skills
relate to ethics, technology, process innova
tions, organizational and institutional changes,
and analy
ti
cal skills. Mergel then suggests
specific teaching modules, complete with
readings and cases, for big data courses in
public affairs programs.
Obermeyer, Ramasubramanian, and Warnecke
examine how U.S. public administration pro
grams teach GIS. Based on a survey of pro
grams, the authors note that despite the in
creasing importance of GIS in the public sector,
the technology is not well integrated into the
public administration curriculum. Current pro
grams often lack GIS capabilities and need to
work across disciplinary boundaries to offer
GIS courses, which has implications for how the
credits are shared between the different units. The
authors recommend that public administration
programs consider hiring interdisciplinary fac
ulty who can teach GIS courses.
The seventh article, by Sukumar Ganapati and
Christopher G. Reddick, examines the impact
of the 2009 NASPAA standards on IT course
offerings in public administration schools. The
authors surveyed the NASPAA principal re
presentatives and analyzed the NASPAA data
base of self-studies. Their analysis shows that
IT and e-government are not given adequate
importance in the public administration curri
culum in general, especially in schools ac
credited under the 2009 NASPAA standards.
Schools have limited faculty resources, and the
IT courses get short shrift. Because the 2009
NASPAA standards fail to emphasize IT, many
schools may not even include it and associated
topics as part of the curriculum conversation.
The final article, by Mete Yildiz, Cenay Babaoğlu,
and Mehmet Akif Demircioğlu, brings an inter
national dimension. The authors focus on the
current state and future prospects of graduate
e-government education in public administra
tion in Turkey. Based on surveys with e-govern
ment instructors and on content analysis of
graduate program websites and e-government
course syllabi, the authors highlight several
challenges faced by public administration
departments in teaching e-government courses.
These challenges include the limited availability
of Turkish teaching materials, difficulties in
accessing reliable and timely data on
e-government initiatives that can be used as
case studies, threats to long-term sustainability
of e-government courses, and the ongoing need
to keep the curriculum up-to-date due to the
ever-changing nature of technologies. As
NASPAA’s international accreditation efforts
grow, the experiences of Turkey and other
countries are relevant for how NASPAA deals
with the growth of IT.
Our hope is that the articles in this issue will
spur further dialogue about the scope of IT
in public administration education. As many
of the authors discuss, the NASPAA standards
play a key role in the ability to offer IT courses.
Because the 2009 NASPAA standards do not
address IT, there is a real danger that accredited schools will not offer courses in the topic.
The NASPAA standards should recognize the
imperative of teaching governance and public
service in the digital world. Toward this end, as
happened in the 1980s, we propose that NAS
PAA form an ad hoc committee to examine
the scope of IT in the public administration
curriculum. The committee could further review
the state of IT coursework offerings, the con
tent of such offerings, and the challenges of
offering these courses. The committee could
also interact with public administration alumni
and their employers, including professional
associations such as the American Society for
Public Administration, the International City/
County Management Association, and so on.
These interactions would provide useful input
about the need for IT in the workplace and how
public administration IT coursework should be
designed. It would be a mistake for us public
administration educators to be complacent in
the face of the quickly evolving digital world.
REFERENCES
Buffat, A. (2015). Street-level bureaucracy and e-gov
ernment. Public Management Review, 17(1), 149–161.
Hood, C., & Margetts, H. (2010). Cyber-bureaucracy:
If information technology is so central to public ad
ministration, why is it so ghetto-ized? In J. Pierre &
P. W. Ingraham (Eds.), Comparative administrative
change and reform (pp. 114–135). Montreal, QC:
McGill-Queens University Press.
Kraemer, K., Bergin, T., Bretschneider, S., Duncan,
G., Foss, T., Gorr, W., et al. (1986). Curriculum re
commendations for public management education
in computing: The final report of the NASPAA
Ad Hoc Committee on Computers in Public Man
agement Education. Social Science Computer Review,
4(1), 1–37.
Moon, M. J., Lee, J., & Roh, C-Y. (2014). The evolu
tion of internal IT applications and e-government
studies in public administration: Research themes
and methods. Administration and Society, 46(1), 3–36.
Navarro, P. (2008). The MBA core curricula of topranked U.S. business schools: A study in failure?
Academy of Management Learning and Education,
7(1), 108–123.
Network of Schools of Public Policy, Affairs, and
Administration
(NASPAA),
Commission
on Peer Review and Accreditation. (2014).
NASPAA standards: Accreditation standards for
master’s degree programs. Retrieved from https://
naspaaaccreditation.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/
naspaa-accreditation-standards.pdf.
Pollitt, C. (2011). Mainstreaming technological change
in the study of public management. Public Policy
and Administration, 26(4), 377–397.
Roberts, A. (2014). Large forces: What’s missing in public
administration. Boston, MA: Alasdair Roberts.
U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO).
(2015). High-risk series: An update (Report No.
GAO-15-290). Retrieved from http://www.gao.
gov/assets/670/668415.pdf.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Sukumar Ganapati is an associate professor in the
Department of Public Administration at Florida International University (FIU), in Miami.
He is also director of the PhD program in pub
lic affairs. He has taught several courses related
to information technology and e-government at
FIU. His research on information technology
encompasses open government and emerging
information technologies and their adoption in
public organizations.
Christopher G. Reddick is a professor and chair of
the Department of Public Administration at the
University of Texas at San Antonio. His research
and teaching interests are in information tech
nology and public sector organization.
160
Revisiting the Information Technology
Skills Gap in Master of
Public Administration Programs
P. Cary Christian
Georgia Southern University
Trenton J. Davis
Georgia Southern University
ABSTRACT
This study investigates how employees in government entities develop information technology (IT)
competence and the extent to which training in Master of Public Administration (MPA) programs
contributes to such competence. To facilitate this evaluation, we surveyed government employers
and MPA program alumni and carried out a content analysis of MPA program offerings. We use
results from the employer survey to gauge employer perceptions of IT-related knowledge levels of
employees with MPA degrees, and we use the survey of MPA program alumni to ascertain alumni
perceptions of their own competence. Our content analysis of MPA program technology offerings
provides insight into what IT training is available to help students meet the identified functional
IT needs of the organizations surveyed. Our findings indicate a gap between MPA curricula and
such critical skills, and we provide recommendations for curricular changes to address this gap.
KEYWORDS
Information technology training, MPA curricula, MPA curricular recommendations, information technology
skills perceptions
In the fall of 1988, the Network of Schools of
Public Policy, Affairs, and Administration
(NASPAA) required all graduate programs in
public management to include training in
information systems. This new requirement, in
essence, created a sixth skill or knowledge area
within NASPAA’s Master of Public Admini
stration (MPA) curriculum guidelines; programs
could meet this guideline by offering one course
in the fundamentals of computing and one in
computer applications for management. Kraemer
and Northrop (1989) recommended that com
puter use and information systems knowledge
be integrated into most courses in the curri
culum and that many schools should offer an
information management concentration.
JPAE 22 (2), 161–174
In the final report of NASPAA’s Ad Hoc Com
mittee on Computers in Public Management
Education titled “Curriculum Recommenda
tions for Public Management Education in
Computing” (Kraemer et al., 1986), the
committee identified three levels of computer
literacy that a manager’s education should
provide: (1) the ability to use technology in
carrying out daily responsibilities; (2) the ability
to use the technology of the organization
overseen by the manager; and (3) the ability to
develop policy for effective use of technology
within the organization. At the time of the report,
only 15% of public administration schools
offered a management information systems or
computer applications course (Kiel, 1986). In a
P. C. Christian & T. J. Davis
1989 survey, Cleary (1990) found that 45 MPA
programs (26% of respondents) required infor
mation systems or computer science courses in
their core curriculum. An additional 15.6% of
respondents indicated training in information
systems and computer skills as a gap in their
offerings. Prior to 2009, NASPAA accreditation
Standard 4.21, which specified common curri
culum requirements, included a component for
information management, technology applica
tions, and policy (NASPAA, Commission on
Peer Review and Accreditation, 2008).
Today, NASPAA no longer specifies curriculum
components for MPA programs. Instead,
NASPAA instructs each program to “implement
and be accountable for delivering its distinctive,
public service mission through the course of
study and learning outcomes it expects its
graduates to attain” (NASPAA, Commission
on Peer Review and Accreditation, 2014).
NASPAA does not intend that MPA programs
meet each universal required competency by
offering a specific course but rather that the
curriculum as a whole address these compe
tencies. Thus, NASPAA accreditation standards
no longer expressly require the inclusion of
dedicated information technology (IT) courses
within MPA curricula.
The move toward a missions- and outcomesbased accreditation regime should not diminish
the importance of IT training within public
administration curricula. The impact of IT in
government is omnipresent, requiring managers
to work within the “processes, preferences,
rules, and assumptions embedded in the infor
mation systems” (Dawes, 2004, p. 6). Public
managers are ever more in need of IT skills
because of rapidly increasing interest in
e-government initiatives; the rise of contracting
out, which creates a need for skillful manage
ment of technology contracts; the increasing
complexity of interoperable and linked systems;
the increased need for information to support
performance management systems; and the need
for government managers to become more
sophisticated purchasers of IT services and
systems. Based on the rapidly expanding role of
162
IT in public organizations, coupled with the
lack of any specific NASPAA requirement for
the inclusion of IT coursework, this study
investigates the following questions:
1.What is the status of IT in current MPA
program curricula?
2.Do current MPA curricula adequately
address the importance of IT in the
careers of those we train?
3.Does the perception of the importance
of IT in MPA curricula vary between
MPA graduates and employers?
THE CASE FOR INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
IN MPA CURRICULA
The pace of change in information systems
requires organizations not only to change struc
turally but also to constantly adapt (Berce,
Lanfranco, & Vehovar, 2008). Matei and Sav
ulescu (2014) argue that most innovations in
public administration have an information and
communications technology component that is
vital to public service provision and policy
implementation. Moreover, as Kernaghan and
Gunraj (2004) aver, the use of information
technology by public organizations predisposes
them to change in certain ways: (1) to hire
employees with specialized skills and to invest
substantially in IT infrastructure; (2) to im
prove efficiency by streamlining information
management; and (3) to become more likely to
share and disseminate information. The extent
to which these predispositions result in changes
within the organization is subject to political,
structural, managerial, and cultural factors but
can move departments and agencies toward
more collaborative arrangements, from depart
mental to nondepartmental forms, and from
hierarchy and central control toward decentral
ization of authority and control, including the
shrinking of middle management layers within
the organization.
Denhardt (2001) suggests that scholars should
be attentive to the “big questions” of public
administration education just as we are to the
big questions of the fields and subfields within
our discipline. One of the principal questions
put forward by Denhardt is, do we seek to
Revisiting the Information Technology Skills Gap
educate our students with respect to theory or
to practice? We contend that most scholars in
our field acknowledge that a firm grounding in
theory is critical to the long-term success of our
students. There are principles related to IT that
will hold for the foreseeable future and deserve
respect because of their extended impact on
public management. Dhar and Sundararajan
(2007) describe these principles as “techno
logical invariants.” The first of their three
technological invariants is that most types of
information are capable of digitization. The
digitization of information makes it easy to
store, transport, and utilize computationally in
numerous ways. It is, however, critical that
public managers understand the host of
potential problems related to the digital
representation of information.
First, managers should be concerned with the
nuances of records retention in a digital
environment. As applications are retired or up
graded, managers should consider the capability
of reading data from older technologies. While
managers may address the possibility of data
loss from hardware or software failures by
implementing system redundancy and backup
protocols, managers must understand that
records retention policies can create costly legal
ramifications if data destruction occurs on
schedules other than what is allowed under
such policies.
Second, as organizations begin to use social
media platforms outside their control, such as
Twitter, Facebook, Vine, and similar applica
tions, they must have a methodology in place
to save and store the data produced by these
platforms. It is equally important that social
media policies address issues that might arise
when government employees interact with the
public digitally, such as monitoring appropriate
use of these platforms by employees and the
accuracy of the content. Third, in the event
that data are requested as part of a lawsuit or
under freedom of information or similar
legislation, managers should be sensitive to the
need to maintain data in a format that will
allow for cost-effective retrieval.
Finally, managers should be cognizant of the
transparency and privacy issues related to
digitally stored data. For example, organizations
have a responsibility to keep personally identi
fiable information secure from threats that can
occur from both internal and external sources
and it is incumbent upon managers to under
stand the types of data that must be protected.
The second technological invariant addressed
by Dhar and Sundararajan (2007) is the sus
tained exponential growth of computational
power. Thanks to the progressive doubling of
overall processing power every 18 months since
1970 (Moore’s law), we now have a relatively
inexpensive, globe-spanning digital infrastruc
ture that accommodates devices as disparate as
cell phones and supercomputers. As we move
toward virtually unlimited bandwidth and
storage capacity, emergent technologies will
continue to transform the way we work in
dividually (Fichman, Dos Santos, & Zheng,
2014). This, in turn, will affect the structure of
the modern organization. It is imperative that
there be a well-trained corps of public managers
capable of understanding the organizational
changes that will flow from continued advances
in IT capabilities.
Dhar and Sundararajan’s (2007) final techno
logical invariant is the sustained increase in the
capability of addressing complexity through
the use of modular layers of technology within a standardized software platform. Public
managers must understand how this capability
enables organizational models that otherwise
would not exist and device capabilities that
were previously not feasible. As noted by
Fichman, Dos Santos, and Zheng (2014),
managers have the opportunity to become
digital innovators. The extent to which this will
occur, however, is predicated on the ability to
understand what is possible in light of advances
in technology, coupled with insight into unmet
organizational needs.
In their study, Dhar and Sundararajan (2007)
focused on the private sector and interviewed
college deans from 45 business schools, posing
the following question: “Do you think that
teaching MBA students about IT in business
is necessary?” (p. 127). An overwhelming
majority (43 of 45, or 95.5%) responded yes
to this question and then proceeded to discuss their reasoning. Three points emerged that
are particularly applicable to the public sector:
(1) information technologies continually trans
form business and society; (2) investments in
IT are critical to success; and (3) innovation
and creativity in the use of data in decisionmaking processes is critical to the success of
a business executive. Similar to the debate
per
taining to Denhardt’s (2001) question
about the balance between theory and practice
in public administration education, Dhar and
Sundararajan (2007) note that in prepar
ing
students for careers that span decades, general
theories have more value than the specific
context of the current environment. However,
due to the pervasive nature of IT, it remains
important to train MPA students how to
think about technology and its role within
the organization.
METHODOLOGY
We conducted two surveys during late July and
August of 2015: one of MPA program alumni
and the other of government employers of
MPA graduates. We administered the surveys
anonymously. We initially sent the alumni
survey to graduates of two MPA programs that
agreed to allow us access to their alumni lists;
we then supplemented this with respondents
who were referred through the employer survey
or who learned of the survey through other
sources. The invitations to participate in the
employer survey also included a link to parti
cipate in the alumni survey, which the employer
could provide to its MPA graduate employees.
We also distributed the alumni survey invitation
to the Professional Public Service: MPA-MPP
Degrees group on LinkedIn. We administered
the employer survey with the primary assistance
of the Georgia Municipal Association and the
Florida League of Cities, who promoted the
survey to their members. Each of these organ
izations also submitted our invitation to part
icipate to national organizations with whom
they are affiliated. As a result, almost all of our
government employer survey respondents work
for municipalities.1
164
Because we distributed surveys in the broadest
manner possible, we do not know how many
invitations were ultimately received by potential
respondents, how many were opened, and what
our final response rate was.2 However, we
believed that our distribution methodology
would provide an adequate number of responses
from organizations of all sizes based on the sheer
number of organizations that would receive an
invitation to participate: more than 1,200 in
Georgia and Florida alone. Because of this
distribution methodology, the results of the
surveys may not be representative. Both surveys
were an initial attempt to study employer and
employee perceptions of the adequacy of IT
training in MPA programs, and we believe they
represent a significant first step toward a more
complete understanding of this important issue.
In addition to the surveys, we also performed a
content analysis of MPA program curricula of
170 NASPAA member schools, noting whether or not the program required an IT course
in its core requirements, offered one or more
IT courses as both general or concentration
electives, and offered a concentration in IT.
We made these determinations based on a
review of the requirements of the MPA program
and course descriptions. The purpose of this
content analysis was to determine how many
programs offered some form of IT training and
whether the training was required or elective.3
TABLE 1.
Alumni Survey: Organization Size
Number of fulltime employees
Number of
respondents
Percentage
Less than 10
29
14.6
10 to 100
43
21.6
101 to 500
36
18.1
501 to 1,000
27
13.6
1,001 to 10,000
37
18.6
More than 10,000
20
10.0
7
3.5
199
100.0
Did not respond
Total
FINDINGS
Program Content Analysis
Of the 170 NASPAA member schools reviewed,
only 26 (15.29%) required an information
technology class within their core requirements.
This represents essentially no change from the
results of a similar survey by Kiel (1986); but it
represents a decrease from 1989, when Cleary
(1990) found that 26% of NASPAA member
schools required such a course. Additionally,
only 33 programs (19.41%) offered a general
elective class in IT. Seven programs (4.12%)
offered an IT concentration, and 34 (20%)
offered elective IT classes within concentration
electives. Of the core required courses and con
centration electives offered, 47 courses were in
information management and 21 were related
to using geographic information systems (GIS).
Alumni Survey
We received 199 responses to our alumni
survey from individuals who graduated from
84 different MPA programs. The respondents
worked in a variety of organizational types. As
would be expected of such graduates, many
respondents worked in municipal (n = 44,
22.1%), state (n = 26, 13.1%), county (n = 14,
7.0%), and federal (n = 17, 8.5%) government
or in nonprofit organizations (n = 30, 15.1%).
Outside of government, the largest numbers of
respondents worked in business (n = 27, 13.6%)
and education (n = 25, 12.6%). The remainder
were either self-employed (n = 10, 5.0%) or did
not respond to this question (n = 6, 3.0%).
Of the 199 respondents, 102 were managementlevel employees (51.2%), 65 classified them
selves as “employees” (32.7%), 23 classified
themselves as consultants (11.6%), and 9 did
not respond (4.5%).
Table 1 shows the size of the organization
within which the alumni respondents worked.
Of the 199 respondents, 51 (25.6%) reported
that a general IT class was required in their
program. Of the 148 (74.4%) who reported
that a general IT class was not required in their
program, 9 respondents (6.1%) reported that
they took a general IT class as an elective. We
also asked if alumni had taken other non-IT
classes that included some coverage of IT
management issues and 47 (23.6%, N = 199)
responded affirmatively.
We also asked the alumni how important spec
ific IT skills were in their present job. Table 2
presents the results of this inquiry.
The most important or critical skill identified
was having general computer literacy and com
mon skills, such as the ability to use Microsoft
Word and Excel. This is not surprising given
the wide use of Microsoft Office or similar soft
ware suites. As educators, however, we should
be aware that requiring advanced skill in these
applications in coursework might serve students
well once they are employed. Six of the skills
and abilities identified by more than 60% of
respondents as being important or critical were
related to broad management-level policy con
siderations, and three were implementation or
evaluation skills.
We also asked alumni to indicate the extent to
which they perceived that their MPA program
provided them with the knowledge and skills
they indicated as being at least “important” in
the previous question on skills and abilities.
Table 3 presents the results of this inquiry.
Table 3 indicates that alumni of MPA programs
may not be obtaining sufficient training with
respect to IT from their MPA programs. This is
not surprising given that only 15% of MPA
programs require students to take an IT course.
With respect to the respondents in this survey,
83.33% of those who took a general IT course
stated they agreed to some degree that their
MPA programs provided them with the IT
knowledge and skills needed versus 54.96% of
those who did not take a general IT class. The
relationship between these variables was
significant: X2 (5, N = 173) = 16.22, p < .01.
Also implied is that students are obtaining
some IT skills from courses other than IT
courses. A few respondents voluntarily indi
cated they obtained some IT skills through
general management courses (n = 28) or from
statistics or program evaluation courses (n = 10).
TABLE 2.
Alumni Survey: Ratings of Technology Skills Required in Order of Percentage Ranked
Important or Critical (Combined)
Not
important
Nice to
have
but not
critical
Important
Critical
Percent
important
or critical
0
2
28
144
98.85
Understanding of the role of organizational
policies and procedures in containing
security threats
12
26
81
52
76.44
Understanding of the issues related to
records retention policies as they relate to
electronically stored information, including
data from social media websites
12
33
73
54
72.99
Knowledge of the legal requirements
related to protection of electronically
stored, personally identifiable data
14
31
67
58
71.84
General understanding of how to protect
the workplace from technology risks like
viruses, malware, social engineering, etc.
20
30
64
58
70.11
Understanding of transparency and
accountability issues as they relate to
technology management (N = 173)
17
32
81
39
69.36
Understanding of technology management,
legal, and regulatory issues, and consider
ations related to social media use
18
36
78
39
67.24
Ability to participate in needs assessments,
business process analysis, feasibility
studies, and implementations for new
technology initiatives
20
34
69
43
64.37
Ability to function as a member of or to
lead multidisciplinary teams that have a
technology component (N = 173)
22
32
59
47
61.27
Ability to evaluate technology implement
ations using tools such as cost-benefit
analysis and return on investment (N = 173)
20
41
63
42
60.69
Understanding of the issues related to the
“digital divide” that may affect the citizens
served by the organization
22
44
71
29
57.47
Ability to negotiate and manage
outsourced IT functions (N = 173)
33
38
48
39
50.29
Understanding of cloud computing and its
benefits and dangers (N = 172)
29
50
63
21
48.84
Ability to manage IT staff members
38
37
48
35
47.70
Understanding of management issues
related to e-government initiatives
31
58
50
31
46.55
Intermediate technology skills such as GIS
or other specialized technology
38
70
48
14
35.63
Skill
General computer literacy/common IT skills
such as Word and Excel
Note. N = 174 unless otherwise specified.
166
TABLE 3.
Alumni Survey: MPA Program Provided
Knowledge and Skills Needed
Response
Frequency
Percentage
Strongly disagree
21
12.1
Disagree
45
26.0
Somewhat agree
56
32.4
Agree
27
15.6
6
3.5
18
10.4
173
100.0
Strongly agree
Agree for some;
disagree for others
Total
Given that many alumni respondents indicated
that they did not learn required IT skills from
their MPA programs, the question of where the
respondents learned the skills they need be
comes important. Table 4 shows the responses
of the alumni to this question.
The results in Table 4 make it clear that students
who do not learn appropriate IT skills in their
MPA programs and do not already possess the
skills they require must develop them on their
own after entering the job market. Some
learned these skills through classes offered by
their employer (n = 26), while others (n = 19)
received additional training paid for by their
employer. It appears that, at least to some
extent, MPA graduates are successful at finding
alternative methods of learning required IT
skills after graduation. However, many respond
ents commented that having to learn these
skills on the job or through independent study
was a burden and imposed significant diffi
culties. Additionally, the large number of MPA
program alumni who were required to take
some action to obtain needed IT skills for their
jobs indicates that alumni are not graduating
with a valid and complete set of minimum
required skills. This premise is further evidenced
by the overwhelming majority of respondents
who indicated that IT skills should be included
in the MPA core curriculum and that in
hindsight they would have taken an IT course
whether it was required or not. Table 5 shows
alumni perceptions of the impact on their
careers resulting from not having learned
needed IT skills from their MPA programs.
As Table 5 clearly shows, MPA alumni who
responded did not perceive much of an impact
from not having learned more IT skills during
their MPA programs. This makes sense because
most respondents obtained the training they
required from other sources or had already
developed needed skills prior to entering the
MPA program. As one respondent stated, “The
impact is on the organization. Those at the top
TABLE 4.
Alumni Survey: If Not from the MPA Program, Where Did You Learn Needed IT Skills?
Response
Frequency
Percentage
I had adequate IT skills prior to entering the MPA program.
62
33.5
I took a class offered by my employer to learn the skills I need.
26
14.0
I took a class at a local community college to learn the skills I need.
9
4.9
I took a class at a local technical college to learn the skills I need.
0
0.0
I studied independently and learned the skills I need on my own.
91
49.2
My employer paid for the additional training required.
19
10.3
Informally from my peers and from IT staff or Other
36
19.5
Note. Percentages are based on N = 185 for each statement.
and in IT don’t have the skills either and we see
waste and failure as a result.” The responses do
not tell us how much easier a graduate’s path
might have been with some required training
within the MPA program or what the improved
impact on the organization would have been.
Alumni respondents seem to understand that
their paths would have been easier: 67.1%
(102, N = 152) of those who did not take a
general IT course stated that, in hindsight, they
would have taken at least one course in this
area; and 60.4% (99, N = 164) stated that they
would have taken one or more specialized IT
courses. Additionally and perhaps most im
portantly, 65.1% of respondents (112, N = 172)
stated that they agreed or strongly agreed that
IT management and issues should be given a
more prominent role in their school’s MPA
program; only 7.0% (12, N = 172) disagreed or
strongly disagreed with that premise. Similarly,
68.3% of respondents (114, N = 172) believed
that it is becoming more critical for new hires
to have more training in IT as part of their
MPA program versus only 7.0% (12, N = 172)
who did not believe that to be the case.
Students entering MPA programs look to
faculty to help guide them in their acquisition
of those skills most needed to excel in their fu
ture careers. These “hindsight” responses speak
loudly to the need for MPA programs to
incorporate more IT content.
Employer Survey
Respondents to the employer survey were large
ly municipal government employers (n = 91,
97.8%) and, within those responding munici
palities, city managers (n = 64, 68.8%). Employ
er respondents were primarily from Georgia
(n = 26) and Florida (n = 28). Six were from
Tennessee; 2 from California; and 1 each from
Maryland, Kansas, Kentucky, Missouri, Ohio,
Texas, and Washington. Twenty-four respondents did not identify their location. Responding
organizations primarily had less than 500 em
ployees (n = 83, 89.2%). The size distribution
of the municipal or county government also
trended smaller, as indicated in Table 6. However, this size distribution is somewhat consistent with city-size distributions of the two
primary states surveyed.
Of the 93 governments that responded, 45.2%
(n = 42) had dedicated IT departments; 32.3%
(n = 30) contracted out their IT requirements;
11.8% (n = 11) relied on specific individuals
TABLE 5.
Alumni Survey: Perceived Employment Impact of IT Skills Not Learned in the MPA Program
Impact
I failed to obtain one or more jobs that required IT skills.
Frequency
Percentage
5
3.0
I did not apply for jobs that were otherwise a good fit to my skills because the
job required IT skills I did not have and was unable to acquire on my own.
27
16.3
I did not qualify to apply for one or more promotions at my current or previous
employer because I did not have appropriate IT skills.
4
2.4
I was not chosen for a promotion because I did not have appropriate IT skills.
1
0.6
I lost a job as a result of not having appropriate IT skills.
0
0.0
I have not been chosen for assignments I desired because of a lack of
appropriate IT skills.
8
4.8
109
65.7
There has been no impact.
Other
12
7.2
Total
166
100.0
168
TABLE 6.
Employer Survey: Size of the Municipality,
Town, or County Represented
Size
Frequency
Percentage
Less than 1,000
9
9.7
1,001 to 10,000
39
41.9
10,001 to 20,000
14
15.1
20,001 to 30,000
9
9.7
30,001 to 50,000
5
5.4
16
17.2
Greater than 50,000
No response
Total
1
1.0
93
100.0
dedicated to IT issues (but had no dedicated IT
department); 9.7% (n = 9) hired IT consultants as
needed; and 1 did not respond to this question.
We asked the same question of the employers
that we did of the alumni regarding the
importance of their hires from MPA programs
having specific IT skills. Table 7 lists employer
responses and compares the percentage ranked
important or critical to alumni responses.
Employer and alumni respondents generally
agreed with respect to basic computer literacy
and the management functions related to
policies and procedures, records retention, and
system security. The only real disconnect was
the alumni’s ranking an understanding of
management issues related to e-government
initiatives 15th (46.6% of alumni) versus the
employers’ ranking it 7th (68.6% of employers).
Senior managers likely have a better grasp of
how poorly structured and managed e-govern
ment initiatives can damage reputation and
create costly liability. City managers were the
majority of respondents in the employer survey,
and 80% of those responding to this question
rated this skill as important or critical.
Similar to the alumni survey, we asked em
ployers what types of training they offer their
MPA employees who do not have the skills the
employer desires. Table 8 presents the response
to this question.
Similar to the results of the alumni survey,
employers perceived that MPA graduates who
do not have appropriate IT skills independently
learn those skills, though only 40.5% (n = 17)
of respondents offered internal classes and only
23.8% (n = 10) paid for at least part of the cost
of external training. We asked what the impact
would be if MPA graduates lacked required IT
skills. Table 9 shows the responses.
Of the employers surveyed, 51 did not answer
this question. Those that did respond perceived
a much greater negative impact of not having
or being able to acquire the requisite IT skills
than did the alumni surveyed: only 33.3% of
employers indicated that lacking IT skills
would have no impact versus 65.7% of alumni.
The implication is that (1) the alumni acquired
the needed skills independently before a neg
ative impact could occur; (2) the alumni had
not yet encountered a situation where the lack
of IT skills was important; or (3) the alumni
were not aware that decisions may have been
made by supervisors that had negatively
affected their careers. With 83 respondents
answering, 66.3% (n = 55) of employers stated
that MPA and similar programs should
more sufficiently cover IT management, while
only 4.8% disagreed or strongly disagreed with
this proposition. The remaining 24 respond
ents (28.9%) neither agreed nor disagreed.
Again, with 83 respondents answering, 71.1%
(n = 59) believe that it is becoming more critical
for new hires in their organization to have more
training in IT as part of their MPA or similar
program, while only 3.6% (n = 3) disagree and
25.3% (n = 21) are unsure.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
The inclusion of information technology courses
in MPA curricula has not changed much over
the last 30 years. Only slightly more than 15%
of NASPAA member schools require a general
IT course as part of the core curriculum, and few
er yet offer a concentration in IT. This seems a
rather glaring omission given the central role of
technology in the delivery of public services,
either directly by government or through ex
tended governance structures. While government
may logically look to the private sector for
TABLE 7.
Employer Survey: Ratings of Technology Skills Required in Order of Percentage Ranked
Important or Critical (Combined)
Rank
Skill
Not
important
Nice to
have
but not
critical
Important
Critical
Percent
Important
or critical
Alumni
rank
1
General computer
literacy/common IT skills
such as Word and Excel
0
2
23
60
96.51
1
2
Understanding of the role
of organizational policies
and procedures in containing security threats
2
14
47
21
79.1
2
3
General understanding
of how to protect the workplace from technology risks
like viruses, malware, social
engineering, etc. (N = 85)
2
17
43
21
75.29
5
4
Understanding of the
issues related to records
retention policies as
they relate to electronically stored information,
including data from social
media websites (N = 85)
4
17
41
22
74.12
3
5
Understanding of transparency and accountability issues as they relate to
technology management
0
22
45
17
72.1
6
6
Knowledge of the legal
requirements related to
protection of electronically stored, personally
identifiable data
3
21
46
15
70.9
4
7
Understanding of management issues related to
e-government initiatives
1
23
49
10
68.6
15
8
Ability to evaluate
technology implementations using tools such as
cost-benefit analysis and
return on investment
4
21
41
17
67.44
10
technical capabilities, public employees must
possess suitable IT skills to effectively manage
these outsourced services.
Beyond a desire for general computer literacy,
the employers we surveyed indicated solid
support for information management training
regarding the role of organizational policies and
170
procedures in containing security threats, issues
related to records retention, and legal require
ments related to privacy issues. Employers also
wanted their employees to be capable of eval
uating technology implementations; contribut
ing to multidisciplinary implementation teams;
and participating in needs assessments, business
process analyses, and feasibility studies.
TABLE 7.
Employer Survey: Ratings of Technology Skills Required in Order of Percentage Ranked
Important or Critical (Combined) (continued)
Not
important
Nice to
have
but not
critical
Important
9
Ability to function as a
member of or to lead
multidisciplinary teams
that have a technology component
4
21
10
Understanding of
technology management, legal, and
regulatory issues, and
considerations related
to social media use
3
11
Ability to participate
in needs assessments,
business process analysis,
feasibility studies, and
implementations for new
technology initiatives
12
Ability to manage
IT staff members
13
Critical
Percent
Important
or critical
Alumni
rank
46
11
66.3
9
28
37
17
62.8
7
3
29
47
6
61.6
8
13
18
44
6
58.1
14
Ability to negotiate
and manage outsourced IT functions
7
31
38
7
52.3
12
14
Intermediate technology
skills such as GIS or other
specialized technology
6
33
40
4
51.2
16
15
Understanding of
the issues related to
the “digital divide”
that may affect the
citizens served by
the organization
1
37
38
6
51.2
11
16
Understanding of cloud
computing and its
benefits and dangers
5
42
35
2
43.0
13
Rank
Skill
Note. N = 86 unless otherwise specified.
Today, the impact of IT on government is
widespread. The obvious question this raises is,
why have most MPA programs neglected to in
corporate more IT training into their curricula?
Without a clear directive from NASPAA, it is
possible that some MPA programs have not felt
the need to enhance IT training. However,
the real reason is likely due to a confluence
of factors related to the rapid growth and
development of IT and its expanding use in
government, which make it difficult for MPA
programs to adapt and create relevant course
work. The IT field is based on technical compe
tencies, and in order for MPA programs to
effectively teach these competencies, they must
employ faculty with expertise in this area. MPA
TABLE 8.
Employer Survey: Where Do MPA Graduates Without Desired Skills Learn Those Skills?
Response
Frequency
Percentage
We offer internal classes and training to help them learn the skills they need.
17
40.5
They take a class at a local community college to learn the skills they need.
4
9.5
They take a class at a local technical college to learn the skills they need.
They study independently to learn the skills they need.
I do not know. It is their responsibility and the learn the skills they need or
they do not succeed in our organization.
We pay for at least part of the cost of information technology skills training.
Other
5
11.9
17
40.5
3
7.1
10
23.8
6
14.3
Note. Percentages are based on N = 42 for each statement.
TABLE 9.
Employer Survey: Impact If MPA Students Lack Required Skills
Response
Frequency
Percentage
They will not qualify for promotions when competing with other employees
who have IT skills.
13
31.0
They will not be chosen for assignments that call for minimum levels of
information technology skills.
19
45.2
They will not be chosen for multidisciplinary teams working on needs
analysis, business process analysis, feasibility analysis, or implementation
of new technology in our organization.
11
26.2
They will not be considered for promotion to management positions.
8
19.0
There will be no impact because our organization has little need for
information technology skills on the part of nontechnical employees.
10
23.8
There will be no impact because our organization is large enough to have
multiple career paths that do not require IT skills.
4
9.5
Other
6
14.3
Note. Percentages are based on N = 42 for each statement. Respondents could select more than one statement.
programs can accomplish this by hiring faculty
with a background in IT; by identifying one or
more IT professionals to serve as part-time in
structors; or, as suggested by Dawes (2004), by
sharing courses with other programs, such as
business or IT.
We also recognize that some MPA programs
have likely shied away from greater IT training
because of their regional location. In a study
172
addressing the ability of MPA programs to
satisfy the professional management needs of
local government given the coming waves of
anticipated baby boomer retirements, Gabris,
Davis, and Nelson (2010) assert that MPA
programs design their curricula within a
regional market. One can assume that MPA
program IT offerings also respond to regional
needs, though the study did not specifically
address this question.
As a whole, our findings indicate that MPA
programs may not be keeping pace with the IT
needs of their graduates. Further research is
needed to fully understand why this is the case.
However, given that the development of MPA
curricula is largely the domain of public
administration faculty, our findings suggest
that MPA programs should begin implementing
modifications to enhance IT training. As the
basis of an IT curriculum, MPA programs
should adopt, in conjunction with NASPAA
universal competencies, a set of student
learning outcomes (SLOs). Dawes (2004)
contends that the first goal of IT education
should be training managers to manage with
technology rather than to manage technology
itself. To that end, SLOs should focus on
developing competencies in analytical skills,
strategic thinking and evaluation, technical
concepts, and complex project management
(Dawes, 2004).
Public administration faculty and other
stakeholders should consider the extent to
which IT should be added to their program’s
curriculum. For example, strong student and/
or regional market demand for IT training
might lead MPA programs to offer a separate
course in IT management and, in some
instances, a specialization in this area. Since
MPA program credit hours are limited, a strong
commitment to incorporating a stand-alone or
required IT course might come at the expense
of another core course. Importantly, MPA
programs should bear in mind that just as
technology considerations are infused in the
daily activities of management, so too can IT
training be modularly infused in a program’s
existing core curriculum. Technology-related
management policies, proced
ures, and legal
considerations could be integrated into courses
in public human resource management, while
implementation-related activities such as eval
uation, needs assessments, and process analyses
could be incorporated into program evaluation,
research methods, budgeting, and financial
management courses. Field and service-learning
projects, practicums, and internships are other
ways that MPA programs can integrate IT into
the curriculum, while also helping illuminate a
connection between theory and practice.
We envision that some MPA programs will find
it easiest to implement a separate IT course and
that this strategy will provide greater learning
opportunities, owing to immersion in similarly
themed subject matter. Other programs, how
ever, will likely prefer to include appropriate
IT subject matter into other non-IT courses or
perhaps craft a combination of these two ap
proaches. Moreover, it will be up to MPA pro
grams to strike a balance between theoretical
and application-based training. Ultimately, the
inclusion of IT training in MPA curricula,
whether in more broad-based IT management
theory or in application training (e.g., GIS)
will produce graduates who are more capable
public managers.
NOTES
1 These surveys made no attempt to link alumni with
employers. Our goal was to obtain a broad view
of alumni and employer perceptions of readiness
with respect to the IT aspects of their work and,
ultimately, the ways in which MPA programs
can offer additional IT training through curricular changes.
2 We anticipated a very low response rate because
we did not exclude small organizations that are
less likely to employ MPA graduates. The majority
of municipalities in Georgia and Florida are
small. There are 549 municipalities in Georgia,
but only 128 have populations in excess of 5,000
residents and only 84 have populations in excess of
10,000 residents.
3 For purposes of this study, we were not interested
in the details of these offerings, such as what
specific skills were taught in each course. This data
were gathered to compare the status of IT offerings historically.
REFERENCES
Berce, J., Lanfranco, S., & Vehovar, V. (2008).
Egovernance: Information and communication
technology, knowledge management and learning
organisation culture. Informatica, 32(2), 189–205.
Cleary, R. E. (1990). What do public administration
masters programs look like? Do they do what is
needed? Public Administration Review, 50(6), 663.
Dawes, S. S. (2004). Training the IT-savvy public
manager: Priorities and strategies for public man
agement education. Journal of Public Affairs Edu
cation, 10(1), 5–17.
Denhardt, R. (2001). The big questions of public ad
ministration education. Public Administration Review,
61(5), 526–534.
Dhar, V., & Sundararajan, A. (2007). Issues and opinions—information technologies in business: A blueprint for education and research. Information Systems
Research, 18(2), 125–141. Retrieved from http://
doi.org/10.1287/isre.1070.0126.
Fichman, R. G., Dos Santos, B. L., & Zheng, Z. (2014).
Digital innovation as a fundamental and powerful
concept in the information systems curriculum. MIS
Quarterly, 38(2), 329–353.
Gabris, G. T., Davis, T. J., & Nelson, K. L. (2010).
Demand versus supply: Can MPA programs satisfy
the need for professional management in local gov
ernment? Journal of Public Affairs Education, 16(3),
379–399.
Kernaghan, K., & Gunraj, J. (2004). Integrating in
formation technology into public administration:
Conceptual and practical considerations. Canadian
Public Administration, 47(4), 525–546.
Kiel, L. D. (1986). Information systems education in
masters programs in public affairs and administra
tion. Public Administration Review, 46(Special issue),
590–594.
Kraemer, K. L., & Northrop, A. (1989). Curriculum
recommendations for public management educa
tion in computing: An update. Public Administra
tion Review, 49(5), 447–453.
174
Kraemer, K. L., Bergin, T., Bretschneider, S., Duncan,
G., Foss, T., Gorr, W., et al. (1986). Curriculum
recommendations for public management education in computing: Final report of the National
Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration, Ad Hoc Committee on Computers in
Public Management Education. Public Administra
tion Review, 46(Special issue), 595–602.
Matei, A., & Savulescu, C. (2014). Enhancing the cap
acity for innovation of public administration: An
exploratory study on e-governance, ICT, knowledge
management in Romania. Theoretical and Applied
Economics, 21(11), 7–26.
National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and
Administration (NASPAA), Commission on Peer
Review and Accreditation (2008). General information
and standards for professional master’s degree programs. Retrieved from https://naspaaaccreditation.
files.wordpress.com/2014/04/old-accreditationstandards.pdf.
Review and Accreditation. (2014). NASPAA standards: Accreditation standards for master’s degree programs. Retrieved from https://naspaaaccreditation.
files.wordpress.com/2015/02/naspaa-accredit a
tion-standards.pdf.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
is assistant professor at the
Institute for Public and Nonprofit Studies at
Georgia Southern University. His research
focuses on budgeting and finance, information
technology, tax evasion, and trade-based money laundering.
P. Cary Christian
is associate professor and dir
ector of the Institute for Public and Nonprofit
Studies at Georgia Southern University. His
research focuses on employee motivation, org
anizational change, compensation systems, and
small-group behavior.
Trenton J. Davis
Technology and Pedagogy:
Information Technology Competencies
in Public Administration and
Public Policy Programs
Aroon P. Manoharan
University of Massachusetts, Boston
James McQuiston
University of Akron
ABSTRACT
Much of the public administration literature over the last 50 years has focused on the perceived gap
between theory and practice, and recent studies examine the implications of such a gap for
implementing and engaging in e-government initiatives. To identify solutions to such a gap,
however, one must first establish that it exists. This qualitative study analyzes syllabi of 57 Master
of Public Administration and Master of Public Policy (MPA/MPP) programs to assess their
emphasis on information technology (IT) competencies. Our findings indicate that MPA/MPP
programs teach a variety of IT components, but topics are not evenly dispersed or taught in all
programs. It is beyond debate whether or not technology skills are required in the workplace—they
are. This study endeavors to identify which of these skills are taught in graduate programs aimed at
preparing students for the workplace—one increasingly geared toward government-citizen
interaction through computer-mediated tools.
KEYWORDS
Information technology, competencies, NASPAA standards, NASPAA accreditation, public affairs, learning outcomes
Increasing governmental use of information
technology (IT) in service delivery is creating
an immediate need for public sector employees
trained in relevant IT skills who can better
provide services and reduce dependence on
external contractors. This need is particularly
urgent given the imminent retirement of the
baby boomer generation at all levels of
government, which will increase the demand
for workers suited to an ever more technologydriven public sector. IT skills–based education
is thus essential for successful public sector
management because employees with such
training are more supportive of e-government
JPAE 22 (2), 175–186
applications and more likely to contribute to
the success of technology projects and initiatives
(Manoharan, 2013). E-government represents
the increasing use of the Internet by
governments to provide information to citizens,
enhance performance and service delivery, and
improve interaction with the public. IT skills
are particularly crucial for students of public
administration and public policy who wish to
be competitive in the public sector job market.
This study thus assesses the emphasis that
current Master of Public Administration and
Master of Public Policy (MPA/MPP) programs
place on these skills by analyzing syllabi from
A. P. Manoharan & J. McQuiston
57 IT courses. We define IT courses as those
providing the knowledge and skills for the
management of information and communica
tion applications related to computer and
mobile technologies.
An important aspect of this research is the
perceived gap between what the public sector
workplace requires and what academic pro
grams actually teach. Whereas prior public
administration research conceptualizes the
MPA/MPP skill set as continually evolving—
which requires ever greater collaboration
between educational programs, professional
organizations, and government institutions—a
trend in public administration education has
been to separate what is taught in MPA/MPP
programs from what is required of public
administrators (Dunleavy & Hood, 1994;
Grizzle, 1985; Lazenby, 2010). Public admini
stration programs also tend to vary greatly in
the skill sets they teach, leading scholars to
advocate for a set of core competencies that all
students in the discipline must acquire before
graduation (Greenhill, Metz, & Stander, 1982).
Several paradigms have been proposed to better
coordinate theory and practice (Denhardt,
2001) and reform the manager-workforce
relationship (Green, Wamsley, & Keller, 1993),
and these are even more relevant today in
assessing the degree to which academic
programs are evolving to adapt to recent
technological advances, thereby benefiting
their graduates and soon-to-be government
employees. One indicator that a gap exists
between graduate IT education and practi
tioners’ needs is the sheer amount of IT
spending waste in the public sector, which
implies a need for immediate action. This
article thus attempts to determine whether
MPA/MPP programs have taken such action in
terms of incorporating required IT compe
tencies. If so, we ask in what ways; or if not,
we ask what adaptations programs have made
to meet the stated mission of the Network
of Schools of Public Policy, Affairs, and
Administration (NASPAA) to “continuously
improve, which includes responding to and
impacting their communities through ongoing
program evaluation” (NASPAA, Commission
on Peer Review and Accreditation, 2014, p. 4).
176
To answer these questions, we first position this
study within the larger discourse by reviewing
pertinent literature on the perceived gap
between desired and imparted skills in the field
of public policy, affairs, and administration.
We then draw on multiple perspectives to
provide a broad foundation for identifying
what IT skills MPA/MPP programs teach and
the changes needed (or those already being
made) in the dynamic mutualistic relation be
tween academia and practice. Research design
and methodology and study findings follow.
We conclude with a discussion of the impli
cations of these findings for future research
and practice.
PERCEIVED SKILLS GAP IN PUBLIC
ADMINISTRATION PEDAGOGY
Public administration is founded on the inte
gration of academia and practice, with emphasis
on the practical applications of theoretical
concepts. The field is often considered as a
community of “pracademics,” involving regular interaction between academicians and prac
titioners (Posner, 2009). The academicians
involved in public administration teaching
and research tend to be highly conscious of
the practical implications of their work, which
“finds its most compelling and highest audience when it addresses the agenda items and
concerns of practitioners” (Posner, 2009, p.13).
To draw a parallel with other professional
fields such as engineering and law, public
administration programs must cater to the
evolving workplace needs of practitioners in
government and nonprofit agencies, as well as
of contractors and consultants. Indeed, the
emergence of nontraditional providers and the
increase in privatization, contracting, and
public-private partnerships challenges the
traditional professional boundaries of public
administration, as well as the professional
academic programs (Posner, 2009). As society
is becoming more complex, there is a greater
need for professionals who are highly skilled,
are professionally qualified, and possess a pas
sion for public service. “Government service
must be attractive enough to lure our most
talented people” (John F. Kennedy, quoted in
Knott, 2013, pp. 2–3).
Technology and Pedagogy
MPA/MPP programs serve a crucial role in
equipping future public managers with ade
quate knowledge and training in core compe
tencies (Lazenby, 2010). Several professional
organizations, including NASPAA and the
International City/County Management Asso
ciation (ICMA), have proposed sets of core
competencies around which MPA/MPP pro
grams should build their curricula. Although
suggested competencies have changed over
time, the ICMA (2015) lists 18 it deems
essential for preparing students for the work
force; particularly, functional and operational
experience, citizen service, performance man
age
ment, technological literacy, democratic
advocacy, and human resources management.
NASPAA (2014) accreditation, on the other
hand, requires that schools imbue their grad
uates with the ability to
•lead and manage in public governance;
•participate in and contribute to the public
policy process;
•analyze, synthesize, think critically, solve
problems, and make decisions;
•articulate and apply a public service
perspective; and
•communicate and interact productively
with a diverse and changing workforce
and citizenry.
These skill sets, however, are only broad guide
lines and not detailed curriculum roadmaps to
comprehensive preparedness for the workforce.
In identifying specific solutions for integrating
core competencies into curricula, research has
proposed that above all, public administration
programs and practitioners must bridge the gap
between the skills that government employers
need and those taught in academic institutions.
As early as 40 years ago, Engelbert (1977)
stressed the need for “more cooperation be
tween the universities and governmental agen
cies in carrying out the educational program”
(p. 230); this recommendation has been reiterated in the public affairs education literature ever
since. Yet despite a proliferation of studies on
the academia-workplace gap, the separation
between educational programs and professional
and government organizations remains.
Grizzle (1985) offered interesting insights into
the history of this vast gap; her comparison of
survey data from budget directors in major
American states with the syllabi in required
MPA courses revealed a large deficit between
what managers deemed essential for their
employees and what degree-granting programs
taught. This disconnect was even larger for
computer-based skills, leading Grizzle to
conclude that a majority of MPA programs
succeeded in only covering between one third
and one half of the competencies desired by the
directors. Forer and Unwin (1999) commented on workers’ using technology tools without
adequate knowledge of the science or concepts,
which fed into the larger debate over balancing
education and training. Moreover, because aca
demics tend to favor education over training,
while many practitioners lean more toward
training, it remains unclear where the line
should be drawn to balance both dimensions.
More recently, Lazenby (2010) elicited a list of
core competencies by surveying an “expert
group,” the ICMA Strategic Planning Com
mittee and Advisory Board on Graduate
Education, together with an executive-selected
subgroup on performance analytics, and the
organization’s board of directors. This expert
group was paired with a “practitioner group”
chosen from NASPAA-accredited schools, man
agers of local-level government organizations,
and executive recruiters (Lazenby, 2010, pp.
342–343). Lazenby’s survey data identified 12
skills as essential, having average Likert values
above 3 (“useful”). When these skills were
compared with MPA program syllabi, 40% or
more of the programs required courses with an
administrative focus; however, only one fifth
required technical and analytical concentrations
or a focus on the legal/institutional system.
Even more telling, less than 10% of the pro
grams taught ethics, interpersonal commun
ications, human relations, personal traits,
human resources, group processes, community
building, and service delivery. This contem
porary research thus suggests that the gap
between what practitioners need and what
MPA/MPP programs teach may in fact be
widening, implying that educational insti
tutions are finding it difficult to instill the core
competencies required by the workplace.
PEDAGOGY OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
Among the competencies taught by graduate
programs, information technology is gaining
increasing attention due to the rapidly changing
nature of the field. As the public sector has
become more technologically driven, scholars
and practitioners have been increasingly calling
for public administration programs to place great
er emphasis on the theory and applications of
information technology and knowledge man
agement in government. Scholars and accredit
ing institutions have insisted that those joining
government should have a basic understanding
of both IT applications and the implications of
their uses (Dawes, 2004; Holzer & Lin, 2007;
Kim & Layne, 2001). However, given the lack
of a uniform standard for public sector IT
education, the rate of diffusion is likely to be
uneven. This lack of uniformity further indicates
the need to assess the response of academic insti
tutions in providing the IT education essential
to current and future public administrators in
an increasingly interconnected world.
Despite the conceptualization of the MPA/MPP
skill set as continually evolving, as mentioned
previously, in a work landscape continually
changed by the expanded possibilities and
shifted responsibilities brought by technologi
cal advances, no corresponding changes appear
to be occurring in MPA/MPP programs and
curricula. For instance, Ferrandino (2014)
reported that the increasingly used geographic
information systems (GIS) IT tool is not widely
incorporated into academic programs, while
Dawes (2004) suggested a strong link between
the absence of information strategy and manage
ment-focused curricula and failing government
IT projects. These IT issues must therefore
become integral to educational institutions,
especially given related international education
reforms. Korea, for instance, has diffused IT
education throughout its undergraduate public
affairs programs, creating job-ready training
and incentives that better prepare students for
the rigors and realities of the public sector
workplace (Park & Park, 2006). There is little
doubt that MPA/MPP curricula should reflect
the reality that IT is fundamentally transforming
the functions of government. This present
research thus conducts a qualitative and explor
atory study on the response of MPA/MPP
178
programs to this call for a greater IT focus in
core curricula, paying particular attention to
emphasis on developing programs that will
assist in future workplace success as defined
(although not required) by NASPAA.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
The first step in compiling a data set with
which to explore the research question was to
make an exhaustive list of MPA/MPP programs
in the United States and collect information on
NASPAA accreditation, enrollment, and num
ber of course sections offered for each program
on the list. The resulting database of syllabi,
compiled via an online search, covers 211
programs that offered MPA, MPP, or similar
terminal degrees. Among these, 129 courses of
fered by 99 programs focused on information
technologies, and 39 of these courses (30%)
were required courses. A majority of these offerings (85 courses, or 66%) provided a general
IT perspective, and an additional 29 courses
(23%) offered a specific focus on GIS.
Next, we examined the programs to identify
syllabi related to IT or e-government, resulting
in 23 syllabi. We then e-mailed each program
chair to obtain the syllabus for a similar course
(or courses) in their program. The online search
and e-mail contact netted 57 syllabi, whose con
tent we coded based on a 10-point IT typology
with NVivo, qualitative data analysis software.
The data collected included school-level infor
mation, such as region, MPA versus non-MPA,
TABLE 1.
MPA/MPP Programs and IT Courses
Programs observed
211
Programs offering IT courses
129
Core IT courses
39
Elective IT courses
90
Syllabi submitted
57
Student enrollment (average)
97
Percentage of full-time faculty
70%
FIGURE 1.
Number of IT Courses per State
0
number of sections taught, percentage of courses
taught by full-time faculty, and number of
students in the program. Programs differed
considerably in size, from an observed mini
mum of 12 students to a maximum of 396,
with an average enrollment of 97. The amount
of full-time faculty utilized by these programs
ranged from 12% to 100%, with 70% of an
average program’s faculty employed in full-time
positions. The universities whose programs con
tributed syllabi were in cities across all pop
ulation ranges: 11 programs were headquartered
in cities with a population of less than 50,000,
11 were in cities with a population of 50,001–
199,999, 9 were centered in municipalities with
a population of 200,000–500,000, and 14 were
in cities with greater than 500,000 residents.
Programs in the South (Alabama, Ark
ansas,
Florida, Georgia) contributed the largest num
ber of syllabi, followed by those in the
Midwest (Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio,
Wisconsin) and mid-Atlantic regions (District
of Columbia, Maryland, West Virginia). States
with large populations (California, New York,
Texas) were also better represented in the syllabi database. Figure 1 shows the number of
IT courses per state.
NVivo enables analysts to directly codify and
annotate documents, as well as combine an array
of documents into a database. We used the soft
ware to establish the number of mentions and
the percentage of syllabi dealing with each
IT competency in our 10-point IT typology,
through a set of automatic text searches. To
ensure accuracy, we evaluated the results of the
automatic searches for error, and we manually
browsed the full text of each syllabus to ensure
that no material was excluded. We used NVivo
because our database contained full-text quota
tions for each type of IT education. The soft
ware is able to code syllabi in editable and non
editable formats in the same fashion. NVivo’s
reports are also intuitive and include percentages
of syllabi covered and number of observations
present, allowing this study’s results to be re
plicated or adopted in future research.
The 10-point IT typology represents the most
commonly mentioned IT concepts observed in
public administration education, based on a
focus group discussion involving practitioners
and academicians. These terms include GIS,
cybersecurity, social media, big data, cloud comput
ing, crowdfunding, e-government (service provision
FIGURE 2.
Frequently Observed Terms in IT Syllabi
system
s
As shown in Figure 3, a majority of the 57 courses
(31, or 54%) included an e-government (service
provision and e-procurement) component, while
25 (44%) and 23 (40%) covered privacy and
infrastructure concerns, respectively. This was
dec
isi
smarton
gis
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
inte
llig
enc
tec e
h
r
tial
a
p
s
sem
inar
geog
raph
ic
cyb
ers
pa
ce
s
ion
zat
ani
org
se
ecorvice
nom
ics
legal
ty
securi
and e-procurement), privacy and confidentiality,
digital divide (accessibility), and infrastructure
(Figure 2). We coded each line of a program’s
syllabus using a 3-point scale: no IT content,
one type of IT content, or multiple types of IT
content. Then, for each syllabus, we recorded
the number of mentions of each IT type and
the percentage reported. The results show that
the number of forms of IT education offered in
these syllabi ranged from a minimum of 1 to a
maximum of 10 types; on average, each syllabus
focused on slightly more than 3 different types
of concepts.
theory
or
l
avi organizationa
beh
rnet
intesupport
anag
ec men
t
policy ompu
te
tion
admingoisvetrrnaan
ce
digital
informa
tics
plan
ning
180
n
ctio
information
m
on
ati
ov
inn
ial
soc
y
g
o
l
o arts
n
h
c
te grid
urban
media
applica
tions
nonprofi
t
d
l
fie
odu
intr tor
sec
scie
nce
s
skill
e
ng s
a
ch affair
ic
publ
s
b
tion
we
lica is
imp nalys
a
privac
y
healthcare
artificial
followed by cybersecurity, GIS, and digital
divide issues, having scores of 20 (35%),
19 (33%), and 19 (33%), respectively. A small
share of the syllabi (15 programs, or 26%)
mentioned social media; 11 (19%), big data; 9
(16%), cloud computing; 2 (4%), crowdfund
ing. Table 2 shows the scores and rankings of
the IT competencies, along with their coverage
in core courses and number of observations.
The IT concepts included in core courses
ranged from a low of 45% (big data) to a high
of 67% (cloud computing). Crowdfunding
(50%), social media (53%), and privacy (56%)
topics were offered in half or more courses
observed, while GIS (63%) and cybersecurity
(65%) topics were offered in slightly less than
two thirds of the courses. The IT competencies
varied in their frequencies observed in the
syllabi. Readings, coursework, and mentions
about crowdfunding were observed 3 times in
the data set; e-government, 113 times.
Discussions of cloud computing (11), big data
(16), and digital divide (23) concerns were
infrequently observed. The most frequent
range for IT concerns was between 40 and 50
observations in the data set, for example, GIS
(43), privacy (46), infrastructure (48), and
cybersecurity (49). There were 58 observations
of social media topics.
About a third of the syllabi included GIS—the
creation, manipulation, and presentation of
geographic data—which in public administra
tion can be used to showcase rezoning risks,
increase the efficiency of emergency services,
and visualize demographic groups and land use.
GIS education was thus coded in terms of realworld GIS applications and emerging techno
logies: map digitization, familiarity with Arc
GIS and related software suites (ArcCatalog,
ArcMap, ModelBuilder), modeling and spatial
analysis, and the ARIES database. Our analysis
revealed two types of GIS instruction: a week
or two on GIS combined with discussions of
other IT types or a class devoted solely to GIS.
The former were overwhelmingly in-department
courses (within the MPA/MPP program),
while the latter were jointly offered with the
Geography Department.
We classified cybersecurity, which was required
reading in 20 syllabi, according to the pro
tection level of computerized data. Thus, data
breaching refers to unintended releases of
personal data that occur “from a variety of
security incidents including hackers breaking
into systems or networks, third parties accessing
personal information on lost laptops or other
mobile devices, or organizations failing to
dispose of personal information securely”
(Culnan, 2011, p. 1228). The terms cyber
warfare and cybercrime designate the use of
information technologies to gain some benefit
from an organization or government; cyber
warfare is conducted exclusively by countries or
their agents (Clarke & Knake, 2014), and
cybercrime manifests as illicit activities over
the Internet. A major focus of the IT-themed
syllabi was security policies and risk manage
FIGURE 3.
Distribution of IT Competencies
E-Government
Privacy
IT Competencies
Infrastructure
Cybersecurity
GIS
Digital Divide
Social Media
Big Data
Cloud Computing
Crowdfunding
0 5101520253035
Number of Courses
TABLE 2.
IT Competencies Scores and Rankings
Rank
IT Competencies
Number
of Courses
(out of 57)
Percent
of Courses
Percent
Core Courses
Number of
Observations
1
E-government
31
54
60
113
2
Privacy
25
44
56
46
3
Infrastructure
23
40
48
48
4
Cybersecurity
20
35
65
49
5
GIS
19
33
63
43
5
Digital divide
19
33
47
23
7
Social media
15
26
53
58
8
Big data
11
19
45
16
Cloud computing
9
16
67
11
Crowdfunding
2
4
50
3
9
10
ment, which cover information access and
mod
ification, appropriate data storage, safe
tradeoffs, and appropriate steps to be taken in
the case of a breach. One major concern for
scholars of jurisprudence is government sur
veillance of data, especially when federal and
local or state laws differ.
Big data—the analysis, collection, and archiving
of traditionally unmanageable amounts of data
(Desouza & Benoy, 2014)—was reflected in
the syllabi by discussions of data analytics,
data volume, or the collection and mainten
ance of or rights related to data collected by an
organization. Such readings, assignments, or
prompts appeared in 11 syllabi. Likewise, cloud
computing—the uploading and downloading
of documents to an online hosting service such
as Dropbox or Office 365 for access from a
remote location—was referenced in 9 syllabi,
primarily in terms of ramifications of physical
storage location, amount of access, and rights
distribution. Crowdfunding—the raising of
funds directly from individual investors (via a
service such as Indiegogo, Kickstarter, or
GoFundMe)—is a relatively new phenomenon
in the public sphere. However, it can manifest
as civic crowdfunding by citizens or groups seek
ing raise operating funds for initiatives like
182
parks, pools, or area beautification (Hollow,
2013; Zuckerman, 2014). Terms representing
this phenomenon were observed in only 2 syllabi.
In contrast, 31 syllabi exhibited an e-govern
ment focus. The concept of e-government
captures coursework on service provision,
e-procurement, and online interactions be
tween government and its citizens or between
various levels of government. A major topic in
the current e-government discourse is service
provision, defined here as citizens’ ability to use
an online portal to apply for assistance, pay
utilities, report crimes, register for licenses,
and/or contact government representatives.
E-procurement, on the other hand, is an
organization’s ability to purchase services and
supplies online. Although all syllabi included
discussions on access to personal data, citizen
privacy rights, and the sharing of private data
between organizations, 25 syllabi specifically
covered privacy and confidentiality, topics that
have become a major source of contention as
the amount of data created by each governmentcitizen transaction has increased. These syllabi
referred specifically to the sharing of govern
ment services, unauthorized access to infor
mation, institutional compliance with confid
entiality laws, and the conflict between an
“open Internet” and the right to privacy.
The topic of the digital divide and accessibility
was covered in 17 syllabi and included issues
ranging from obstacles related to sight, vision,
or physical limitation to the availability of Int
ernet-capable computers, computing resources,
and public education on computer resource
utilization. Syllabi that addressed such digital
divide and accessibility issues referred specifi
cally to the concerns of older populations, the
difficulty of navigating antiquated governmental
information services, and variation in computer
ownership among high- and low-income fam
ilies. Infrastructure—the overall coordination of
an organization’s information technologies, the
workforce that uses them, the software that
runs them, and the connections (real and virtual)
between system resources—was mentioned in
22 syllabi. Syllabi discussions included soft
ware implementation, transi
tioning between
programs, performance measurement of infor
mation technologies, best cases in IT rollouts,
worker IT education, and using IT to assess
overall organizational value.
BEST CASES
We selected two courses from the syllabi pool
that reflect the best cases of meeting the call to
bridge the teaching-practice gap in public
affairs and administration.
Course A, offered by a Midwestern research
university, focused on GIS, data systems,
e-government and e-procurement, security
concerns, and the use of technology to reduce
the effects of the digital divide. Course assign
ments require students to explore information
technologies and the online presence of an
organization and to evaluate the costs and
benefits that will accrue for an institution
that adopts a data system. Additional topics
explored through a discussion board include
the effectiveness of e-government initiatives,
threats to cybersecurity, issues arising from
third-party contracting of IT services, data
storage and analysis, end-user privacy concerns,
large-scale IT implementation, and how IT
tools can reduce the digital divide. Overall,
this course provides ample opportunities for
students to familiarize themselves with organi
zational IT issues, and the syllabus incorporates
general topics important to public admin
i
stration practitioners (e.g., purchasing, workflow
optimization, financial planning).
Course B, offered by a major research university
in the West, covers a broad array of IT topics,
including e-government, planning and budget
ing for IT expenses, big data, crowdfunding
and crowdsourcing initiatives, best cases in IT
implementation, and organizational policies
for social media and mobile technologies. The
course includes discussions of cybersecurity,
privacy, legal issues related to IT usage, and the
factors that make IT projects successful.
Assignments require students to discuss data
security issues; explore the increasing amount
of data collected by organizations; showcase
institutional uses of cloud computing; and
create an IT policy that addresses the drafting,
rollout, and performance measurement phases.
Classes include guest lectures by practitioners,
both administrators and software developers
from the public and private sectors. The sylla
bus stipulates a number of learning objectives
for each course section and is arranged in
modules to allow for easy mod
ification in
subsequent offerings of the course. Overall, the
course offers breadth and depth by requiring
students to expand on the IT education
initiated in class, it and familiarizes them with
major IT topics before they join the workforce.
CONCLUSION
The primary aim of this article is to close the
teaching and practice gap in current public
administration literature: the gulf between the
core competency ideal of providing what
practitioners want in their workers and trad
itional conceptions of only one form of IT
education. Our study addresses the first step in
such research by examining the current em
phasis on IT skills and competencies in MPA/
MPP programs. Our findings, based on a
content analysis of observed syllabi, indicate
that a considerable number of programs do
offer some form of IT education and that those
not currently doing so are considering them for
the future. More specifically, we identified
10 forms of IT education being provided in
MPA/MPP programs in the United States. The
syllabi analyzed vary greatly in depth and
specificity; those that provide a full list of
readings and research prompts are more likely
to include one or more IT competencies than
those that only mention general week-to-week
topics. This study clearly identifies a variety of
IT components being taught in public admin
istration programs, even though NASPAA
removed the IT requirement from its standards
for institutional accreditation because of the
subject area’s diffuse focus.
At present, the most common IT topics in
program syllabi relate to technologies and
concerns that have been around for decades
and/or that represent issues with an off-line
component (e.g. service provision, GIS,
privacy). Syllabi give comparatively less focus
to tools with relatively newer applications in
public administration (e.g., social media, big
data, cloud computing, crowdfunding). However,
as the public sector increasingly addresses
concerns like privacy, security, and standard
operating procedures, this trend is bound to
change: more and more, practitioners will use
new technologies and require new hires to be
familiar with their applications, implying that
MPA/MPP programs will have to accord such
topics greater space in their IT-themed courses.
Thus, public organizations that want to
safeguard the data they collect should seek
graduates from programs that focus on cyber
security, big data, and privacy concerns.
Similarly, municipalities with large income
disparities or budget shortfalls would do well to
procure workers who are well educated on the
digital divide and know how to conduct suc
cessful crowdfunding campaigns and increase
response rates using social media profiles.
The lack of a uniform standard in public sector
IT education contributes to the uneven and
slow diffusion of IT courses among MPA/MPP
programs, and accrediting institutions should
address this variability. MPA/MPP programs
would benefit from the addition of IT courses
to their program core curricula, which over the
last 30 years have responded to similar calls for
inclusion (Brudney, Hy, & Waugh, 1993;
Grizzle, 1985; Leip, 1999; Mergel, 2012; Park
& Park, 2006). As suggested by Dawes (2004),
to better prepare students for IT-heavy posi
tions, degree-granting programs can discuss
184
privacy and access concerns within policy
analysis courses or can incorporate software
obsolescence and migration costs into bud
geting courses. Similarly, e-government and
IT topics can be incorporated into manage
ment courses related to strategic planning,
performance measurement, and organization
management. Such approaches will enable
public administrators to implement IT
initiatives using a strategic framework that
aligns e-government goals to the organizational
mission and focuses on regularly measuring
and improving e-government performance
(Manoharan, 2013). Cross-discipline courses
are another means of providing public ad
ministration students with experience that
department faculty may not be able to offer.
Additionally, lectures in information techno
logy and management should be included in
introductory courses to provide all students
with baseline IT knowledge, along with oppor
tunities for interested students to specialize in
IT (Dawes, 2004). Although some programs
and scholars may hesitate to disrupt curricula
to support these additions (citing the old adage,
“If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”), research evidence on the academia-workplace gap suggests
that some things may well be broken. If so,
then although adding coursework to existing
programs may be onerous (Rocheleau, 1998;
Saint-Germain, Ostrowski, & Dede, 2000),
programs should not consider it an insur
mountable challenge.
This research constitutes an early examination
of the typology of IT course content in public
affairs and administration education (not
including instructor course notes or the specific
content of course readings). Although the
generalizability of our findings is limited, as the
data set covers only U.S. programs, the
proposed typology would be easily applicable
to similar studies on graduate programs in
other nations. Future research might examine
how the teaching of IT in MPA/MPP programs
differs based on program location and time
frame. Generalizability is also hampered by the
limited analytic time frame, which encompasses
active syllabi only from 2009 to 2015. As IT
technologies are continually in flux, the same
trends might not be observable in courses
taught before the start point of data collection
or in classes conducted after 2015. Future
research could also expand its scope by exam
ining variations in different course sections. For
instance, an initial comparison of two sections
of the same course revealed that whereas one
syllabus went into considerable detail on a
weekly basis and discussed 7 of the 10 types of
IT topics, the second syllabus covered only 2.
A small number of programs provided infor
mation about the same IT course taught by
different instructors in different semesters,
reflecting the likelihood that as courses with
an IT component continue to be taught, the
multiple iterations of a syllabus taught by
several instructors will only increase. As such
information become commonplace, researchers
might seek further insights from a vertical
examination of syllabi over a set time period.
This research proposes a unique typology for
IT education in public administration and
iden
t
ifies that MPA/MPP programs more
commonly teach topics related to privacy, ser
vice provision, infrastructure, and cybersecurity
in preparing students for an increasingly
technology-oriented workplace. However, what
the academic programs offer and what practi
tioners desire differs; most common IT topics
being taught have had a traditional off-line
component, while there is comparatively less
emphasis on tools with recent applications in
public sector organizations. This study finds
that information technology has become a con
venient catch-all term for scholars, educators,
and policy makers alike, producing an overly
simplistic framework for a complex pheno
menon. There is a need to establish a uniform
standard for IT education in MPA/MPP
programs, and this research provides a useful
baseline for examining IT competencies in
public affairs and administration education.
Additionally, a specific research focus on IT
requirements for practitioners would allow
comparison of what MPA/MPP programs
teach with what the workforce needs. The
overall framework of this study provides
effective guidance for instructors, researchers,
practitioners, and students in bridging the
teaching-practice IT gap that exists in public
administration education.
REFERENCES
Brudney, J., Hy, R. J., & Waugh, W. L. (1993).
Building microcomputing skills in public
administration graduate education: An assessment
of MPA programs. Administration and Society,
25(2), 183–203.
Clarke, R. A., & Knake, R. K. (2014). Cyber war. Old
Saybrook, CT: Tantor Media.
Culnan, M. J. (2011). Social perspectives on
information privacy. In H. C. A. van Tilborg &
S. Jajodia (Eds.), Encyclopedia of cryptography and
security (2nd ed., pp. 1228–1229). Berlin: Springer.
manager: Priorities and strategies for public
management education. Journal of Public Affairs
Education, 10(1), 5–17.
Denhardt, R. B. (2001). The big questions of public
administration education. Public Administration
Review, 61(5), 526–534.
Desouza, K. C., & Benoy, J. (2014, November 6). Big
data in the public sector: Lessons for practitioners
and scholars. Administration and Society, 1–22.
Dunleavy, P., & Hood, C. (1994). From old public
administration to new public management. Public
Money and Management, 14(3), 9–16.
Engelbert, E. A. (1977). University education for
public policy analysis. Public Administration Review,
37(3), 228–236.
Ferrandino, J. (2014). Incorporating GIS as an
interdisciplinary pedagogical tool throughout an
MPA program. Journal of Public Affairs Education,
20(4), 529–544.
Forer, P., & Unwin, D. (1999). Enabling progress
in GIS and education. In P. A. Longley, M. F.
Goodchild, D. J. Maguire, & D. W. Rhind (Eds.),
Geographical information systems: Management issues
and applications (2nd ed., pp. 747–757). New York,
NY: John Wiley and Sons.
Gibson, P. A., & Deadrick, D. (2010). Public
administration research and practice: Are
academician and practitioner interests different?
Public Administration Quarterly, 34(2), 145–168.
Green, R. T., Wamsley, G. L., & Keller, L. F. (1993).
Reconstituting a profession for American public
administration. Public Administration Review,
53(6), 516–524.
ards: Accreditation standards for master’s degree pro
grams. Retrieved from https://naspaaaccreditation.
files.wordpress.com/2015/02/naspaa-accreditationstandards.pdf.
Greenhill, M., Metz, C., & Stander, P. (1982). The
case for a competence-based public administration
curriculum for urban managers. Innovative Higher
Education, 7(1), 27–43.
Park, H. M., & Park, H. (2006). Diffusing information
technology education in Korean undergraduate
public affairs and administration programs: Driving forces and challenging issues. Journal of Public
Affairs Education, 12(4), 537–555.
Grizzle, G. A. (1985). Essential skills for financial
management: Are MPA students acquiring the
necessary competencies? Public Administration
Review, 45(6), 840–844.
Hollow, M. (2013). Crowdfunding and civic society in
Europe: A profitable partnership? Open Citizenship,
4(1), 68–73.
Holzer, M., & Lin, W. (2007). A longitudinal per
spective on MPA education in the United States.
Journal of Public Affairs Education, 13(2), 345–364.
International City/County Management Association
(ICMA). (2015, April 30). Practices for effective
local government management. Retrieved from
http://icma.org/en/university/about/management_
practices.
Posner, P. L. (2009). The pracademic: An agenda for reengaging practitioners and academics. Public Bud
geting and Finance, 29(1), 12–26.
Rocheleau, B. (1998). The MPA core course in infor
mation technology: What should be taught? Why?
Saint-Germain, M. A., Ostrowski, J. W., & Dede, M.
J. (2000). Oracles in the ether: Using an e-mail
Delphi to revise an MPA curriculum. Journal of
Public Affairs Education, 6(3), 161–172.
Zuckerman, E. (2014). New media, new civics? Policy
and Internet, 6(2), 151–168.
Kim, S., & Layne, K. (2001). Making the connection:
E-government and public administration education.
Knott, J. H. (2013). Looking outward: The changing
context of public service education. Journal of
Lazenby, S. (2010). The adequacy of MPA course
content in preparing local government managers.
Leip, L. A. (1999). An Internet integration plan for the
MPA curriculum: A case study of Florida Atlantic
University. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 5(3),
247–261.
Manoharan, A. (2013). A study of determinants of
county e-government in the United States. American
Review of Public Administration, 43(2), 159–178.
Mergel, I. (2012). The public manager 2.0: Preparing the
social media generation for a networked workplace.
Review and Accreditation. (2014). NASPAA stand186
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Aroon P. Manoharan is an associate professor and
co-director in the Department of Public Policy
and Public Affairs, John W. McCormack Grad
uate School of Policy and Global Studies at the
University of Massachusetts Boston. His research
focuses on e-government, strategic planning,
performance measurement and reporting, pub
lic management, and global comparative public
administration. He holds a PhD from Rutgers
University-Newark, and an MPA from Kansas
State University.
is senior lecturer of political
science at the University of Akron. His research
focuses on information technologies and
civic engagement, human resources’ adoption
of social media policies, comparative social
media usage by governments, and public
affairs education. He holds a PhD from Kent
State University.
James McQuiston
No MPA Left Behind: A Review of
Information Technology in the Master
of Public Administration Curriculum
Marcus D. Mauldin
University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
ABSTRACT
This report describes the current state of information technology (IT) in the Master of Public
Administration (MPA) curriculum. Data were collected through a review of graduate program
information contained on MPA program websites. Findings are that the majority of programs do
not offer IT concentrations, core courses, or electives. While IT courses have been adopted in a
limited capacity, there are opportunities to improve their adoption in order to satisfy public
workforce demands. Such integration could be done using existing courses, promoting faculty skill
development, or utilizing expertise found in other academic disciplines.
KEYWORDS
Information technology, MPA curriculum, information management
Information technology (IT) enables govern
ments to process data in order to address policy
issues, improve services, and make informed
managerial and organizational decisions. Man
ag
ing information and understanding tech
nological environments are thus essential to
government (Haque, 2003) and public admin
istration (Kernaghan & Gunraj, 2004). Under
standing applicable IT trends is essential for
incorporating technologies in a timely manner
across government operations. To satisfy rapidly
changing technology-related demands in gov
ernment organizations, the Network of Schools
of Public Policy, Affairs, and Administration
(NASPAA) encouraged public administration
programs to improve computer literacy in 1986
(Brown & Brudney, 1998). Holzer and
Schwester (2011) contend that technology has
become more complex and has expanded in
scope, thus public managers should better
JPAE 22 (2), 187–192
under
stand and embrace tech
nology. They
further assert that managers must learn how to
better apply technology due to how it is used in
the workplace and how it influences and is
influenced by policy.
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY IN
PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION EDUCATION
Information technology plays a central role in
governance, and information systems are vital
in how public services are organized as business
processes and in how they are provided (Dun
leavy, Margetts, Bastow, & Tinkler, 2005).
Information technology and systems allow pub
lic organizations to provide better services, util
ize resources more efficiently, improve informa
tion handling, and increase organ
iza
tional
responsiveness (Jensen, 1998; Menzel, 1998).
Understanding information manage
ment and
technology is also important for reasons beyond
M. D. Mauldin
their direct practical uses. Purtell and Fossett
(2010) argue there is a need for public officials
to become proficient due to increased interest
in e-government and performance management
systems. This increased interest creates a climate
of sophistication in which sound technical and
financial decisions must be made regarding
the purchase and creation of information technologies and information management sys-tems.
Yang and Rho (2007) assert that public admin
istrators share a responsibility with politicians
and e-government experts “to solve the problems such as the digital divide, information
security, privacy, new technology, inter
oper
ability, and inter-agency cooperation” (p. 1213).
Several studies examine Master or Public
Administration (MPA) program1 curricula for
various reasons and include some aspect of
information technology, information manage
ment, or computing (Brown & Brudney, 1998;
Griz
zle, 1985; Lazenby, 2010; Slack, 1990;
Zhang, Lee, & Yang, 2012). These studies
highlight the extent to which an IT (or related)
focus has been largely absent from the MPA
curriculum. However, at the same time, they
illustrate the growing importance of IT in the
curriculum to fulfill public sector organizational,
managerial, and service demands. MPA pro
grams play an important role in preparing
future administrators to take full advantage of
IT in government (Brown & Brudney, 1998)
and to meet associated challenges.
REVIEW OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION PROGRAM
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CURRICULA
To assess the extent to which MPA programs
offer IT-related courses, this article reviews
courses available at U.S. programs listed in
NASPAA’s 2014–2015 Roster of Accredited Pro
grams.2 Curriculum information was collected
from program websites in the fall of 2014 and
spring of 2015 on program type (i.e., Master of
Public Administration, Master of Public Policy,
etc.) and on IT concentrations, core courses,
and electives offered. The University of Puerto
Rico was excluded. The total number of
programs examined was 164.
Dichotomous variables (0 = No; 1 = Yes) denote
the lack or presence of an IT-related concen
tration, whether IT-related courses are part of
the core curriculum, and whether the program
offers IT-related courses as electives. An
additional variable provides a count of IT
electives offered or approved by programs.
Table 1 shows the number and percentage of
programs offering IT-related concentrations,
core courses, or electives.
TABLE 1.
Number and Percentage of IT Concentration and Course Offerings (N = 164)
Yes
Program has an IT concentration
No
9 (5.5%)
155 (94.5%)
Program offers IT core courses
48 (28.4%)
116 (70.7%)
Program offers IT electives
72 (43.9%)
92 (56.1%)
Note. N = 164.
188
No MPA Left Behind
TABLE 2.
Number of IT Electives Offered by MPA Programs (N = 164)
Number of IT Electives Offered
Program Frequency
Percentage
0
92
56.1
1
41
25
2
13
7.9
3
6
3.7
4
5
3
5
3
1.8
6
2
1.2
10
1
0.6
13
1
0.6
Note. N = 164.
The majority of programs do not offer IT
concentrations, core courses, or electives. How
ever, the number of programs that offer IT
courses increases as course levels change from
concentration to core to electives. Only about
6% of programs offer an IT concentration.
Data indicate that about 28% of the programs
offer IT courses as part of their core curricula
and about 44% of programs offer IT electives.
Not all electives are developed within the MPA
program, as some programs allow students to
take electives from other academic disciplines.
As shown in Table 2, when electives are offered,
the total number of electives available ranges
from 1 to 13 courses.
While most programs (56.1%) do not offer IT
electives, 25% offer at least 1 elective, approxi
mately 8% offer 2, almost 10% offer between
3 and 6, and 1% offer 10 or more. These elec
tives vary in scope and content. For example,
several programs offer electives in management
infor
mation systems or geographic information systems (GIS). Other programs offer
M. D. Mauldin
electives in e-government, information techno
logy, information security, and health informa
tion systems.
have to develop new skills and knowledge and
be innovative in course design to ensure that
some facets of IT are taught and applied.
IMPLICATIONS FOR MASTER OF
PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION PROGRAMS
Second, in programs that have not adopted IT
courses, new courses need to be developed.
These could include courses on information
man
age
ment, database design, information
systems management, GIS, and the like. One
consideration with this option is the possible
trade-off between increasing faculty capacity to
teach such courses and maintaining existing
courses. In some cases where specialization is
paramount, the use of adjunct instructors may
complement this option. Otherwise, existing
faculty would need to develop new skills in order
to accommodate demand for such courses.
The use of IT requires that government organ
izations employ workers with specialized skills
(Kernaghan & Gunraj, 2004). Some believe
that governments lack competence in IT, thus
making it a challenge to keep up with the
changing economy (Kernaghan & Gunraj,
2004). Further, while innovations such as
e-government have grown in scope, they have
not been as transformative as many expected
(Norris & Reddick, 2012). One reason for this
lack of transformation may be due to a focus on
the technologies themselves and not on how
they are used. As Kraemer and Dedrick (1997)
contend, training and practice must move
beyond a focus on IT applications to how we
employ IT to transform organizational pro
cesses in order to realize productivity gains.
Graduate programs in public administration
are a fertile training ground to put this per
spective into practice.
This review of NASPAA accredited MPA
programs reveals that while IT courses are not
common, many programs have taken steps to
offer related courses. If the integration of IT is
indeed a goal of MPA programs, how can it
occur given resource constraints? The following
are some suggestions.
First, as previously noted, some programs in
corporate IT into existing courses. Such courses
include research methods, policy analysis, pro
gram evaluation, and budgeting. Ferrandino
(2012), writing about GIS, highlights limit
ations associated with a broad and holistic
integration of GIS in the MPA curriculum.
These limitations include a possible technology
gap between newer professors who may value
and desire to teach GIS and more seasoned
professors who do not. In addition, programs
may lack the faculty expertise to teach ITrelated courses. Faculty, in many cases, would
190
Finally, MPA programs could partner with
other academic departments to offer IT elec
tives to public administration students. This
would not require existing MPA faculty to
develop new knowledge and skills but would
benefit from the knowledge and skills of pro
fessors in other disciplines. For example, many
business schools have begun teaching courses
on big data and data analytics. Further, they
have historically offered other IT courses.
Each MPA program would need to determine
whether such courses in other disciplines would
meet the needs of the program and its students.
In sum, this review indicates that courses on
information management and technology are
largely absent from the public administration
graduate curriculum, similar to the results of
previous research (e.g., Brown & Brudney,
1998; Koven, Goetz, & Brennen, 2008; Laz
enby, 2010). At the same time, while an IT
focus in MPA programs is not widespread,
several programs have integrated IT into their
curricula. The majority of programs do not
offer IT-related concentrations or core courses,
but several programs have at least begun to
offer IT-related electives. This is promising in
that it provides an opportunity for those
graduate students working in public organi
zations or seeking public sector employment to
No MPA Left Behind
develop the skills needed to transform those
organizations through the use of IT. In order
to not leave MPA graduates behind in the
rapidly changing, technology-driven public
sector workplace, MPA programs must make
an effort to incorporate IT into their existing
curricula, to promote and dedicate resources to
faculty skill development, and to draw upon
the information technology and management
courses and faculty expertise of other disciplines.
Grizzle, G. A. (1985). Essential skills for financial man
agement: Are MPA students acquiring the necessary
competencies? Public Administration Review, 45(6),
840–844.
Haque, A. (2003). Information technology, GIS and
democratic values: Ethical implications for IT professionals in public service. Ethics and Information
Technology, 5(1), 39–48.
Holzer, M., & Schwester (2011). Public administration:
An introduction. New York, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
Jensen, M. C. (1998). Foundations of organizational
strategy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
NOTES
1In this article, Master of Public Administration
(MPA) refers to graduate programs in public ad
ministration and affairs.
2 NASPAA has 280 member institutions that offer
undergraduate and graduate degrees in public ad
ministration and affairs. Of the total number of
programs eligible to participate in NASPAA’s peer
review process, 184 programs at 173 schools have
been accredited (NASPAA, 2014).
Kernaghan, K., & Gunraj, J. (2004). Integrating infor_
mation technology into public administration:
Conceptual and practical considerations. Canadian
Public Administration, 47(4), 525–546.
Koven, S., Goetz, F., & Brennan, M. (2008). Assessing
public affairs programs: The view from the top.
Administration and Society, 40(7), 691–710.
Kraemer, K., & Dedrick, J. (1997). Computing and
public organizations. Journal of Public Administra
tion Research and Theory, 7(1), 89–112.
Lazenby, S. (2010). The adequacy of MPA course con
tent in preparing local government managers. Journal
of Public Affairs Education, 16(3), 337–360.
Menzel, D. C. (1998). http://www.ethics.gov: Issues and
challenges facing public managers. Public Admin
istration Review, 58(5), 445–451.
REFERENCES
Brown, M. M., & Brudney, J. L. (1998). Public sector
information technology initiatives: Implications for
programs of public administration. Administration
and Society, 30(4), 421–442.
Administration (NASPAA). (2014). 2014–2015
roster of accredited programs. Retrieved from https://
annual-roster-of-accredited-programs-updated09-01-14.pdf.
Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S., & Tinkler, J.
(2005). New public management is dead—long live
digital-era governance. Journal of Public Admin
istration Research and Theory, 16(3), 467–494.
Norris, D. F., & Reddick, C. G. (2012). Local
e-government in the United States: Transforma
tion or incremental change? Public Administration
Review, 73(1), 165–175.
Ferrandino, J. (2012). Incorporating GIS as an
interdisciplinary pedagogical tool throughout an
MPA program. Journal of Public Affairs Education,
20(4), 529–544.
Purtell, R. M., & Fossett, J. W. (2010). Beyond bud
geting: Public-service financial education in the
21st century. Journal of Public Affairs Education,
16(1), 95–110.
M. D. Mauldin
Slack, J. D. (1990). Information, training, and
assistance needs of municipal governments. Public
Administration Review, 50(4), 450–457.
Yang, K., & Rho, S. (2007). E-government for better
performance: Promises, realities, and challenges.
International Journal of Public Administration,
30(11), 1197–1217.
Zhang, Y., Lee, R., & Yang, K. (2012). Knowledge
and skills for policy making: Stories from local
public managers in Florida. Journal of Public Affairs
Education, 18(1), 183–208.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Marcus D. Mauldin is an associate professor in
the Department of Political Science and Public
Service at the University of Tennessee at Chat
tanooga. His research focuses on open data,
economic and community development, and
public-private partnerships.
192
A Conceptual Model of Information
Technology Competence for Public
Managers: Designing Relevant MPA
Curricula for Effective Public Service
Anna Ya Ni
California State University, San Bernardino
Yu-Che Chen
University of Nebraska, Omaha
ABSTRACT
This study aims to conceptualize and propose information technology (IT) competence for training
Master of Public Administration (MPA) students to succeed in the production and delivery of
public service. Defining and assessing student competence is a central challenge to the relevance
and accountability of public administration education. This study draws from the literature of
psychology, IT management, technology education, and public administration, as well as from
practitioners in the public sector, to develop a construct of IT competence for public managers,
including general public managers and public IT managers. This conceptualization regards IT
competence as multidimensional, encompassing knowledge, skills, and personal attributes that
enable public managers be effective. Moreover, this conceptualization articulates the knowledge,
skills, and personal attributes relevant to achieving effectiveness at individual, organizational, and
professional levels. Emphasizing the perspective of employers of MPA graduates, we also discuss the
conceptualization’s implications for MPA curricula and recommend curricular changes.
KEYWORDS
Information technology, public manager competence, MPA curriculum, competence model
The definition and assessment of student com
petence is a central challenge to the relevance
and accountability of public administration
education. In response, the Master of Public
Administration (MPA) accrediting institution,
the Network of Schools of Public Policy, Affairs,
and Administration (NASPAA), has urged
MPA programs to define and assess student
competence. In 2009, NASPAA adopted new
accreditation standards, demanding perform
ance measurement throughout the public
JPAE 22 (2), 193–212
administration curriculum. These standards
now require programs to “engage in ongoing
assessment of student learning for all universal required competencies, all mission-specific
required competencies, and all elective (option,
track, specialization, or concentration) com
pe
tencies” (NASPAA, Commission on Peer
Review and Accreditation, 2014, p. 29). The
goal is to engage faculty and educational
programs in a conscious, calculated, continuous
process to improve learning outcomes.
A. Y. Ni & Y-C. Chen
With widespread technology innovations in the
public sector, public managers are increasingly
required to be competent in utilizing and
managing information technologies effectively.
The context of public service has also been
modified by technology advancement. For
example, Bowman, West, and Beck (2014)
contend that IT, new media, and cybersecurity
concerns have changed the way public servants
work and have raised new and confounding
technical and ethical dilemmas for public
management. Emergent technologies have
constantly redefined ways of organizing work
and means of delivering services and, therefore,
have redefined the nature of public service.
Meeting all these challenges requires a unique
combination of values, knowledge, skills, abil
ities, traits, and behaviors, as well as effective
training and educational programs to nurture
those competencies.
Although NASPAA has emphasized teaching
IT and many MPA programs have incorporat
ed IT training into their curricula, the public
sector lacks a conceptual understanding of what
constitutes IT competence for general mana
gers and IT managers. Previous studies have
articulated the core technical and management
knowledge required (Rocheleau, 1998), the need
for strategic information resource plan
ning
(Brown & Brudney, 1998), the importance of
skills in operating in a networked environment
(Kim & Layne, 2001), and the need for a
more comprehensive “information strategy
and management” curriculum (Dawes, 2004).
However, the confluence of advancements in
technologies, pervasive use of IT in public
service, and the focus on public values demands
a renewed effort to conceptualize IT compe
tence to deliver on performance in the digital
age (Mergel, 2012).
To fill this gap, this research attempts to
conceptualize the IT competence for public
managers, including general public managers
and public IT managers. Defining IT compe
tence demands specificity, especially with
NASPAA having removed IT competence from
its accreditation standards to focus on five
194
broad universal competencies. Uniquely, our
conceptualization addresses (1) IT-related
values and attitudes; (2) the ability to operate
at organizational and professional levels; and
(3) multilevel and multicomponent specifics
for training public managers and public IT
managers. Our primary focus is on IT com
petence for public managers, as they constitute
the vast majority of MPA students. The
distinction of IT competence for public man
agers versus public IT managers aims to
delineate what IT topics should be covered in
the MPA curriculum.
We start by presenting the analytical approach
we used to develop the conceptual model of
IT competence. Then we discuss the general
notion of competence and IT competence
relevant to MPA education. The subsequent
section develops the conceptual framework of
IT competence, drawing on the literature of
psychology, IT management, technology educa
tion, and public administration, as well as on
the experiences of practitioners in the public
sector. This conceptualization emphasizes the
perspective of employers of MPA graduates.
Lastly, based on this conceptualization, we dis
cuss implications for MPA curri
cula and
present recommendations both for updating IT
competence in MPA programs and for improv
ing IT curriculum design and implementation.
ANALYTICAL APPROACH TO DEVELOPING
A MODEL OF IT COMPETENCE
This research is intended to build a conceptual
model of IT competence for public managers
that is grounded both in theory and practice.
To that end, we divided our research into two
phases: (1) developing a broad conceptual
framework based on reviewing the theoretical
literature and (2) enriching and refining the
conceptual model by drawing on empirical
(practical) literature as well as insights
from practitioners.
To inform our construction of a valid theoretical
framework, we started with an analysis of
literature in the disciplines—including psych
ology, business management, education, and
public administration—that had studied
IT Competence in Public Managers
managerial competence. We then specifically
focused on the literature of IT competence and
its relationship to public management. This
phase led to our definition of IT competence
for public managers and major dimensions of
that competence.
In our second phase, we integrated the
theoretical and empirical literature of IT
competence and public management, as well as
practitioner insights, to finalize the IT com
petence conceptual model. Empirical studies
not only validate the structure of the conceptual
framework but also provide additional com
ponents to competence model.
Though we identified these two phases, the
process of literature review and intellectual
construction was more iterative than sequential.
Especially in our second phase, based on the
feedback from practitioners, we constantly
revisited competence literature to sharpen our
theoretical thinking and expand and refine
the discussion.
It is critical to note that our purpose is to define
a competence model and its subcomponents
with content validity. We intend to ensure that
our model demonstrates an appropriate cov
erage of the content. Although the resulting
model may provide guidance for assessing IT
competence, our model is not intended to be
a comprehensive measurement instrument for
evaluating IT competence in MPA programs.
COMPETENCE AND IT COMPETENCE
FOR PUBLIC MANAGERS
The Study of “Competence”
The concept of “competence” was first
introduced in the 1970s to refer to a person’s
particular set of skills and/or qualities that
could be used by the discipline of psychology
as better job-performance indicators than
standard intelligence tests (McClelland, 1973).
It is worth noting that competence enables
performance but does not necessarily imply
performance, since factors beyond competence
(such as effort and supporting resources
and conditions) may also affect performance
(Bassellier, Reich, & Benbasat, 2001; Klemp,
1979; Schambach, 1994).
Drawing from psychological studies, recent
management studies emphasize that compe
tence is inherent in character, which underpins
the concept of virtue. As virtue often suggests a
trait or quality that promotes moral good,
competence encompasses a number of domains
—intellectual knowledge, practical skills,
personality traits, attitudes, behaviors, values,
beliefs, motivations, and social capability—
that enable work-related effectiveness. In the
field of public administration, virtue has tradi
tionally been a central principle in public service.
The emphasis on competence in recent decades
marks a theoretical convergence between the
academic fields of moral philosophy and man
agement development (Macaulay & Lawton
2006). The idea of occupational competence
has been applied since the U.S. State De
partment started to require Certificates of
Competence under the Foreign Service Act of
1980. Today, almost every public agency has
developed various job-specific competencies
to guide training, hiring, and evaluation of
employee performance. Such occupational
competence has an ethical component that
speaks to the importance of virtue and morality
(Bowman, West, & Beck, 2014; Virtanen, 2000).
IT Competence for Public Managers
Scholarship in business literature on IT com
petence has a long history. Research efforts
studied both the competence of IT professionals
(e.g., Bassellier & Benbasat, 2004; Schambach,
1994) and the IT competence of operational
managers. For example, Sambamurthy and
Zmud (1994, 1997) emphasize the importance
of, and offer guidelines for, assessing managerial
IT competence in an organization. Moreover,
such competence should contain two domains
—explicit and tacit IT knowledge, which lead
to increased willingness to work with IT people
and to lead and participate in IT projects
(Bassellier et al., 2001, p. 159).
As early as the 1970s, IT became indispensable
to public managers. For example, using a
longitudinal study of computer use from 1976
to 1988, Kraemer, Danziger, Dunkle, and King
(1993) identified that public managers are
extremely dependent on IT, and a manager’s
style of use is particularly important in
accounting for differences in usefulness of
computer-based information. Kraemer and
Northrop (1989) urged public management
programs to include computing curriculum.
Recognizing IT as a catalyst for organizational
change, Seneviratne (1999) called for “a fund
amental restructuring of the public sector to
reflect the value systems of the information
age” (p. 41) and suggested that public managers needed to become agents of change and
to manage the change process by managing
technology. The U.S. Government Accounta
bility Office (GAO) (2004a) reported that the
federal government faces human capital chal
lenges “in the information technology area,
where widespread shortfalls in human capital
have contributed to demonstrable shortfalls in
agency and program performance” (p. 1). The
importance of IT and the need for IT compe
tence have been also stressed in nonprofit organ
izations (e.g., Hackler & Saxto, 2007).
Despite the enthusiasm about IT, studies also
reveal that the majority of information systems
developments in the public sector have been
unsuccessful (Bussen & Myers, 1997; Collins,
1997; Goldfinch, 2007; Heeks, 2002, 2004;
Heeks & Bhatnagar, 1999; Norris & Moon
2005), pointing to special implications for IT
competence. For example, Goldfinch (2007)
urged public managers to be “a recalcitrant,
suspicious, and skeptical adopter of IT” (p.
917). Dawes (2004) argued that today’s public
managers need an area of core knowledge, such
as information strategy and management, in
addition to traditional public administration
core competencies.
Responding to the growing importance of IT
in government operation, NASPAA (1986)
recognized IT as a critical skill/knowledge
component in the MPA curriculum. Such
recognition occurred against a backdrop of
conflicting opinion: many public administration
196
faculty rejected information systems coursework
as necessary for MPA programs (Kiel, 1986),
while another group of concerned faculty made
a conscious effort to elevate the teaching of
public management information systems to
a required component for accreditation. In
2001, NASPAA’s own technology committee
recommended inclusion of IT education as a
core component accreditation (Dawes, 2004,
p.7). In 2004, NASPAA expanded its IT
standard to cover the managerial and policy
implications of IT (Park & Park, 2006, p. 1).
More specifically, this IT standard (Standard
4.21) designated “information management,
technology applications, and policy” as a core
curriculum standard for managing public
service organizations (NASPAA, Commission
on Peer Review and Accreditation, 2008, p.9).
However, the implementation of an IT
curriculum has faced many challenges. Studies
have found that the pace of IT curriculum
development has been very slow, indicating a
limited impact of NASPAA standards and
guidelines in the United States through the
1990s (Kiel, 1986; Park & Park, 2006).
Schools have devoted insufficient educational
resources to meeting the challenges of teaching
IT use and management (Lan & Cayer, 1994).
More
over, schools have not articulated the
specific knowledge and skills needed for
meeting NASPAA’s former curriculum standard
on information management, technology ap
plications, and policy (Dawes, 2004).
NASPAA’s complete removal of an IT standard
in favor of universal required competencies in
2009 leaves a major void in providing guidelines for MPA programs as they attempt to
develop their IT competence. The new
NASPAA standards require each program to
define the five universal competencies based on
the program’s mission and context, with no
mention of the role of IT in such standards as
“to lead and manage in public governance” or
“to communicate and interact productively
with a diverse and changing workforce and
citizenry” (NASPAA, Commission on Peer
Review and Accreditation, 2009, pp. 7–8).
In addition, NASPAA also removed accredi
tation-based incentives for MPA programs to
devote time and resources to sustain IT competence education.
The gap seems to have widened between the
demand for an articulation of IT competence
in response to the growing use of IT in the
public sector and NASPAA’s removal of any
such specific standard. Over the last decade, the
use of IT in government has continued to grow.
Such use includes, but is not limited to, social
media (e.g., Twitter for emergency notification),
311 systems (which provide one-stop city infor
mation), mobile device apps (e.g., for traffic
updates), data analytic tools to analyze public
service issues, and big data for predictive
modeling of public service issues (e.g., crime
and public health). Moreover, IT functions in
government and strategic use of IT have grown
and diversified. Individual MPA faculty mem
bers have tried to narrow the gap by including
up-to-date components in their curricula, such
as courses that focus on social media (e.g., Mer
gel, 2012). Additionally, interest has recently
grown in developing a data science track in
MPA curricula and offering relevant IT courses
in public administration and public policy.
Nonetheless, the United States still lacks an
articulation of IT competence that could drive
and inform MPA program curricula.
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
FOR IT COMPETENCE
Numerous studies across various disciplines
reveal that competence is a complex multi
dimensional concept that encompasses “almost
anything that might directly or indirectly affect
job performance” (Woodruffe, 1993, p. 29).
For the purpose of this research, we define IT
competence for public managers as the know
ledge, skills, and personal attributes of a public
manager that enables him/her to achieve IT
effectiveness in fulfilling his/her public service
duties. This definition of IT competence im
plies three dimensions: (1) components, (2) per
formance levels, and (3) public service duties.
Components of IT Competence
There are three components of IT compete nce:
knowledge, skills, and personal attributes. The
knowledge component is of particular interest
to public administration educators and researchers. Bassellier, Reich, and Benbasat (2001) differ
entiate IT-related knowledge into both “explicit
knowledge of technologies, applications, systems
development, and management of IT” and tacit
knowledge, “a combination of experience and
cognition” (p. 159).
Skills often imply practiced facility in doing
something and are largely job-specific. Skills
include both abilities, which are IT-specific
skills acquired over time, as well as aptitudes, a
person’s capacity to obtain additional abilities
(Dunnette, 1976). IT skills of managers can be
further differentiated into technical skills and
managerial skills. While the technical skills
refer to the manager’s ability and aptitude
acquired through learning and practicing IT in
performing a specific job or task, the managerial
skills indicate his/her ability and aptitude to
make IT-related business decisions and lead
subordinates in an organization or in a parti
cular sector to accomplish predetermined goals.
Personal attributes cover a wide range of factors;
however, with a specific emphasis on virtue in
public administration, here the term refers to
an individual’s internalized values, norms, and
beliefs about, as well as the person’s manifested
attitudes toward, IT and public service. A pub
lic manager’s internalized values related to IT
competence consist of at least three subcom
ponents: (1) general public service values perti
nent to information and technology use, such as
transparency, accountability, democratic governance, privacy, equity, and so on; (2) ethics about
IT, the moral principles that guide the use of
information technologies in the public sector,
which include an individual’s own personal code,
any informal code of ethical conduct that exists
in the workplace, and exposure to formal pro
fessional codes of conduct (Aldridge & Stoker,
2002; Pierce & Henry, 1996); and (3) a world
view concerned with technology and society,
especially an individual’s perspective on the role
of IT in the welfare of individuals, organizations,
and society (Garson, 2006).
The recent emphasis on aligning IT projects
with public values has further underscored the
importance of the intrinsic values of public
managers. The fundamental difference between
public sector and private sector IT is the value
system (Bretschneider, 1990). As a result, one
of the first questions about IT projects should
be about the values that such projects are going
to create, such as efficiency, effectiveness, trans
parency, and so on. In addition, such value pro
positions should guide the design and imple
mentation of public sector IT projects and their
evaluation (Cresswell, Burke, & Pardo, 2006).
Internalizing these values as part of IT com
petence fosters alignment of individual public
service motivations and the pro
duction and
delivery of public service to create public values.
Attitudes are feelings, beliefs, and behavior
tendencies, which often manifest a person’s
internalized values. Attitudes always embody
both positive and negative elements, and when
a person holds a certain attitude, he/she will
demonstrate a tendency to behave in a certain
way. A public manager’s attitudes toward IT
can include his/her willingness or resistance to
learn, acquire IT skills, embrace technical
innovation, and debate and advocate for ITrelated policies.
Performance Levels of IT Competence
The organizational level of IT competence
involves effectiveness in achieving organi
za
tional performance goals in any public sector
organizational context. The term organization
here refers to a large array of organizational
forms; these go beyond the traditional
hier
archical or silo-structure bureaucracy to
include process- or service-oriented enterprise
or network-structure entities, such as 311
enterprise systems, public management net
works, and virtual organizations. This broad
definition reflects the need for information
sharing and service integration across juris
dictional boundaries to provide citizen- and
customer-centric personalized service. Such
competence elements include, but are not
limited to, knowledge of the values and impacts
of IT on an organization, ability to strategically
deploy IT to achieve organizational purposes,
and willingness to champion IT innovations to
lead organizational change.
The professional level of IT competence focuses
on elements that affect the field of public ad
ministration in terms of exhibiting leadership
in IT-related public policy and management
practices. An IT-competent public manager
may demonstrate leadership in the profession
by providing service to IT-related national
associations, advocating IT public policy, and
leading IT-related public sector innovation and
practices. An example of this could be the
leadership provided by a state’s chief infor
mation officer (CIO) to establish a consortium
for interstate cybersecurity information exchange.
Acknowledging IT competence as an enabler of
performance, the performance levels (or foci)
of IT competence examine the potential influ
ence of such competence at the individual,
organizational, and professional levels. Such dis
tinctions are useful for linking IT competence
to performance at various levels and for con
sidering the interactions between factors at
these levels.
Public service duties encompass a wide range of
job titles, roles, and responsibilities in public ad
ministration. Here, we focus on public managers
generally and public IT managers specifically.
The individual level of IT competence refers to
the personal competence elements that enable a
public manager to accomplish his/her assigned
duty, including his/her IT-related education
and personal experience, technical knowledge
and skills for day-to-day tasks, and ability and
willingness to overcome personal incompetency
(such as resistance to IT and knowledge gaps).
Public managers are middle- or upper-level
executives in public organizations. These people
can be division heads, department chairs, or
administrators (elected or appointed) at all
levels of government. Although the acquisition,
implementation, and maintenance of informa
tion systems are usually the responsibility of IT
departments, the management of IT in public
198
Public Service Duties
FIGURE 1.
A Multidimensional Conceptual Model of IT Competence for Public Managers
Dimension 3
Public service
duties
Public IT Manager
Public Manager
Professional
Dimension 2
Performance
foci of IT
competence
Organizational
Individual
Knowledge
explicit
tacit
Skills
abilities
aptitudes
Abilities
values
attitudes
Dimension 1
Components of IT competence
sector organizations is often shared between IT
professionals and public managers; some func
tional department managers may even oversee
IT professionals. Public managers are expected
to communicate their needs to and develop a
partnership with IT professionals, to deploy IT
strategies, and to assume leadership in IT projects.
Public IT managers are specifically responsible
for the IT systems within a public agency. Their
responsibilities often involve purchasing hard
ware and software, overseeing installation,
operating backup systems, providing IT infra
structure, and contributing to organizational
policy regarding quality standards and strategic
planning. Their duties ultimately depend on
the organization and how complex its informa
tion systems are. A large governmental agency
could designate a CIO who has an enterprise
and information-resource management perspec
tive, supported by a lower-level operational IT
manager and staff members. In a smaller
organization, public IT managers can be the
director of an IT department or a manager of a
small technology office. The relevant titles have
continued to expand and include CIO, IT
director, IT manager, geographical information
system (GIS) director, information system (IS)
department head, chief knowledge officer, chief
data officer, social media director, and so on.
IT COMPETENCE MODEL
IT Competence for Public Managers
Given the complexity of the public administra
tion environment, our multidirectional concep
tual model goes beyond a typical focus on
technical skills or specific job responsibilities to
address the increasing importance of IT in
organizations, including a broad and holistic
view of competence. Table 1 summarizes the
components of a public manager’s IT com
petence based on the conceptual model.
As public sector organizations continuously
strive for performance outcomes, public mana
gers are generally expected to be competent as
effective workers, managers, and professionals.
TABLE 1.
Components of IT Competence for Public Managers
Performance Foci
Components
Individual
Knowledge
Explicit knowledge:
Technical fundamentals;
current and emerging
technologies and applications in the job area
Tacit knowledge:
Personal use of computers
Organizational
Explicit knowledge:
System development
methods and practices;
management of IT;
knowledge management
Tacit knowledge:
IT project experience;
management of IT;
process view of
organizational activities;
vision of IT in
the organization
Professional
Explicit knowledge:
Peer organizations’
use of IT; best IT
practices in the field
Tacit knowledge:
Experience of
inter-organizational IT
projects/management;
experience of IT leadership in the public sector
Skills
Basic computer skills;
ability to use specific
computer applications
required by the job
Aptitude for additional IT
knowledge and skills for the
job; adaptiveness to workrelated technical changes
Ability to manage IT programs; ability to lead IT-related organizational changes; ability to formulate
IT-related organizational
standards and policies; ability to develop IT strategies
and relocate IT resources;
ability to articulate IT vision
Aptitude for additional
IT management knowledge and skills in the
organizational context
Ability to formulate
IT-related professional
standards and policies;
ability to advocate or
lead IT-related innovations in the profession
Aptitude for additional
IT leadership knowledge
and skills in the profession
As individual workers, IT-competent public
managers are expected to go beyond their man
dated job responsibilities to possess both explicit
and tacit knowledge of information techno
logies for their daily work assignments. Explicit
knowledge refers to formal knowledge that can
be readily articulated, codified, accessed, and
verbalized; such knowledge enables public
managers to communicate with IT professionals.
Competent public managers also need to under
stand technical fundamentals (such as hardware,
200
Personal Attributes
Personal computer ethics;
valuing IT-competence
for work
Sensitivity to personal workrelated technical needs;
recognition of personal limits
in competence and expertise; willingness to acquire IT
knowledge and skills; comfort with technical changes
IT-related business ethical codes of conduct;
valuing IT competence
for the organization
Sensitivity to organizational
technical needs; recognition of IT implication to
organization; willingness to
champion/lead technical
innovations; submissiveness
to elected officials’ or constituents’ worldviews of IT
IT-related public-service
values; IT-related professional ethical codes of
conduct; valuing IT competence for public service
Striving for leadership
of IT innovation in the
profession; advocacy
of IT-related policies
software, personal computers, client/server com
puting, the Internet, multimedia, etc.; (Bassellier
et al., 2001)) as well as technical concepts (such
as information systems, networking, databases,
etc.; Dawes, 2004). They are also expected to
keep up with current and emerging technologies
and applications related to their jobs. Simply
knowing of these technologies (know-what) is
not sufficient; a public manager also needs to
practice or experience them, which constitutes
his/her tacit knowledge (know-how). Unlike
explicit knowledge, tacit knowledge is difficult
to transfer to a person by means of writing it
down or verbalizing it. Tacit knowledge is often
acquired through practice or experience. The
practice of explicit and tacit knowledge, over
time, builds a manager’s IT skills.
At the individual performance level, these skills
are generally technical, including both basic com
puter skills (such as e-mail, word processing,
spreadsheets, databases, PowerPoint, telecom
munications, etc.; Kraemer et al., 1986) and
job-specific computer skills (such as the ability
to use the financial management system for
public financial managers, the procurement
system for procurement officers, GIS for public
planners, etc.) Equally important skills include
the capacity to acquire additional knowledge
and skills and the capability to adapt to future
technological changes during a career.
Through the practice of IT knowledge and
skills, public managers are expected to form
their own worldviews, values, norms, and
beliefs about IT, which are externalized in their
attitudes and actions toward IT. Competent
managers should possess personal IT ethics—
for example, respecting proprietary software
and protecting information privacy (Henderson
& Snyder 1999). These managers would value
IT for their jobs, be aware of work-related tech
nical needs, recognize personal limits in com
petence and expertise, be willing to acquire IT
knowledge and skills, and be comfortable with
technical changes.
At the organizational level, a competent man
ager “appreciates technology’s capabilities and
uses technology as a lever to deliver outstanding
business results” (Smith 1996, p. 39). Explicit
knowledge at this level includes system dev
elopment methods and practices, management
of IT, and access to knowledge; tacit knowledge
consists of both experience, especially of IT
project and management, and cognition, esp
ecially of the process view of organizational
activities and the vision of IT in the organization
(Bassellier et al., 2001). Such explicit and tacit
IT knowledge should be integrated with mana
gers’ working knowledge of agency goals, major
strategies, priorities, and significant threats and
challenges, so as to maintain perspective while
developing and framing IT solutions.
Public managers are expected to be able to man
age IT programs, lead IT-enabled organizational
changes, formulate IT-related organi
zational
standards and policies, develop IT strategies
and relocate IT resources, articulate IT vision
for the organization, and especially important,
align IT vision to organizational mission (Boyn
ton, Zmud, & Jacobs, 1994; Dawes, 2004; Kim
& Layne, 2001; Kraemer et al., 1986; U.S.
Gov
ernment Accountability Office [GAO],
1994, 2004a). Dawes (2004) specifically empha
sizes analytical skills (such as stakeholder analy
sis, user needs analysis, business process analy
sis, information policy analysis, infor
ma
tion
and work-flow analysis, modeling techniques,
risk assessment, etc.) and skills for managing
complex projects (such as communication and
presentation, negotiation, intra- and interagency
coordination, intergovernmental coordination,
risk management, etc.). Meanwhile, public man
agers are supposed to possess the capacity to
acquire IT management knowledge and skills
in the organizational context. Skills at the organ
izational level are largely managerial in nature.
In practicing such knowledge and skills, public
managers are also expected to follow ethical
codes of business conduct—for example,
providing quality e-services to the citizenry.
They would recognize the role of IT in public
organizations (Fountain, 2001) and value IT
competence accordingly (Armstrong & Sam
bamurthy, 1996). Such business ethics and
values are revealed by managers’ sensitivity to
organizational technical needs, recognition of
IT implications to the organization, and
willingness to champion/lead technical inno
vation (GAO, 1994). Being responsive to their
constituents and the elected officials overseeing
their organizations, public managers are also
expected to submit to the worldviews and
values of those key stakeholders (even if these
worldviews and values are different from their
own) who create (or destroy) the organizational
culture that defines the use of IT and its ulti
mate benefit to constituents. An IT-competent
public manager should be invested in (or toler
ant of ) the organizational culture and stake
holders and work effectively with them to achieve
organizational purposes.
At the professional level, an IT-competent man
ager is expected to positively affect the IT prac
tices and policies in public service, which goes
beyond the sphere of a specific organization or
program. To achieve this goal, such managers
are expected to know peer organizations’ use of
IT and best IT practices in the field (GAO 1994,
2004b). Experiences of interorganizational or
intersectoral IT projects and management are
deemed valuable (Dawes 2004). For example,
previous experience in private sector IT projects
may enable a public manager to launch a public
sector IT innovation. In addition, experience of
IT leadership in the field, such as heading a
national IT special task force, is an important
tacit aspect of professional IT knowledge.
Through practicing professional knowledge,
public managers are expected to be able to
formulate IT-related professional standards and
policies and to advocate or lead IT-related
innovations in the profession. They should also
possess the capability to acquire additional IT
leadership knowledge and skills.
As a public sector professional, an IT-competent
manager is expected to recognize and appreciate
public service values (such as efficiency, trans
parency, democracy, accountability, equity, etc.)
enabled by IT (Bertot, Jaeger, & Grimes, 2010;
Cresswell et al., 2006; Davis, 1999; Dawes, 2010;
Dervin, 1994; Hindman, 2008; Jorgensen &
Bozeman 2007; Osborne & Gaebler, 1992;
Public CIO, 2009; West, 2004) as well as the
impact of IT on public service ethics and values
(Kernaghan, 2014; Ottensmeyer & Heroux,
1991; Roman, 2013). These managers should
consider IT competence valuable to public
service and strive for leadership in IT innovation
within their profession. In addition, they should
advocate for (or be willing to provide expertise
to) IT-related policies. For example, these man
agers may push for IT policy reform or be willing
to provide expert opinions on IT policy issues.
202
IT Competence for Public IT Managers
Unlike for general public managers, IT know
ledge, skills, and attributes are considered public
IT managers’ core competence. However, this
does not imply fundamental distinctions in IT
competence between the two types of public
service duties. Sometimes, rotation of managers
at the senior level in different functional
departments is possible. For example, the Seoul
city government of South Korea requires that
all chief department managers move to a
different department, including the IT depart
ment, every two years. Such practices can help
managers think of their organization as a set of
processes rather than as functional silos, enab
ling them to understand the transformational
power of IT (Bassellier et al., 2001; Layne &
Lee, 2001). Some organizations always select
their senior IT managers from the ranks of the
operational personnel. For example, IT mana
gers in the FBI and other law enforcement
agencies are commonly special agents who have
acquired some technology background, which
demonstrates the preference for legitimization
over technical competence. However, for lowerrank IT managers, their careers may follow a
different path—they often enter the industry
in technical roles and work up to management
positions after several years’ experience or
training in system administration, project
management, or team leadership.
Researchers have studied the IT competence of
public IT managers, especially that of public
CIOs, since the establishment of federal agency
CIOs by the Information Technology Management Reform Act (Clinger-Cohen Act) of
1996. The E-Government Act of 2002
strengthened the role of CIOs. While 20 years
ago technical expertise was the critical variable
for a competent CIO, today’s CIO must possess
much broader knowledge and skills to be
effective (General Services Administration
[GSA], 2008). For example, Sharon Dawes
comments that the position of “CIO is not a
single role but a combination of roles. It
demands a set of competencies that cover more
territory than we demand from most other
leadership positions” (quoted in GSA, 2008, p.
9). Subsequently, she developed a list of CIO
TABLE 2.
Components of IT Competence for Public IT Managers
Performance Foci
Components
Individual
Knowledge
Explicit knowledge:
Advanced knowledge of
IT; current and emerging
technologies and applications in the job area
Tacit knowledge:
Personal use of computers; experience of
information systems
Skills
Personal Attributes
Professional computer skills
(skills to resolve job-related
technical problems); ability
to use specific technologies
and applications required
by the job; adaptiveness
to work-related technical
changes; ability to communicate IT concepts to
nontechnical colleagues
Personal computer ethics
Sensitivity to emerging technical innovation; recognition of personal limits in
competence and expertise;
willingness to acquire IT
knowledge and skills; willingness to provide technical
consultation and support to
nontechnical colleagues
Aptitude for IT knowledge
and skills for the job
Organizational
Explicit knowledge:
Current and emerging
technologies and applications in the organizational
business area; system development methods and
practices; management of
IT access to IT knowledge
Tacit knowledge:
IT project experience;
management of IT; process view of organizational
activities; vision of IT in the
organization; insights of
organizational IT capacity
Professional
Explicit knowledge:
Current and emerging
technologies and applications in public sector; peer
organizations’ use of IT; best
IT practices in the field
Ability to manage IT programs as a core manager; ability to coordinate/facilitate IT-related
organizational changes;
ability to formulate ITrelated policies; ability to
develop IT strategies and
relocate IT resources; ability to articulate IT vision
Aptitude for IT management
knowledge and skills in the
organizational context
Ability to formulate ITrelated professional standards and policies; ability
to advocate or lead (as a
critical player); IT-related
innovations in the profession
Aptitude for IT leadership
Tacit knowledge:
knowledge and skills in the
Experience of interorganizational/sectoral IT projects; profession
experience of core IT leadership in the public sector
IT-related business ethical codes of conduct
Sensitivity to organizational technical needs;
recognition of IT implication
to organization; willingness to provide technical
consultation and support
to other functional units;
willingness to champion/
facilitate technical innovation; submissiveness to
elected officials’ or constituents’ worldviews of IT
Public service values;
professional ethical codes
of conduct; valuing IT competence for public service
Striving for core leadership of IT innovation in the
profession; advocacy of
IT-related public policies
Note. Boldface indicates the different competencies required of public IT managers versus general public managers.
competencies that consists of five components:
strategic thinking and evaluation, systems orient
ation, appreciation for complexity, information
stewardship, and technical leadership (Dawes,
2004; GSA, 2008). In 2012, the federal CIO
Council published its Clinger-Cohen Core
Competencies and Learning Objectives, which
encompasses 12 areas: policy and organization,
leadership and human capital management,
process and change management, information
resources strategy and planning, IT performance
assessment, IT project and program manage
ment, capital planning and investment control,
acquisition, information and knowledge man
agement, cybersecurity/information assurance,
enterprise architecture, and technology man
agement and assessment (CIO Council, 2012).
These competence models indicate that CIOs
share many core competencies with other
leaders in the public sector.
Although the general framework, as well as the
primary elements, of IT competence for public
managers essentially apply to public IT man
agers, there are substantively higher expectations
for the latter regarding IT knowledge, skills,
and personal attributes as defined by their job
responsibilities, especially at the individual and
organizational performance foci (see Table 2;
boldface indicates the differences). These pub
lic IT managers should have much more indepth knowledge about technical specifics and
implementation details of strategic information
resource use and cybersecurity issues as well as
other areas identified in the most up-to-date
Clinger-Cohen training document (CIO Coun
cil, 2012).
Perhaps the most significant variation in com
petence between public IT managers and general
public managers is at the individual level. Be
cause technology is essential in IT managers’
routine work responsibilities, these managers
are expected to go beyond technical fundamen
tals to possess a professional-level knowledge of
IT (such as IT infrastructure, architecture,
system security, application development, etc.;
Dawes, 2008) as well as knowledge of current
and emerging technologies and applications in
their job areas. For example, GIS managers’
knowledge scope may encompass the domains
of management sciences, engineering, geo
graphy, information systems, cartography, city
planning, and so on. They are also expected to
have relevant system administration experience,
which is often beyond the scope of an
operational manager. They need to possess
professional IT skills and be able to resolve jobrelated technical problems. More importantly,
they are also expected to be able to communicate
technical concepts and be willing to provide
technical consultation and support to nontech
nical colleagues. They are “likeable,” someone
with whom operational managers and staff
204
enjoy working. Compared to operational man
agers, they are more sensitive to emerging
innovations and eager to stay up-to-date on
new developments in technology.
At the organizational level, IT managers in
public sector organizations have traditionally
been placed lower in the organizational struc
ture, assuming supporting roles (Bretschneider,
1990); however, with the rise in the importance
of IT for public organizations, especially
through the advancement of public CIOs,
public IT managers are also expected to play
strategic roles, although such strategic roles are
often underplayed or underappreciated (Press,
2015). Compared to operational managers,
public IT managers are expected to remain
knowledgeable about current and emerging
technologies and applications relevant to the
organization’s business. In addition to the IT
vision of the organization, IT managers should
also possess insights into the true capabilities of
their organization, knowing what is possible or
not possible given the organizational purpose,
culture, and resources. IT managers are
expected to be able to coordinate and facilitate
IT-related organizational changes and play a
key role in IT project management. In doing
so, they need to be able to demonstrate their
understanding of the operational mission,
strategies, priorities, and cultures. They should
be considered an integral part of the
organizational management team by the
management, workforce, and stakeholders,
fully participating and engaging in most issues
that affect the whole organization, not just IT
issues. To be competent in doing so, IT
managers’ managerial skills must range from
project management, analytical acumen,
problem solving, organizational strengths, and
time management to interpersonal, leadership,
and communication skills. IT managers should
be more sensitive to organizational technical
needs and to IT implications for organizations
than operational managers and be willing to
provide technical consultation and support to
other functional units as well as to champion
and/or facilitate technical innovations. On one
hand, IT managers see the values of innovative
solutions and are willing to take risks and push
the organization forward; on the other hand,
they are tolerant of more cautious approaches,
maintaining an acceptable performance level
and accepting slow evolution in response to
new products and concepts. Overall, a compe
tent IT manager is expected to be relevant to,
supportive of, and accepting of operational
agendas and to equate IT success with the
success of operational managers.
At the professional level, the difference in IT
competence between public managers and IT
managers is less conspicuous. To be competent,
IT managers need to go beyond knowledge of
current technologies and applications and cap
ture the trends of technology development, re
maining visionary and proactive toward tech
nical innovations. They should be able and
willing to assume core responsibilities in lead
ing and advocating public sector innovations
and policies.
IMPLICATIONS FOR MPA CURRICULA
The proposed IT competence model for
managers in the public sector, while gaining
much credence from practice, has several farreaching implications for MPA curricula. First,
the model underscores IT competence as an
integral element to public managerial com
petency. Public organizations have been increas
ingly relying on managers as co-leaders of IT
projects and as cross-functional partners to
design and implement them (Chan & Reich,
1999). MPA programs that neglect the im
portance of IT competence for public managers
may fail to prepare students for the practical
reality of IT as an integral and strategic element
of public service. Although IT competence has
been previously articulated for private sector
managers (e.g., Bassellier & Benbasat, 2001) and
for public sector IT managers (e.g., Dawes,
2008), this research effort calls for (1) reeval
uating the role of IT competence in public
TABLE 3.
Professional
Organizational
Individual
An Example of IT Course Learning Objectives and Assessment Tools
Knowledge
Skill
Value/attitude
Learning
objectives
Knowledge of information system concepts
Use of computer
applications
Articulation/application of IT ethics
Assessment
methods
Quizzes, case analyses
Exercises, handson projects
Problem analyses,
self-reflection essays
Learning
objectives
Knowledge of
IT-enabled organizational change
Development/
implementation
of IT/IS strategies
Articulation/application of ITenabled organization theories
and public service values
Assessment
methods
Case analyses, practice-based projects
Practice-based
projects
Practice-based IT project
analyses, self-reflection essays
Learning
objectives
Knowledge of public
sector innovation
Development/
implementation
of information
and/or technology policies
Articulation/application
of relevant social theories,
worldviews, and public values
Assessment
methods
Case analyses,
large-scope servicelearning projects
Service-learning
projects
IT policy analyses, self-refection
essays, program study portfolios
affairs education and (2) reexamining MPA
curricula to meet the challenges facing public
managers today.
and reinforcement of such knowledge in both
educational and practical settings will eventually
affect students’ beliefs and behavior systems.
Second, because MPA programs are required to
“engage in ongoing assessment of student learn
ing” (NASPAA, Commission on Peer Review
and Accreditation, 2014, p. 29), our holistic IT
competence framework provides guidance for
designing learning objectives and assessment
tools to equip public managers with IT com
petence (e.g., see Table 3).
The proposed IT competence model also helps
address the gap in tacit knowledge and
computing aptitude. Most MPA curricula have
focused on developing explicit IT knowledge
and computer skills and have tended to neglect
developing tacit IT knowledge and aptitude as
well as IT values and attitudes. Our proposed
model is important for MPA curriculum design
and related career training because it points to
neglected areas.
Third, the proposed model can be integrated
into an existing MPA curricula in various ways.
Individual MPA programs can use the proposed
model to evaluate their needs for IT competence
training and choose the relevant emphasis for
their respective student populations. The pro
posed emphasizes the importance of IT know
ledge as well as the value of differentiating
various performance levels in designing IT
curricula for public managers and public IT
managers. Public service values such as equity,
transparency, and accountability, as well as con
cerns about privacy, security, and ethics, should
be integral to any IT curriculum. It is critical
that MPA curricula emphasize the development
of IT competence attributes, such as values and
attitudes. There are ample examples of welltrained public managers producing devastating
results for communities and for society when
they are motivated by distorted values and
beliefs (Adams & Balfour, 2009; Keeley, 1983).
Because values in the practice of public
administration have real consequences for
individuals and communities, MPA programs
should not neglect IT-related ethics, values,
and attitudes for future public managers.
A graduate IT curriculum may consider includ
ing modules that systematically introduce IT
ethics for individuals and businesses, public
service values in relation to IT, and implications
of IT for society. Although such a curriculum
may not be sufficient to fundamentally establish
or transform people’s worldview, values, or
attributes, it can at least improve students’
knowledge and awareness of professional ethics,
values, and responsibilities. Constant practice
206
If tacit knowledge is equally important to
explicit knowledge, as the model suggests,
MPA curricula need to systematically plan for
students’ direct engagement in practical IT
projects for both experience and cognition. It is
important for students to acquire and practice
their knowledge and skills through mechanisms
such as real case scenarios, community-based
projects, service-learning programs, and so on.
Perhaps even more critical in curriculum design
is building students’ IT aptitudes—their capa
city to obtain additional abilities in their future
careers. This requires that MPA curricula help
students lay a solid foundation of IT knowledge
as well as develop their learning capabilities for
career-long benefits. For exam
ple, computer
programming knowledge and skills may not be
relevant to a non-IT public manager’s job;
however, public managers, if equipped with such
knowledge and skill, will be able to better
understand computer applications and more
easily adapt to IT innovations. In addition,
knowledge and training from other courses in
MPA curricula can enhance IT aptitude. For
example, research skills from research methods
classes will enable students to search for
knowledge of and solutions to IT problems.
MPA programs should design specific curri
culum components (such as research projects,
comprehensive exams, service learning projects,
etc.) to encourage students to synthesize and
integrate their knowledge and skills across
different courses. Such components will en
hance students’ experiences through learning
by doing, which will benefit their future careers,
as they will be able to learn continuously in
their jobs.
Moreover, the proposed IT competence model
can guide MPA programs’ choice of what to
emphasize, depending on each program’s stu
dent population and target audience. If an
MPA program primarily serves students pur
suing general public management positions,
Table 1’s emphasis for public managers would
be more applicable. A more specialized course
or module could be developed for students
pursuing careers in public IT management
(see Table 2).
The fourth implication of the proposed IT
competence model for MPA curricula is the
most far-reaching. For most MPA programs
without an IT concentration or specialization,
a core required course laying the foundation for
IT competence for general public managers
would be productive. The proposed model can
guide the development and implementation of
such a course. More specifically, this course
should articulate public service values and
ethics for public managers with regard to
information management and deployment of
IT. Such articulation should be part of the
evaluation framework for making IT decisions
throughout the entire course. A discussion about
the publicness of public management informa
tion systems would be a requirement. Such
articulation and discussions could propel pub
lic managers to champion IT-enabled innovation
to improve public service. In addition, the course
should teach ethical principles such as pro
tection of privacy and equity, both of which
are likely to guide the development and imple
mentation of government IT projects.
In this course, the technical skills should cover
all three performance foci. At the individual
level of performance, the course should teach
basic computer, network, and applications skills.
Students should have opportunities to apply
these skills in their course-related assignments
and projects. At the organizational level, the
course should introduce strategic considerations
of the use of information and communication
technologies. At the same time, the question of
governance and standards should be part of the
discussion. A standard management informa
tion system (MIS) textbook for business school
students can cover these skill areas at both
individual and organizational levels. At the
professional level, skills to be taught involve
articulating public service values and developing
policies/standards for managing IT in govern
ment. Such policies and standards could be
for online privacy, cybersecurity, online trans
parency, and e-participation.
In addition, this course should build tacit
knowledge in addition to explicit knowledge.
Explicit IT knowledge concerns both current
and emerging technologies as well as metho
dologies for information system development.
A standard MIS text can cover explicit know
ledge at the individual and organizational levels.
An e-government textbook should supplement
the explicit knowledge, focusing on the use of
IT for public service and IT leadership in the
public sector. The use of public sector cases and
the inclusion of best practices and experiences
of government technology are a formal way of
introducing some tacit knowledge. In addition,
engaging students with real projects in the field
as part of service learning and pairing them
with mentors are ways to create and share tacit
knowledge. Moreover, given the rapid develop
ment of information technologies, the course
focus should be on building the aptitude for
lifelong learning of IT knowledge and skills.
This course should support the integration of
IT competence into other core courses to
achieve universal competence. One of the crit
ical pieces of knowledge for managing 21st
cen
tury public service organizations is to
understand the implications of emerging tech
nologies and the possible ways of leverag
ing these technologies. For instance, a public
finance and budgeting course can highlight
the role of information and communication
technologies for online financial transparency.
An organizational theory core course should
dis
cuss the implications of communication
technologies for decision making and organi
zational structure.
For MPA programs with an IT specialization or
concentration, the IT curriculum should be
composed of several courses, both required and
elective. There should also be a course that
introduces various aspects of an IT competence
model for all MPA students. For those students
who choose an IT concentration, there should
be more in-depth coverage of technical know
ledge and skills. Such coverage should go beyond
the individual level to the organizational and
professional levels. The specifics, however, will
be mostly driven by the strengths and emphases
of any one MPA program (these specifics are
beyond the scope of this research).
One strategy for enabling MPA programs to
offer an IT concentration with the requisite
technical knowledge and scope is to partner
with other departments, schools, and colleges.
The top-ranked universities in information and
technology management, according to U.S. News
and World Report, all partner with other units
(e.g., the Information School, University Tech
nology Research Center, College of Business,
and Department of Geography). The proposed
IT competence model is more concerned with
whether students have the requisite knowledge,
skills, and attributes on all three performance
levels rather than with what unit provides the
training. The home unit of MPA, however, is in
a critical position to put all technical knowledge
and skills in the public context, articulating
public values and advancing public admini
stration professional ethics.
CONCLUSION
This research proposes a definition and con
ceptual model of IT competence for public
managers. Our definition and model are based
on an extensive review of the literature, both
in the domains of public manager competence
and IT-specific knowledge, skills, values, and
ethics. Our resulting three-dimensional IT com
petence model contains IT knowledge, skills,
and personal attributes of different performance levels for public managers with various
service duties.
In addition to the implications for MPA
programs detailed above, the proposed model
208
possesses several potentially useful attributes
for management. First, it allows identification
of the domain of public service duties in IT
competence, namely duty-universal and dutyspecific IT competence. For example, based on
the model, we can easily construct IT com
petencies for public financial managers, police
chiefs, human service officials, and so on that
are either unique or common across various
functions. Second, the model helps minimize
potential misunderstandings likely to arise
when people do not clarify the different
performance foci in relation to IT competence.
For example, a highly competent manager at
the individual level (e.g., excellent in using a
computer for his/her job) may not be competent
at the organizational level (e.g., successful in
leading IT-enabled organizational change).
Therefore, those of us in the field should not
only customize our learning or training pro
grams to address specific needs but also design
valid and reliable performance appraisal systems
for effective public service. Finally, the model
indicates that the path to IT competence
requires a broad and integrated approach.
Traditionally, public sector management, espe
cially in human resources, emphasizes the in
dividual level of competence in terms of hiring,
training, evaluating, and retaining; but this has
been insufficient in developing more systematic,
large-scale, outcome-oriented IT-enabled change
strategies. Concentrating efforts at the indiv
idual level and neglecting the organizational
and professional ones fails to recognize the inter
relationship, interaction, and interdependence
among the three levels.
We have attempted to create a construct with
high content validity, drawing on both theor
etical and empirical literature as well as expert
comments. Yet, further empirical investigation
of the model’s validity will require more
extensive data collection in the field and data
analysis. Further refinement of this theoretical
construct and the operationalization of IT
competence for public managers are necessary.
Public manager IT competence is a complex
construct. We hope our model will lead to a
better understanding of IT in public sector
organizations as well as the development of
appropriate curricula for public administration
educational and training programs.
Bretschneider, S. (1990). Management information
sys
tems in public and private organizations: An
empirical test. Public Administration Review, 50(5),
536–545.
Bowman, J. S., West, J. P., & Beck, M.A. (2014).
Achieving competencies in public service: The profes
sional edge. New York, NY: Routledge.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We would like to thank Mark Mosher and
Thomas McWeeney, our practitioner reviewers, who contributed valuable insights to this
research article.
Boynton, A. C., Zmud, R. W., & Jacobs, G. C. (1994).
The influence of IT management practice on IT
use in large organizations. MIS Quarterly, 18(3),
299–318.
and Society, 30(4), 421–443.
Bussen, W., & Myers, M. D. (1997). Executive infor
mation system failure: A New Zealand case study.
Journal of Information Technology, 12(2), 145–153.
REFERENCES
Adams, G. B., & Balfour, D. L. (2009). Unmasking administrative evil (3rd ed.). Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
Aldridge, R., & Stoker, G. (2002). Advancing a new
public service ethos. London: New Local Government Network.
Armstrong, C. P., & Sambamurthy, V. (1996). Creat
ing business value through information technology:
The effects of chief information officer and top
management team characteristics. In Proceedings
of the 17th International Conference on Information
Systems, Cleveland, Ohio (pp. 195–208). Retrieved
from http://aisel.aisnet.org/icis1996/14.
Bassellier, G., & Benbasat, I. (2004). Business com
petence of information technology professionals:
Conceptual development and influence on IT-busi
ness partnerships. MIS Quarterly, 28(4), 673–694.
Bassellier, G., Reich, B. H., & Benbasat, I. (2001).
Information technology competence of business
managers: A definition and research model. Journal
of Management Information Systems, 17(4), 159–182.
Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T., & Grimes, J. M. (2010).
Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency:
E-government and social media as openness and
anti-corruption tools for societies. Government
Information Quarterly, 27(3), 264–271.
Chan, Y. E., & Reich, B. H. (1999). Current practices
to raise information technology competence in business
managers. Burnaby, BC: Simon Fraser University.
CIO Council. (2012). 2012 Clinger-Cohen core com
petencies and learning objectives. Washington, DC:
CIO Council.
Collins, T. (with Bicknell, D.) (1997). Crash: Learning
from the world’s worst computer disasters. New York,
NY: Simon and Schuster.
Cresswell, A. M., Burke, G. B., & Pardo, T. A. (2006).
Advancing return on investment analysis for govern
ment IT: A public value framework. Albany, NY:
Center for Technology in Government.
Davis, R. (1999). The web of politics: The Internet’s
impact on the American political system. New York,
NY: Oxford University Press.
Dawes, S. (2004). Training the IT-savvy public mana
gers. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 10(1), 5–18.
Dawes, S. (2008, Spring). What makes a successful CIO?
Intergovernmental Solutions Newsletter, (21), 9–10.
Retrieved from http://anthonydwilliams.com/wpcontent/uploads/cio-article-in-gsa-spring-2008.pdf.
Dawes, S. (2010). Stewardship and usefulness: Policy
principles for information-based transparency. Gov
ernment Information Quarterly, 27(4), 377–383.
Dervin, B. (1994). Information democracy: An examination of underlying assumptions. Journal of the
American Society for Information Science, 45(6),
369–385.
Dunnette, M. D. (1976). Aptitude abilities and skills.
In M.D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and
organizational psychology. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
Fountain, J. E. (2001). Building the virtual state: Infor
mation technology and institutional change. Washing
ton, DC: Brookings Institution.
Garson, G. D. (2006). Public information technology and
e-governance: Managing the virtual state. Sudbury,
MA: Jones and Bartlett.
General Services Administration (GSA). (2008). The
role of the government chief information officer
[Special issue]. Intergovernmental Solutions Newsletter,
(21). Retrieved from http://anthonydwilliams.com/
wp-content/uploads/cio-article-in-gsa-spring-2008.pdf.
Goldfinch, S. (2007). Pessimism, computer failure, and
information systems development in the public sec
tor. Public Administration Review, 67(5), 917–929.
Heeks, R. (2002). Failure, success and improvisation of
information system projects in developing countries
(Development Informatics Working Paper Series
No. 11/2002). Manchester, United Kingdom: Insti
tute for Development Policy and Management,
University of Manchester.
Heeks, R. (2004). eGovernment as a Carrier of Context
(iGovernment Working Paper Series, No. 15).
Manchester, United Kingdom: Institute for Devel
op
ment Policy and Management, University
of Manchester.
Jorgensen, T. B., & Bozeman, B. (2007). Public values:
An inventory. Administration and Society, 39(3),
354–381.
Keeley, M. (1983). Values in organizational theory and
management. Academy of Management Review, 8(3),
376–386.
Kernaghan, K. (2014). Digital dilemmas: Values, ethics
and information technology. Canadian Public Admin
istration, 57(2), 295–317.
Kiel, L. D. (1986). Information systems education in
masters programs in public affairs and administra
tion. Public Administration Review, 46(Special issue),
590–594.
Klemp, G. O. (1979). Identifying, measuring, and
inte
grating competence. In P. S. Pottinger & J.
Goldsmith (Eds.), New directions for experiential learn
ing: Defining and measuring competence (pp. 41–52).
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
recommendations for public management education
in computing: Final report of the National Asso
ciation of Schools of Public Affairs and Admini
stration, Ad Hoc Committee on Computers in
Public Management Education. Public Administra
tion Review, 46(Special issue), 595–602.
Kraemer, K. L., Danziger, J. N., Dunkle, D. E., &
King, J. L. (1993).The usefulness of computer-based
information to public managers. MIS Quarterly,
17(2), 129–148.
Heeks, R., & Bhatnagar, S. (1999). Understanding success
and failure in information age reform. In R. Heeks
(Ed.), Reinventing government in the information age:
International practice in IT-enabled public sector reform
(pp. 49–74). London, United Kingdom: Routledge.
in computing: An update. Public Administration
Review, 49(5), 447–453.
Henderson, S. C., & Snyder, C. A. (1999). Personal
information privacy: Implications for MIS mana
gers. Information and Management, 36(4), 213–220.
Lan, Z., & Cayer, N. J. (1994). The challenges of
teaching information technology use and manage
ment in a time of information revolution. American
Review of Public Administration, 24(2), 207–222.
Hindman, M. (2008). The myth of digital democracy.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Hondeghem, A., & Vandermeulen, F. (2000). Com
petence management in the Flemish and Dutch
civil service. International Journal of Public Sector
Management, 13(4), 342–353.
210
Layne, K., & Lee, J. (2001). Developing fully functional
e-government: A four stage model. Government
Information Quarterly, 18(2), 122–136.
Macaulay, M., & Lawton, A. (2006). From virtue to
competence: Changing the principles of public ser
vice. Public Administration Review, 66(5), 702–710.
McClelland, D. C. (1973). Testing for competence
rather than for “intelligence.” American Psychologist,
28(1), 1–14.
Pierce, M. A., & Henry, J. W. (1996). Computer
ethics: The role of personal, informal, and formal
codes. Journal of Business Ethics, 15(4), 425–437.
Mergel, I. (2012). The public manager 2.0: Preparing
the social media generation for a networked work
place. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 18(3),
467–492.
Press, G. (2015, February 23). The CIO dilemma: What
new surveys say about IT’s declining strategic role.
Forbes/Tech. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/
sites/gilpress/2015/02/23/the-cio-dilemma-whatnew-surveys-say-about-its-declining-strategic-role.
Administration (NASPAA). (1986). Curriculum
recommendations for public management educa
tion in computing: The final report of the NASPAA
Ad Hoc Committee on Computers in Public Man
agement Education. Public Administration Review,
46(6), 595–602.
Review and Accreditation (2008). General informat
ion and standards for professional master’s degree programs. Retrieved from https://naspaaaccreditation.
National Association of Schools of Public Affairs
and Administration (NASPAA), Commission on
Peer Review and Accreditation. (2009). NASPAA
standards 2009. Retrieved from https://naspaaaccreditation.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/accreditation-standards.pdf.
Review and Accreditation. (2014). Self study
instructions. Retrieved from https://naspaaa-accreditation.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/ssi-instructions2014-update-final.pdf.
Norris, D. F., & Moon, M. J. (2005). Advancing
e-government at the grassroots: Tortoise or hare?
Osborne, D., & Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing government: How the entrepreneurial spirit is transforming
the public sector. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Ottensmeyer, E. J., & Heroux, M. A. (1991). Ethics,
public policy, and managing advanced technologies:
The case of electronic surveillance. Journal of Busi
ness Ethics, 10(7), 519–526.
Park, H. M., & Park, H. (2006). Diffusing information technology education in Korean undergraduate
public affairs and administration programs: Driving
forces and challenging issues. Journal of Public
Public CIO. (2009, February 18). New York City’s
accountability tools pay off in tracking service
to citizens. Digital Communities. Retrieved from
http://www.digitalcommunities.com/articles/NewYork-Citys-Accountability-Tools-Pay.html.
Roman, A. V. (2013). Framing the questions of
e-government ethics: An organizational perspective.
American Review of Public Administration, 45(2),
216–236.
Sambamurthy, V., & Zmud, R. W. (1994). IT
management competence assessment: A tool for creating
business value through IT. Morristown, NJ: Financial
Executives Research Foundation.
Sambamurthy, V., & Zmud, R. W. (1997). At the
heart of success: Organizationwide management
competencies. In. C. Sauer & P. W. Yetton (Eds.),
Steps to the future: Fresh thinking on the management
of IT-based organizational transformation (pp. 143–
163). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Schambach, T. P. (1994). Maintaining professional
competence: An evaluation of factors affecting
professional obsolescence of information technology
professional. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University of South Florida, Tampa.
Seneviratne, S. J. (1999). Information technology
and organizational change in the public sector.
In G. Garson (Ed.), Information technology and
computer applications in public administration: Issues
and trends (pp. 41–61). Hershey, PA: Information
Science Reference.
Smith, J. B. (1996). Becoming the new technology
executive. CIO Canada, 41(6), 39–46.
U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO). (1994).
Executive guide: Improving mission performance through
strategic information management technology (GAO/
AIMD-94-115). Washington, DC: Govern
ment
Printing Office.
U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO). (2004a).
Human capital: Building the information technology
workforce to achieve results (GAO-01-1007T). Wash
ington, DC: Government Printing Office.
U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO). (2004b).
Information technology: Training can be enhanced
by greater use of leading practices (GAO-04-791).
Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
Virtanen, T. (2000). Changing competences of public
managers: Tensions in commitment. International
Journal of Public Sector Management, 13(4), 333–341.
West, D. (2004). E-government and the transformation
of service delivery and citizen attitudes. Public Administration Review, 64(1), 15–27.
Woodruffe, C. (1993). What is meant by a competency?
Leadership and Organizational Development Journal,
14(1), 29–35.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
is an associate professor of public
administration at California State University,
San Bernardino. Her research and teaching
interests are digital governance, public manage
ment information systems, cybersecurity, and
government-business relations.
Anna Ya Ni
Yu-Che Chen is an associate professor of digital
governance in the School of Public Admin
istration at University of Nebraska at Omaha.
His research and teaching interests are digital
governance, e-government, cross-boundary colla
boration, smart cities, open data, and big data.
212
The Information Technology Gap
in Public Administration:
What We Can Learn From the
Certified Public Manager and
Senior Executive Service Programs
Alan R. Shark
Public Technology Institute
Rutgers University School of Public Affairs and Administration
ABSTRACT
The use of information technology (IT) has grown dramatically throughout every public agency
regardless of size and scope. As a result, all public managers (technical and nontechnical) must be
better informed and prepared to make critical decisions about IT, especially since IT is no longer
the exclusive domain of technology managers. Master of Public Administration programs have
struggled to prepare students for these new requirements of the 21st century workforce. This article
examines this growing phenomenon by exploring two existing programs designed for practitioners
who serve in senior public manager positions: the Certified Public Manager (CPM) program and
the federal Senior Executive Service (SES). This article endeavors to provide a pedagogical pathway
for schools of public administration and public affairs seeking to adopt IT competencies for a
broader nontechnical audience.
KEYWORDS
Public administration technology leadership, e-government in public administration, professional development
in public administration
At the state and local levels, information
technology (IT) has generally been viewed as a
centralized function, and IT departments have
often been referred to as management
information systems (MIS) departments. At
the federal level, technology governance systems
have been inconsistent and uncoordinated.
Responding to growing IT complexities in the
federal sector, Congress passed the ClingerCohen Act (CCA) of 1996, formerly the
Information Technology Management Reform
Act of 1996. This watershed legislation was
designed to improve how the federal
JPAE 22 (2), 213–230
government acquires, uses, and disposes of
information technology. While the CCA
addressed the need for greater efficiencies and
improved management practices, it did not
address specific staff competencies and/or
training needs. The act did, however, require
that each federal agency establish clear
accountability for IT management activities by
appointing a chief information officer (CIO)
with the requisite visibility and management
responsibilities to carry out the law’s specific
provisions. The act stipulated various
responsibilities for these CIOs, including
A. R. Shark
developing strategies and specific plans for
hiring, training, and professional development
of the IT workforce. In 1997, the first iteration
of the Clinger-Cohen Core Competencies creat
ed a baseline of requirements for information
resources management. In 1999 and again in
2013, learning objectives were added to identify
the desired level of mastery within academic or
experiential environments.
As information management challenges increas
ed, Congress passed the E-Government Act of
2002. The legislation’s stated purpose was to
improve management and promotion of elec
tronic government services and processes by
establishing a federal chief information officer
within the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). It also called for using Internet-based
IT to improve the delivery of government
services, including citizen access to government
information. According to the E-Government
Act, the OMB’s CIO is supposed to be the goto person for IT leadership and support, but
this centralized approach has shifted as the IT
environment has changed. IT decisions are
now made throughout each enterprise by many
public managers who have no formal IT training.
A federal CIO consortium formed not long after
passage of the CCA, and member institutions
(colleges and universities) began providing CIO
certifications. The certification program was
initially coordinated through the General
Services Administration and the federal CIO
Council; the first graduating class was in 2000
(Federal CIO University, 2000, 2007). Today,
the original colleges and universities, along
with a few newcomers, continue to offer CIO
certification, though the consortium is no
longer active.
Over time, the federal CIO Council has esta
blished CIO core competencies, and in 2013 it
updated its Clinger-Cohen Core Competencies
and Learning Objectives document, the found
ation for IT curriculum development as well as
the development and consistent implementation
of federal IT workforce policy initiatives (Jack
son, 2013). The learning objectives identify key
concepts and capabilities to be taught and can
214
be used as professional development guidelines
for both individuals and organizations.
Periodically, the federal government reviews
these core competencies to assess what critical
knowledge areas are affecting information
resources management. Updates reflect new
statutory and regulatory requirements as well
as areas requiring greater emphasis due to new
policies and strategies (e.g., the recently releas
ed presidential strategy on digital government
[White House, 2015a]), continuous changes
in technology, and other evolving agency
IT/cybersecurity mission requirements.
The latest version added new competency areas
such as IT governance, IT program management,
leadership, vendor management, cybersecurity,
information assurance strategies and plans,
social media, cloud computing, open govern
ment, information collection, and information
accessibility. Despite these additions, however,
there is little evidence that schools of public
affairs and administration have adopted these
core competencies into their curricula.
Today, hundreds of technology executives hold
the title of CIO in the federal government and
many thousands in state and local government.
Moreover, every federal agency has a top CIO,
and each department has its own CIO. Each
state has a state CIO (or equivalent) along with
a CIO for every department. According to the
National Association of State Chief Information
Officers (NASCIO) (2015), finding qualified
technology staff is becoming an increasing
priority. Recent state CIO hires reveal that
public managers seem to be favoring leadership
skills, high-level project management, and
economic development and system integration
skills for these positions.
For practicing technology managers and system
engineers, there are numerous certification pro
grams. These include federal CIO certification
as well as local government certification offered
through colleges and universities (e.g., Carnegie
Mellon University, n.d.; George Mason Uni
versity, n.d.; Rogin, 2006). At least three
higher-education institutions offer a certified
The IT Gap in Public Administration
CIO program for local and state government
technology managers and have graduated more
than 7,500 students since 2008 (Shark, 2015).
Many government institutes also offer techno
logy management certificate programs.
Information technology has expanded into many
subfields. Examples include geographic infor
mation systems (GIS), big data and open data,
cybersecurity, database management, civic and
social media, citizen engagement and e-govern
ment. And there is no shortage of degree-based
programs aimed at beginning or furthering car
eers in IT management, focused on topics such
as computer systems design, system integration,
computer information technology, systems engi
neering, and information technology systems.
Well before the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996,
the Network of Schools of Public Policy, Affairs,
and Administration (NASPAA) issued a report
on computers in public management education
(Kraemer et al., 1986) in which it recommended
that schools seriously consider adding com
puting applications and management either
within existing curricula or as course electives.
NASPAA reinforced this plea for IT education
four years later, citing an even greater need to
address the topic (Kraemer & Northrop, 1989).
In a study of 106 master’s-level courses offered
by schools of public affairs and administration,
Kiel (1986) showed that only 15 percent of
these programs required an MIS or management com
puter applications course. In the
same study, attitudinal data revealed that many
public administration faculty do not believe
that information systems coursework should be
required of master’s students. There has long
been a lack of consensus about adding such
course content despite the strong arguments for
doing so. In the Journal of Public Affairs Edu
cation, Rocheleau (1998) made the case for
what and how information technology could
and should be offered within Master of Public
Administration (MPA) programs. He argued
that MPA students, as generalists, should be
continually engaged with IT and with using
the Internet and other information commun
ication technologies as strategic tools essential
for im
proving citizen access and government productivity.
Given the mounting calls for adding IT to the
MPA curriculum, NASPAA began offering
options for greater IT inclusion as part of the
accreditation process. In 1998, two years after
passage of the Clinger-Cohen Act, Brown and
Brudney (1998) studied 106 MPA programs to
determine how NASPAA’s goals and recom
mendations were working. They found that
MPA programs did not fare well when it came
to student exposure to key CCA criteria. In
light of current knowledge and experience, the
study’s conclusions are prescient and no less
true today:
The information system failures witnes
sed throughout the public sector are not
grounded in technical limitations but
rather in attendant managerial issues—
domains in which schools of public
administration could and should make a
difference. Schools of public administra
tion must broaden their course offerings
to educate public managers regarding the
bridge between technical capabilities and
operational, mission-driven needs. In no
small part, failures in IT have occurred
because public managers and staff have
not been actively involved in shaping the
direction of IT efforts according to org
anizational and operational imperatives.
(Brown & Brudney, 1998)
Regardless of early success or failure, NASPAA’s
initiative was short-lived. With adoption of the
2009 NASPAA standards and a move to
competency-based assessment, the NASPAA
Commission on Peer Review and Accreditation
(COPRA) no longer prescribes guidelines or
criteria for IT coverage in the public admin
istration curriculum, thus leaving it up to each
school to decide its program offerings. The
prior COPRA policy had originally called for
“information management, technology appli
cations, and policy”:
4.21 Common Curriculum Components.
The common curriculum components shall
enhance the student’s values, knowledge,
and skills to act ethically and effectively:
A. R. Shark
In the Management of Public Service
Organizations, the components of which
include: human resources, budgeting and
financial processes, information manage
ment, technology applications, and policy.
(NASPAA, Commission on Peer Review
and Accreditation, 2008, p. 9)
ed as they should be to deal with contemporary
workplace and workforce realities. What can be
done to improve the skills of current and future
public administrators? How can core compe
tencies such as those outlined in the ClingerCohen Act be assimilated into real-world,
competency-based course content?
COPRA needed to clarify these requirement
because NASPAA schools faced problems meet
ing it:
There are hundreds of IT degree and certificate
programs for those new to the field as well as
for those seeking continuing education. While
these programs are certainly open to general
practitioners, they usually do not cater to
current nontechnical public administrators.
However, two nationally recognized programs
do focus on the managerial and leadership
needs of practitioners. The most recognized for
public administration practitioners are the
Certified Public Manager (CPM) program and
the federal Senior Executive Service (SES). The
CPM program offers certification while the
SES enables the federal government to attract
executive talent that operates between regular
civil service employees and appointees. Each
program aims to recognize a high level of
proven professional development and in some
instances includes IT education. The underly
ing assumption of this article is that public
administration education has much to learn
from those working in public service man
agement. The related questions are, when and
how do the CPM and SES programs incorporate
technology management? Or if they do not,
then why not?
CLARIFICATIONS
1. Standard 4.21 Information Management
and Technology
a. Over the past few cohorts, COPRA
has seen programs struggling with Stand
ard 4.21 IT. The Commission is looking
for evidence that all students are exposed
to information management, technology
applications, and policy in the core
curriculum. The evidence should include
examples of how students are exposed to
issues such as privacy, security, accessi
bility of technologies, and policies regarding the collection, use, and dissemination
of information, or other information man
agement and policy topics related to the
program’s unique mission. (NASPAA,
Commission on Peer Review and Accred
itation, 2013, p. 9)
COPRA’s change in certification requirements
has not in any way discouraged NASPAA schools
of public affairs and administration from in
cluding IT subject matter. Indeed, NASPAA
schools continue to provide IT-related courses
and specializations regardless of accreditation
requirements. According to U.S. News and
World Report (n.d.) rankings, NASPAA schools
make up the entirety of the top 10 graduate
programs in information technology.
THE CERTIFIED PUBLIC MANAGER PROGRAM
AND FEDERAL SENIOR EXECUTIVE SERVICE
Given the high failure rate of IT projects and
the serious cyber breaches affecting both highly
confidential systems and critical infrastructure,
many wonder if public managers are as prepar
216
THE CERTIFIED PUBLIC MANAGER PROGRAM
In 2015, the National Certified Public Mana
ger Consortium listed 39 CPM programs,
though some have become inactive. Formed in
1979, the National Certified Public Manager
Consortium establishes and preserves standards
for the CPM designation. The consortium
promotes CPM programs by providing and
monitoring accreditation standards, facilitating
program development, encouraging innovation,
and developing linkages between programs and
organizations with similar concerns. The con
sortium grants accreditation for five years, as
long as the grantee program remains both
active and in compliance.
To date, only two studies have reviewed aspects
of the CPM program. In a cross-state analysis,
Conant (1995) provides an excellent overview,
including student data and program history.
The study finds that the CPM program may
hold some important advantages over the MPA
program; namely, lower cost and shorter time
commitment but also a more practical treat
ment of relevant issues. Fairholm, Moe,
Houghtby-Haddon, and Feldman (2004/2005)
look specifically at the District of Columbia’s
CPM program and address the growing need
for dealing with contemporary issues in public
management, including strategic information
management. In 2005, the 13-month program
included a course in strategic information
management designed to expose students to
competitive, economic, and political factors
that influence technology innovation, giving
particular attention to managing technology in
public organizations. This study is the first to
even mention how this subject is handled
within an active CPM program.
The National Certified Public Manager Con
sortium sets the basic core competencies
required for accreditation. Each accredited
institution develops its own courses and on
average provides 300 contact hours. There are
currently seven required core competencies:
1.Personal and organizational integrity.
2.Managing work.
3.Leading people.
4.Developing self.
5.Systemic integration.
6.Public service focus.
7.Change leadership.
Participating institutions must embrace each of
these core competencies and are free to add
additional ones. A high-level review of current
CPM programs reveals that many programs
exceed the required seven competencies. At
present the consortium does not include IT
management in its required core competencies.
With full cooperation from the staff and board
of the consortium, the present study sent a survey
to 36 active CPM programs in June 2015 ask
ing about program IT content and did a
written follow-up in July. Seventeen programs
responded, a 47% response rate. To help fill
in the gaps, the study thoroughly reviewed each
of the nonresponding program websites for
additional content and insight.
Seven respondents (17% of existing CPM pro
grams) offer a separate IT module or course.
Three focus on a particular aspect of IT by in
fusing content into the existing curriculum.
Ten CPM programs do not formally include
technology management. Based on survey data
and the website analysis, 28 programs (78%)
have no formal means of introducing the sub
ject or content. Of those programs responding
“no” to whether or not they offer formal
information technology/management courses
or content, one indicated it planned on doing
so and six said they were uncertain.
One respondent stated that an “information
technology” course had been offered for several
years but was discontinued when the curriculum
no longer seemed helpful or relevant. Four
respondents reported programs distinct from
the CPM program offered by their respective
state agencies. One respondent offers a separate
program designed to equip local government
staff and officials with both an awareness of and
tools to utilize available digital solutions, and
the same respondent reported that though its
program had been inactive for a while, the plan
was to reactivate it. Still another responding
CPM program said it planned to expand
treatment of communications materials to
include social media. Table 1 summarizes the
time each program dedicates to technology
management content.
CPM programs that do not offer a separate IT
module or course mentioned other ways of
dealing with technology management issues.
For example, two programs indicated that they
introduce technology within different modules
where appropriate, analyze case studies that
include technology-related issues, and/or focus
on IT/technology management in student cap
stone projects.
A. R. Shark
The following CPM programs offer either a
separate IT course or include an IT content
focus. Program descriptions are taken from
actual course materials, and the programs are
listed in descending order of the amount of
IT content offered; placement does not imply
any preference or ranking.
take an online test as often as needed until they
pass this requirement.
Texas CPM Program (Administered by Texas
State University, William P. Hobby Center
for Public Service). Information Technology
•Learn about the range of technology
available for management of day-to-day
operations (i.e., use of electronic spread
sheets, presentations, databases, websites,
social media, etc.).
is one of seven core courses that make up the
Texas State University’s CPM program. This
course is usually offered over 3 full days and
focuses on information systems and ethical
decision making. This track covers the fol
lowing IT tools, systems, and ethical issues:
•Accessing and using federal, state,
and local databases.
•Using the Internet for research
and data analysis.
•Developing computer ethics and
computer security programs.
•Applying emerging technologies to
the public sector.
•Understanding the Internet and the
World Wide Web.
•Exploring public administration
data sites.
New Jersey CPM Program–Civil Service
Com
mis
sion Certified Public Manager
Program (Administered by Rutgers Univer
sity–Newark School of Public Affairs and
Administration). Managing Technology is a
2-day course. It provides an overview of the
technology and associat
ed challenges that
managers need to understand to operate in an
increasingly technologically driven work en
vironment. The class consists of nine modules,
each beginning with a video to set the stage
for further activities and discussion. The
course does not require readings in advance,
instead providing students with an overview
of each topic and information for future
reference. Students take a short quiz at the
end of the technology management module to
test for basic com
pe
tency. Students are
expected to have competence in Microsoft
Office prior to taking this course; they may
218
The course objectives are as follows:
•Develop an understanding of the role
technology plays in organizations and the
challenges involved in managing it.
•Build awareness of the skills needed to
manage information and information technology and systems for the effective flow of
information within public organizations.
•Become familiar with e-governance, focus
ed on current best practices.
•Develop an understanding of the possibil
ities and challenges of technology applica
tions within public organizations.
The course addresses the following compe
tencies: management information systems and
managing work.
The nine course modules are as follows:
Special “START” Module. This segment sets
the stage for the entire class and includes
two discussion exercises.
Technology Leadership: Who Decides? This
segment discusses governance issues, pat
terns, and emerging trends, including roles
of the city manager, assistant city manager,
and head of technology.
This segment
focuses on defining innovation and exam
ining why it is important and how it can
best be achieved.
Technology and Innovation.
Mastering the Cloud and Managed Services.
This segment explores the latest develop
ments regarding cloud services and models,
policies, and procedures. The segment also
explores the rationale behind managed
services and discusses the pros and cons.
TABLE 1.
CPM Programs That Incorporate Technology Management
Texas CPM Program
3 full days
New Jersey CPM Program
2 full days
New Mexico CPM Program
3, 6, or 9 hours (depending on level)
Alabama CPM Program
Half day (Level II)
Wisconsin CPM Program
4 hoursa
Florida CPM Program
4 hoursa
Nebraska CPM Program
4 hoursa
Estimates based on available information
a
The Role of Geographic Information Systems
(GIS) for Government Agencies. This show-
and-tell session reviews the latest in mapping
geography and data, preparing public
managers for what GIS can do, what to ask
for, what to expect, and how to best manage
GIS data.
This
segment explores how data and data analy
tics can play into making better and
more informed decisions. Group mini-case
studies play a central role in this session.
Understanding Data, Big and Small.
Cybersecurity Awareness. This segment
stresses that cybersecurity is not just for
sec
urity professionals. It is everyone’s
responsibility, and public managers can
take many steps and actions to reduce the
risk of internal and external threats.
The Human Factor in Technology, Training, and Project Management. This segment
reminds students that the human element
is critical in discussions of tech
no
logy.
How can government agencies retain and
attract new talent? How can technology
staff best be evaluated? What is the return
on investment (ROI) for project manage
ment professional training?
Current and Future Tech Trends That Will
Transform Local and State Government. This
segment explores protecting public trust in
light of the latest technologies, including
“bring your own device” (BYOD), shared
services, software as a service, telework,
apps, 3D printers, smart parking meters,
and social media.
New Mexico CPM Program (Administered
by New Mexico State University Cooperative
Extension Service). New Mexico State Univer
sity incorporates IT throughout its 16 certifi
cation programs, including the CPM program.
Information technology is one of the CPM
program’s seven core tracks, with components
divided as follows: Level 1 requires three hours;
Level 2 requires six hours; and Level 3 provides
additional IT classes as electives.
The program offers the following IT classes:
Making the Most of the Web. Students
learn
to conduct research using the Inter
net
and to explore online search engines with
an emphasis on public administration
resources. Students then learn options for
developing web pages that can make an
organization’s information more available
to target audiences.
Technology for Effective Time Management
(Elective). Students learn software alter
natives for time management and shortcuts
designed to manage busy days, both on
and off the job.
A. R. Shark
Improving Word Processing (Elective).
Stu
dents learn to create a document and give
it a polished look by emphasizing text,
using styles, and adding bulleted lists.
They learn to revise and edit using Track
Changes and Comments and accept or
reject proposed changes. They also learn
how to add page numbers, headers, and
footers as a finishing touch to documents.
Excel Spreadsheets for Beginners (Elective).
Students create workbooks and learn how
to edit text and numbers, and to add and
delete columns and rows. They enter basic
formulas and perform simple calculations
or use cell references to automatically
update results; they create and customize
multiple worksheets; and they polish final
documents by formatting text and adding
a fill or border to a spreadsheet.
Excel Intermediate Level 1 (Elective).
Stu
dents learn to use hotkeys in Excel and
other Microsoft Office programs; they use
and look up Excel functions; they use cell
references in calculations; they find and
analyze actual tax and revenue data; and
they create and edit an Excel chart.
Access (Elective). Students learn the basics
of relational database management and
how to generate reports.
Getting the Most Out of Outlook (Elective).
Students learn to communicate more
efficiently by organizing Inboxes and
creating personalized signatures; use the
Calendar to create events, invite parti
cipants, and set reminders; and add
Contacts and create distribution lists to
individuals or groups. Students also learn
how Tasks can be used to create, assign,
and track the status of a project.
PowerPoint (Elective).
Students learn effec
tive use of the presentation slide and
basic design elements to create professional presentations.
Excel Intermediate Level II (Elective).
Stu
dents learn to use Excel functions, refer
220
ences, and charts more confidently; find
and analyze Census data; create and edit
an Excel chart; and find and use existing
Excel applications.
This class explores the
opportunities and dangers that come with
using information technology. Stu
dents
explore issues of computer security, per
sonal use of computing resources, and
confidentiality of e-mail.
Current Issues in IT.
Using Technology to Improve Organization.
Students learn how to use technology to
resolve organizational issues and how to
apply technology to improve organizational
operations. They also learn how to imple
ment technological improvements on time
and within budget, in
cluding how to
develop and use a technology plan.
Basic Computer Technology Skills (Elective).
Students learn to use the Microsoft Office
ribbon, where popular commands are
located, as well as shortcuts to assist with
daily projects. File man
agement covers
folder creation, copy and paste, and how
to customize folder view. Participants can
also learn how to connect a laptop and
projector for presentations.
Students learn what
geographic information systems are and
explore how GIS is used in the public
sector. They learn some basic terminology,
what types of information to access to
support better decision making, and sur
vey applications.
GIS for Non-GIS Users.
Alabama CPM Program (Administered by
Auburn University at Montgomery–Alabama
Training Institute). This CPM program takes
place in two segments: CPM I and CPM II.
Each segment lasts 2 days per month over a
9-month period. Information Technology is a
half-day course in the CPM II segment.
The course focuses on the use of information
technology to meet the needs of organizations
in their daily operations. Participants learn how
information systems can be designed and imple
mented to con
nect employees, store infor
mation, secure private information, and meet
org
aniza
tional goals and objectives. Parti
ci
pants are also required to use technology for
their projects.
Wisconsin CPM Program (Administered by
University of Wisconsin–Madison, Continuing
Studies). This program consists of three phases,
totaling 300 instructional hours, taught in 23
one-day, six-hour, face-to-face classes, and 2
multiple-day classes. The following lists courses
which are directly or indirectly tied to infor
mation technology:
Using Data for Better Decisions. Students
learn to use research correctly, manage the
research process, interpret research correct
ly, and use its findings.
Information Technology Issues in Pub
lic
Management. Students learn current issues
affecting information professionals and
managers, the fundamentals of network
management, ethical concerns, and rele
vant security matters in the ever-changing
world of technology.
Organizational Performance Measurement.
Students learn how to develop clear objec
tives and analyze organizational effective
ness in achieving objectives, and they learn
the most efficient ways of achieving success
at every level of management.
Using Systems Approaches in a Chaotic World.
Students learn to use the language of sys
tems, including when and how to apply
systems methods to projects and how to
monitor project progress.
Students learn to use a
variety of tools and techniques to improve
the productivity and quality of agency
services, including those necessary for col
lecting and analyzing information, man
aging groups, making data-based decisions,
and monitoring the delivery of services.
Productivity Tools.
Florida CPM Program (Administered by the
Florida State University–Florida Center for
Public Management). This program offers eight
core classes, one of which covers information
technology. The Management of Organizational
Performance course focuses on improving pro
ductivity and quality through mea
surement,
analysis, the Sterling process, communication,
information technology, and project management.
It also covers emotional intelligence.
Nebraska CPM Program (Administered by
University of Nebraska–Wakefield, School of
Public Administration). This program consists
of an orientation, 17 courses, and a major project.
It offers one formal course covering IT man
age
ment, which introduces students to the
following concepts:
•The critical importance of information as
an organic resource.
•An understanding of how information
should be managed in public organizations.
•The proper management of information
in the public sector.
•Some of the ways the information revo
lution is transforming the administrative/
public policy dimensions of government.
•The broader political, social, economic,
and ethical issues related to information
management in the delivery of public ser
vices and the enhancement of democracy.
•An understanding of some of the major
technologies that support the management
of information.
•Some of the language and some ability to
communicate effectively with information
systems professionals.
Summary of CPM Programs That Offer
Classes in Technology Management
Each of these seven CPM programs differ in
their approach and how they define information
technology management. For example, both
New Mexico and New Jersey require mastery of
basic Microsoft Office skills, but the former
program offers elective courses and the other an
online course and test.
A. R. Shark
Regarding information technology curricula, the
survey responses reveal a lack of consensus as to
what it should consist of. Program approaches
fall broadly into four categories:
1.Information technology courses geared
toward the nontechnical public manager.
2.Information technology courses focused
on applied office tools, mainly Microsoft Office (including Excel/Power Point)
and Google Docs. This includes social
media and citizen engagement.
3.Information technology topics intro
duced through existing courses.
4.Information technology courses and certi
fications aimed mostly at technology managers or those looking to enter the field.
The data provided by each of the CPM pro
grams were somewhat inconsistent, and in many
instances information was incomplete or lack
ing. Further, a comprehensive review of the 36
active CPM program websites showed that most
lacked detailed or updated program information.
This may be explained by the CPM programs
being ever-changing and labor-intensive, depen
dent on having enough interested students as
well as qualified instructors and facilitators.
Many CPM program managers mentioned the
difficulty of finding qualified IT faculty who
are up-to-date on the latest trends, policies, and
regulations and who can balance class focus so
as not to be too technical or too general.
Nevertheless, aside from such limitations and
challenges, it appears that a growing number of
CPM programs are finding ways to include
technology and technology-related topics in
one form or another, and those that do say they
are dependent on experts in the field who are
qualified to teach in an appropriate nontechnical manner.
THE FEDERAL SENIOR EXECUTIVE SERVICE
A recent study by Deloitte and the Partnership
for Public Service shows that fewer than 40%
of current federal employees believe their agen
cies are recruiting people with the right skills
(Fox, 2015).
222
The federal Senior Executive Service has been
considered the keystone of the Civil Service
Reform Act of 1978, when the service was
established to “ensure that the executive man
agement of the Government of the United
States is responsive to the needs, policies, and
goals of the Nation and otherwise is of the
highest quality.”
Unlike the CPM program, the SES is designed
for senior public administrators. Members of
the SES serve in key positions just below the
top presidential appointees and are the major
link between these appointees and the rest of
the federal workforce. They operate and oversee
nearly every government activity in approxi
mately 75 federal agencies.
The U.S. Office of Personnel Management
(OPM) is charged with overseeing the federal
executive personnel program and providing
day-to-day oversight and assistance to agencies
as they develop, select, and manage their federal
executives. Unlike the CPM program, the SES
qualification requires no special courses but is
rather far more experiential; the SES is a corps
of senior executives, not technical experts. In
determining whether a position meets the criteria
for placement in the SES, each federal agency
must evaluate the position and determine if it
functions as part of the management team or as
an independent adviser or technical expert.
Key goals of the SES include the following:
•Improve the executive management of
the government.
•Select and develop a cadre of highly
competent senior executives with leader
ship and managerial expertise.
•Hold executives accountable for individual
and organizational performance.
The OPM convenes a Qualifications Review
Board (QRB) to provide an independent peer
review of candidates proposed for initial career
appointment to the SES. There are three types
of appointments: career, noncareer, and limited
(U.S. Office of Personnel Management [OPM],
n.d., “Senior Executive Service: Executive Core
Qualifications”). There are five executive core
qualifications (ECQ):
1.Leading change.
2.Leading people.
3.Results driven.
4.Business acumen.
5.Building coalitions.
Each of these executive core qualifications con
tains subparts, and both ECQ 3 and 4 speci
fically include technology:
Understands and
appropriately applies principles, procedures,
requirements, regulations, and policies related
to specialized expertise.
Technical credibility (ECQ 3).
Criterion A: Demonstrated executive experience.
Candidates must demonstrate executive exper
ience in all five ECQs. Their applica
tions
should reflect an overall record of the know
ledge, skills, and abilities necessary to succeed
in the SES. This record may include professional
and volunteer experience, education, training,
and awards, in addition to federal experience.
Criterion B: Successful participation in an OPMapproved Candidate Development Program (CDP).
Candidates who compete government-wide for
participation in a CDP and successfully com
plete the program are eligible for noncompeti
tive appointment to the SES.
Technology management (ECQ 4).
Criterion C: Possession of special or unique quali
ties that indicate a likelihood of executive success.
Successful performance in the SES requires
competence in each ECQ. When hiring through
a competitive vacancy announcement, agencies
choose one of the following selection methods:
The candidate must possess special or unique
qualifications that support the ability to perform
the duties of the position and the potential to
quickly acquire full competence in the ECQs
(e.g., an individual who is exceptionally familiar
with an agency’s programs through high-level
staff experience or who has had a significant
impact on the highest policy levels of the agency).
Criterion C cases are very rare and appropriate
only when exceptional candidates with demon
strated experience are not available.
Keeps upto-date on technological developments. Makes
effective use of technology to achieve results. En
sures access to and security of technology systems.
The vacancy announcement
directs applicants to submit only a résumé.
Applicants show possession of the ECQs and
any technical qualifications via their résumé.
Résumé-based.
Accomplishment record. The vacancy announce-
ment directs applicants to submit a résumé and
narratives addressing selected competencies underlying the ECQs, plus any technical qualifications.
Traditional. The vacancy announcement directs
applicants to submit a résumé and narratives addressing the ECQs and any technical qualifications.
The burden of proof regarding competencies in
each ECQ depends on a number of factors, and
federal agencies have much leeway in developing
their own processes. The OPM’s review board
meets often to certify (not rank or decide) that
SES candidates sufficiently meet the five ECQs
requirements. The board uses three main criteria
to determine these basic qualifications:
Both A and C criteria are entirely experiencebased, and B is for those who have participated
in an approved Candidate Development Program.
The SES Senior Executive Development Program
A Senior Executive Service Candidate Develop
ment Program (SESCDP) is one management
tool agencies can use to identify and prepare
aspiring senior executive leaders. An SESCDP
is designed to further develop SES candidates’
competencies in each of the ECQs. Graduates
of SESCDPs who are certified by OPM’s re
view board can receive an initial career SES
appointment without further competition (U.S.
OPM, n.d., “Senior Executive Service: Exec
utive Core Qualifications”).
A. R. Shark
Agencies tailor their SESCDPs to meet their
particular succession-planning needs and organ
izational missions. An SESCDP must last a
minimum of 12 months and include the follow
ing requirements for developing an Individual
Development Plan (IDP), based on individual
needs and competencies:
•At least 80 hours of formal training that
address the ECQs and include individuals
from outside the candidate’s agency.
•At least 4 months of developmental assign
ments outside the candidate’s position
of record.
•An SES mentor.
Each federal agency is free to develop its own
programs consistent with the OPM’s rather
broad and flexible guidelines; however, in the
end, SESCDPs only help prepare a candidate
to better meet the ECQ qualifications, and
passing such a program in no way guarantees a
candidate’s acceptance into the SES. Review
of SESCDPs revealed no evidence to support
that technology education was part of the
required 80 hours of formal training. However,
since technology management is included in
ECQ 4, one might assume that relevant topics
are addressed, as the overall SES program is
designed to prepare candidates to meet the
ECQ requirements.
Center for Leadership Development
The OPM maintains a Center for Leadership
Development (CLD) whose goal is to transform
leaders to better serve the federal government.
The CLD offers educational programs built
around the ECQs for every stage of a federal
employee’s career (U.S. OPM, n.d., “Center for
Leadership Development”). The center coordi
nates many different programs and institutions,
including the Federal Executive Institute, a
number of certificate courses, and an Executive
MPA program (in partnership with American
University). A review of all course and program
offerings for 2016 found no mention of the
word technology. Despite this, the CLD main
tains that the topic is covered under the ECQs
as a subpart.
224
Summary of the Senior Executive Service
The SES allows for a great deal of discretion
among the 75 federal agencies, and technology
management may be more important to some
than to others, depending on the nature of any
particular position. The SES has come under
heavy criticism for not living up to its stated
goals and has changed little over the years.
In 2012, the U.S. House of Representatives
introduced the Senior Executive Service
Reform Act of 2012, passage of which had been
attempted in the previous Congress, but again
failed to gather enough interest or votes. On
December 15, 2015, the White House issued
an executive order, “Strengthening the Senior
Executive Service,” in an attempt to provide
greater overall accountability. But it does not
address the actual qualifications or skills that
future senior managers will need.
The Obama administration nevertheless has
acknowledged a serious deficiency regarding
technology and technology leadership capacity
among the federal workforce. In August 2014,
the White House created the U.S. Digital
Service as a separate initiative with no relation
ship to the SES. This new service corps’ goal is
to recruit the nation’s best tech talent to reform
the federal government’s out-of-date computer
systems and processes. The absence of any
coordination between the SES and the newly
formed Digital Service could be viewed as a
missed opportunity, as technology leadership
and support from the SES are critical for
system-wide success.
WHAT WE CAN LEARN FROM
THE CPM PROGRAM AND THE SES
There are as many similarities as there are
differences between the CPM program and the
SES. While the CPM certification is available
to federal, state, and local government public
managers, most instructional programs focus
on state and local government senior managers.
The SES focuses on senior management at the
federal government level only. In varying
degrees, both programs provide for core
competencies and allow much flexibility in
determining what and how topics will be
treated. Neither the CPM program nor the SES
list technology management as a major core
competency; the SES lists it as a subcategory.
The CPM program and and the SES appear to
face three major obstacles, either separately or
in common. The first obstacle for the CPM
program (as well as for NASPAA schools) is the
lack of qualified faculty who can develop
syllabi, course materials, and content; no less
than three CPM program directors pointed this
out as a major challenge. Some candidates are
either too technical or too theoretical. Finding
an expert in technology management who can
relate to nontechnically inclined public managers
is a serious challenge. Finding qualified instruc
tors for the SES does not seem to be an issue,
since much of the program is experience-based,
and when instructional expertise is needed, the
SES often turns to the private sector or reim
burses candidates for approved courses offered
by higher-education insti
tu
tions. The OPM
also offers executive-level training and develop
ment courses and programs through its Center
for Leadership Development.
A second key obstacle faced by both the CPM
program and the SES is the lack of consensus
regarding how to define information technology
management and how to teach it. The updated
Clinger-Cohen Act does list some contemporary
topics that public managers should master,
including some IT areas:
•IT governance.
•IT program management.
•Leadership.
•Vendor management.
•Cybersecurity.
•Information assurance strategies and plans.
•Social media.
•Cloud computing.
•Open government.
•Information collection and accessibility.
A third obstacle is time and money. Busy public
managers who find themselves in need of
learning more about information technology
management often do not have the time or
money (or both) to spend on a traditional
degree program such as an MPA. While the
CPM program and the SES do require a
substantial commitment of time, much of it is
heavily concentrated and successful completion
provides immediate recognition. Schools of
public affairs and administration might want to
either work more closely with CPM programs
within their respective states and/or seriously
consider providing more focused online execu
tive MPA programs, certifications, or certificate
programs of their own that target the public
manager practitioner.
As a case in point, the Public Technology In
stitute has teamed with the Rutgers University
School of Public Affairs and Administration
to offer a 1-year hybrid Certified Government
Technology Leadership program. This program
requires only three 1-day classes, one each at
the beginning, middle, and end of the year;
the rest of the activities are online, including
monthly live facilitated sessions (Public Tech
nology Institute [PTI], n.d.).
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This article reviewed two national programs—
the CPM program and the SES—that recognize
the professional development needs of public
administrators, revealing many gaps in how the
programs understand information technology.
For example, the programs include GIS as an
information technology subcategory, often cov
ered in courses dealing with data analytics and/
or urban planning. In contrast, a recent study
suggested that GIS should be incorporated as
an interdisciplinary tool throughout the MPA
program (Ferrandino, 2014). Determining how
to bridge the gap in information technology is
made difficult by the lack of consensus
regarding what should be covered and to whom
it should be geared. The following are some
suggested remedies:
General
1. The academic community would benefit
from generally agreeing on what information
technology means. Three terms are used almost
interchangeably: technology, information techno
A. R. Shark
logy, and information technology management.
Yet they vary in focus. Technology is quite broad
and can be defined as the branch of knowledge that deals with the creation and use of
technical means most often derived from
science and applied to solutions that can benefit
society and the environment. Merriam-Webster’s
dictionary defines information technology as
“involving the development, maintenance, and
use of computer systems, software, and networks
for the processing and distribution of data”
(“Information Technology,” n.d.).
The third term, information technology manage
ment, is most often overlooked. Of all the pro
grams reviewed, only three specifically address
information technology management: the New
Jersey and Nebraska CPM programs and the
federal SES. Information technology manage
ment encompasses IT and involves sim
ilar
topics to those taught in basic management
courses, such as leading, directing, staffing,
budgeting, and assessing; but it also includes
managing software and hardware systems,
system acquisition, IT contract management,
cloud solutions, managed services, big data and
analytics, and the like.
2. There appear to be both a need and an
opportunity to determine what information
technology (or technology leadership) topics
should be taught for the various types of public
administrators. For example, some admin
i
strators would benefit from knowing how to
better manage their Microsoft Outlook e-mail
accounts and master the many time-saving
features that most public managers are unaware
of. Similarly, learning how to make a better
presentation using multimedia or improved
graphics would be useful too; at least two CPM
programs provide training in presentation
technology. Senior executives specifically would
likely benefit from exposure to higher-level,
strategic topics. The fast-growing field of
information technology has many dimensions,
and any training program must be viewed
carefully to determine the best content treat
ment for the varied levels and needs of public
managers. The field is also fast-changing, so
content must be reviewed often so that it
remains relevant.
226
The academic community would benefit from
agreeing on competencies and learning out
comes regarding technology management for
each of the various workforce segments, such as
midlevel managers, senior managers, federal
executives, state executives, local government
executives, and so on. In addition, identifying
core competencies and perhaps subspecializa
tions would also be helpful. Given the con
stantly changing information technology field,
learning outcomes and subject matter should
be reviewed frequently. For example, a highlevel public manager would most likely not be
interested in database management or GIS but
might benefit from a course or program that
focuses on managing such operations.
The academic community should begin to
develop common core topics in which content
varies by public manager, rank, and competency
required. Topics might include but not be
limited to the list in Table 2, which is derived
from current CPM programs.
3. NASPAA should consider reestablishing its
Technology Committee or creating a Techno
logy Leadership Section. Given the heightened
and renewed interest in technology and public
administration, any past shortcomings may now
be overcome. At the very least, any NASPAA
working group could examine how information
technology management is taught and share
the latest trends, materials, and best practices.
4. NASPAA may want to consider working
more directly with the National Certified
Public Manager Consortium and federal SES
program managers to provide a constructive
forum for greater coordination and workforce
requirements review.
5. Given the difficulty that many NASPAA
institutions have experienced in finding qual
ified candidates to teach technology manage
ment, greater flexibility is needed in the use of
part-time and adjunct faculty. NASPAA should
consider providing a policy waiver that allows
schools of public affairs and administration to
hire and maintain part-time lecturers and
adjunct faculty specifically to teach information
technology. Such a waiver would prevent part-
TABLE 2.
Possible Core Topics (Derived From Current CPM Programs)
Subject
Focus
Technology leadership and governance
Who decides and how various governance models work
IT assessment
Methods and tools to help assess IT performance
IT policies and compliance
Recognizing and understanding laws and regulations
that IT management must adhere to
IT system risk management and mitigation
Understanding and managing IT risk among systems
and workers. Awareness of migration strategies
and techniques.
Cybersecurity awareness
Senior leadership roles and responsibilities for ensuring cybersecurity awareness
Project management for senior executives
High-level leadership requirements for supporting
project management
Citizen engagement (beyond e-government)
Techniques, best practices, services, and apps aimed
at engaging citizen participation
Managed services (cloud solutions)
Cost-benefits, what managers need to know and ask,
and risk assessment
Data sharing, open and big data
Comprehending how big and open data can lead
to better data-based decision making
Data visualization (GIS)
Awareness of the efficacy of GIS in all planning
Digital ethics
High-level appreciation for how ethics is particularly
challenging in an IT environment and how to create
and maintain a culture of high ethical behaviors
Future trends in IT
What innovative technologies are on the horizon and how to prepare for them
time and adjunct hires from counting against
accreditation standards that require a fixed ratio
or level of full-time faculty.
6. NASPAA should develop a mechanism and
or program to solicit and recruit retiring public
managers who might be particularly effective in
teaching information technology management
either full- or part-time.
7. NASPAA should consider creating, either on
its own or in partnership with a NASPAA
school, a Technology Leadership Academy in
which faculty come together and learn how to
best teach information technology. This
initiative would also collect and disseminate IT
learning materials, a directory of expertise, case
studies, and so on.
CPM- and SES-Focused
1. The National Certified Public Manager
Consortium should consider adding technology
management either as a core competency or as
special treatment infused within existing core
competencies. Judging from those CPM
programs that already focus on technology
management, there is wide latitude regarding
what is taught, how it is taught, and how much
time it is taught. These mixed program offerings
in part seem to stem from the difficulties in
finding qualified talent, both for course
development and for actual teaching and
facilitation. At the very least, the consortium
should consider how it can actively encourage
and share best practices and subject matter
expertise and coordinate content and deli
very mechanisms.
A. R. Shark
2. Those agencies responsible for administering the SES should provide better guidance for
what technology management outcomes are
expected of SES candidates. In addition to
technology familiarity (ECQ 3) and business
acumen (ECQ 4), these latest core competencies
as published in the updated Clinger-Cohen
Act make sense to include: IT governance,
IT program management, leadership, vendor
management, cybersecurity, information assur
ance strategies and plans, social media, cloud
computing, open government, and information
collection and accessibility.
3. The SES might consider developing a simple
database that collects information on how tech
nology management is taught and publishing
the material as best practices. The Senior
Executive Service Candidate Development
Program, which can be adopted by any of the
75 federal agencies, should consider developing
or adopting specific technology management
outcomes in place of the ad hoc nature of the
present system.
In conclusion, there appear to be both a need
and an opportunity for the various MPA
programs, certification programs, continuing
education programs, and the SES to establish
voluntary internal governance mechanisms in
which materials, content, and subject treat
ments can be shared and coordinated among
the many stakeholders.
The most important question is, what do cur
rent and aspiring nontechnical public managers
really need to be better prepared for present
and future challenges in the modern workplace?
Many high-profile IT failures at all levels of
government can be attributed to a lack of
information technology leadership as opposed
to the technology itself. It would be instructive
to study the needs of public managers who have
been at their jobs for at least 3 or more years,
asking them what tech
nology management
courses would be useful. This may prove diffi
cult at first, given that today’s baby boomer–
dominated government workforce is not always
certain of what is available and how it might be
useful. The problem may ease as greater num
228
bers of younger public managers, who have
been exposed to technology for most of their
lives, enter the workforce.
Perhaps academic program planners would find
it useful to learn how professional development
programs for public administration practition
ers teach information technology. This article
begins to address what is available, but much
more research needs to be done that specifically
surveys the field for workforce requirements and
outcomes for technology management success
in a public administration setting. Finally, great
er institutional leadership is required at all levels
to better advance information technology into
all learning platforms and programs.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to thank Peggy Stewart and the
mem
bers of the National Certified Public
Manager Consortium for their help and part
icipation in making this CPM study possible.
REFERENCES
and Society, 30(4), 412–429.
Carnegie Mellon University. (n.d.). CIO Certificate
Program. Retrieved from http://www.heinz.
cmu.edu/school-of-information-systems-andmanagement/cio-institute/cio-certificate-program/
index.aspx.
CIO Council. (2012). 2012 Clinger-Cohen core com
petencies and learning objectives. Retrieved from
https://cio.gov/wp-content/uploads/downloads/
2013/02/2012-Learning-Objectives-Final.pdf.
Civil Service Reform Act, 5 U.S. Code § 3131 (1978).
Clinger-Cohen Act, 40 U.S.C. § 1401 (1996). Summary
retrieved from the U.S. Department of Commerce
website: http://ocio.os.doc.gov/ITPolicyandPrograms/
Capital_Planning/DEV01_003758.
Conant, J. K. (1995). The Certified Public Manager
program: A cross-state study. State and Local
Government Review, 27(2), 144–158. Retrieved
from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4355120.
E-Government Act, 44 U.S.C. § 3601 (2002).
Retrieved from U.S. Government Publishing Office
website: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-107
publ347/pdf/PLAW-107publ347.pdf.
Fairholm, M. R., Moe, K. J., Houghtby-Haddon, N.
K., & Feldman, L. B. (2004/2005, Fall/Winter).
Lessons learned: Assessing the District of Columbia’s
Certified Public Management program. Public
Administration Quarterly, 28(3/4), pp. 335–362.
Ferrandino, J. (2014, Fall). Incorporating GIS as an
interdisciplinary pedagogical tool throughout the
MPA program. Journal of Public Affairs Research,
20(4), 529–544.
Fox, T. (2015, August 21). Federal agencies are failing
when it comes to managing employees throughout
their careers. Washington Post. Retrieved from http://
www.washingtonpost.com/news/on-leadership/
wp/2015/08/21/federal-agencies-are-failing-whenit-comes-to-managing-employees-throughouttheir-careers.
George Mason University. (n.d.). CIO Certification
Program. Retrieved from http://business.gmu.edu/
undergraduate-alias/academic-advising/54-sectionco.
Information technology. (n.d.). In Merriam-Webster’s
online dictionary. Retrieved from http://www.
merriam-webster.com/dictionary/information%
20technology.
Jackson, M. D. (2013, January 17). CIO Council releases
updated Clinger-Cohen Act core competencies and
learning objectives. Retrieved from https://cio.gov/
cio-council-releases-updated-clinger-cohen-corecompetencies-learning-objectives.
Kiel, L. D. (1986). Information systems education
in masters programs in public affairs and admin
istration. Public Administration Review, 46(Special
issue), 590–594. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.
org/stable/975582.
in computing: Final report of the National Associa
tion of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration, Ad Hoc Committee on Computers in Public
Management Education. Public Administration
Review, 46(Special issue), 595–602. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/975583.
in computing: An update. Public Administration
Review, 49(5), 447–453. Retrieved fromwww.jstor.
org/stable/976389.
Review and Accreditation. (2008). General information and standards for professional masters degree

programs. Retrieved from https:/naspaaaccreditation.
National Association of State Chief Information Officers (NASCIO). (2015). State IT workforce: Facing
reality with innovation. Lexington, KY: NASCIO.
Retrieved from http://www.nascio.org/publications/
documentsNASCIOStateITWorkforceSurvey2015
_web.pdf.
National Certified Public Manager (CPM) Consortium.
(2015). Retrieved from http://www.txstate.edu/
cpmconsortium.
Review and Accreditation. (2013). COPRA
policy statement. Retrieved from https://
copra-policy-statements-12-13.pdf.
Public Technology Institute (PTI). (n.d.). Certified
Government in Technology Leadership. Retrieved
from http://www.pti.org/services/cgcio.asp.
Rocheleau, B. (1998). The MPA core course in
information technology: What should be taught?
Why? Journal of Public Affairs Education, 4(3),
193–206. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/
stable/40215391.
Rogin, J. (2006, September 4). 5 examples of other
CIO certificate programs. Federal Computer Week.
Retrieved from http://fcw.com/Articles/2006/09/
04/5-certifications-for-aspiring-CIOs.aspx.
A. R. Shark
Senior Executive Service. (n.d.). Retrieved from
https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/
senior-executive-service.
Senior Executive Service Reform Act, 5 U.S.C. § 3131
(2012). Summary retrieved from http://www.
govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/hr6042/summary.
Shark, A. R. (2015, September 29). Certified govern
ment CIO program built around need for IT
leadership. SlateTech. Retrieved from http://www.
statetechmagazine.com/article/2015/09/tailoredprogram.
U.S. General Services Administration. (2000, July 12).
Inaugural class of CIO university graduates. Retrieved from http://www.gsa.gov/portal/content/100298.
U.S. General Services Administration. (2007, August
16). GSA announces 2007 CIO university graduates.
Retrieved from http://www.gsa.gov/portal/content/
102727.
U.S. News and World Report. (n.d.). Top ten ranking
for graduate programs with information technology
management. Retrieved June 2015 from http://
grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/
best-graduate-schools/search?program=top-publicaffairs-schools&specialty=information-technologymanagement-rankings&name=&zip=&program_
rank=Any&sort=&sortdir=.
U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM).
(2014, April). Guide to the Senior Executive Service.
Retrieved from http://www.opm.gov/policy-dataoversight/senior-executive-service/referencematerials/guidesesservices.pdf.
U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM). (n.d.)
Center for Leadership Development. Retrieved
from https://leadership.opm.gov/index.aspx.
U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM). (n.d.).
Senior Executive Service: Candidate development
programs. Retrieved from http://www.opm.gov/
policy-data-oversight/senior-executive-service/
candidate-development-programs.
U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM).
(n.d.). Senior Executive Service: Executive core
qualifications. Retrieved from /www.opm.gov/
policy-data-oversight/senior-executive-service/
executive-core-qualifications.
West, J. P., & Berman, E. M. (2001). The impact of
revitalized management practices on the adoption of
230
information technology: A national survey of local
governments. Public Performance and Management
Review, 24(3), 233–253. Retrieved from http://
www.jstor.org/stable/3381087.
White House. (2015a, December 15). Digital
government: Building a 21st century platform to better
serve the American people. Retrieved from https://
www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/egov/
digital-government/digital-government.html.
White House. (2015b, December 15). Executive
Order: Strengthening the Senior Executive
Service. Retrieved from http://www.whitehouse.
gov/the-press-office/2015/12/15/executive-orderstrengthening-senior-executive-service.
White House. (2015c, December 15). Meet the U.S.
Digital Service. Retrieved from http://www.white
house.gov/digital/united-states-digital-service.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Alan R. Shark is executive director and CEO of
the Public Technology Institute (PTI). He is
also associate professor of practice at the
Rutgers University School of Public Affairs and
Administration, where he teaches a master’slevel course on technology and public admin
istration. Among his many works, he is author
of the textbook Technology and Public Manage
ment (Routledge, 2015) and Seven Trends That
Will Transform Local Government through Tech
nology (Public Technology Institute, 2012). Dr.
Shark is a fellow of the National Academy of
Public Administration, where he serves as chair
of the Standing Panel on Technology Leadership.
Ines Mergel
Syracuse University
ABSTRACT
Public affairs schools face the challenge of including emergent topics in their curricula to prepare
students for the public sector job market. Some such topics reflect advances in the use of information
technologies; others reflect updates to industry standards or changing needs of public sector
information management professionals. This article focuses on big data that are created through
citizens’ use of new technologies and the combination of administratively collected data with online
data. Big data require changes in government information management skills, including collection,
cleaning, and interpreting unstructured and unfiltered data; real-time decision making based on
early signals and patterns that emerge; and new organizational roles and tasks, such as open
innovation and change management. This article reviews the existing literature, compares big data
requirements in neighboring disciplines, and suggests 13 modules for a big data syllabus that extend
Mason’s PAPA model of ethical considerations for the information age.
KEYWORDS
Information and technology management, big data, public management, MPA curriculum
Traditionally, Master of Public Administration
(MPA) programs at public affairs schools teach
government technology classes using either a
project implementation approach or an infor
mation science approach. Many MPA programs
regularize project and policy implementation
classes by adding skills and knowledge training
that is no longer restricted to technology
projects. At the same time, public managers are
less likely to design databases or set up servers
as part of their job requirements. Such so-called
information technology (IT) projects are often
outsourced to contractors, sometimes with
negative consequences for implementation and
internal capacity building; the HealthCare.gov
launch failure is but one well-known example
(Overby, 2013). Parallel to these developments,
a new wave of government information is
emerging that poses challenges for public
managers: so-called big data sets created
JPAE 22 (2), 231–248
through online interactions of citizens and gov
ernment entities. These big data sets are
challenging the traditional notion of admin
istratively or scientifically created data sets,
such as government open data posted on Data.
gov or standardized surveys (e.g., the U.S.
census, unemployment reviews).
These developments are problematic for MPA
programs. A generalist education in MPA pro
grams will not compete with computer science
or engineering programs that are training ad
vanced data scientists. MPA programs should
therefore focus on the managerial aspects of inno
vative data initiatives and redesign their curri
cula in response to IT innovations in the public
sector. Flexible electives can allow MPA pro
grams to quickly offer new training in IT skill
building, analytical reviews, and applied cases of
emergent government information management.
I. Mergel
THE EMERGENCE OF BIG DATA IN THE
PUBLIC SECTOR
Big data is an industry term commonly said to
derive from a McKinsey Global Institute
(2011) report that outlined the emergence of
very large data sets that need to be collected
and analyzed differently than traditional data,
using computational means and algorithms.
This report described big data as “datasets
whose size is beyond the ability of typical
database software tools to capture, store, man
age, and analyze” (p. 1). However, the term
was first mentioned by two NASA scientists
in 1997 (Cox & Elsworth, 1997, cited in
Friedman, 2012). Cox and Elsworth described
the problem they had with visualizing big data,
explaining that big data
provides an interesting challenge for
computer systems: data sets are generally
quite large, taxing the capacities of main
memory, local disk, and even remote
disk. We call this the problem of big
data. When data sets do not fit in main
memory (in core), or when they do not
fit even on local disk, the most common
solution is to acquire more resources.
(Cox & Elsworth, 1997, p. 235)
Gartner’s IT glossary provides another defin
ition, focusing on the amount, speed of crea
tion, and unstructured nature of the data itself:
“Big data is high-volume, high-velocity and
high-variety information assets that demand
cost-effective, innovative forms of information
processing for enhanced insight and decision
making” (Gartner, n.d.). Management scholars
such as Davenport, Barth, and Bean (2012)
picked up the topic and defined big data as “the
broad range of new and massive data types that
have appeared over the last decade or so,”
predicting a short-term shelf life for the term.
Other authors have focused on the distributed
creation and use of data sets with the help of
new Internet technologies. For example, Cukier
(2010) wrote in the Economist that “the world
contains an unimaginably vast amount of
digital information which is getting ever vaster
ever more rapidly.” Finally, Cukier, and MayerSchoenberger (2013) define the use of big data
232
as “the ability of society to harness information
in novel ways to produce useful insights or
goods and services of significant value” and
“things one can do at a large scale that cannot
be done at a smaller one, to extract new insights
or create new forms of value.”
BIG DATA DEFINITIONS IN
NEIGHBORING DISCIPLINES
Beyond the above industry or business def
initions, researchers in the social sciences only
recently began wrestling with the term big data.
Scholars in various disciplines have begun
calling for additional research to understand
how existing algorithms apply to big data sets.
For example, in the field of management
studies, George, Haas, and Pentland (2014)
focus on the diversity of new data sources and
the emergence of new technologies that are
either actively or passively creating and sub
mitting data: “Big data is generated from an
increasing plurality of sources, including
Internet clicks, mobile transactions, user-gen
erated content, and social media as well as
purposefully generated content through sensor
networks and business transactions such as sales
queries and purchase transactions” (p. 321).
In political science, Clark and Golder (2014)
remark that big data in the form of
“technological innovations such as machine
learning have allowed researchers to gather
either new types of data, such as social media
data, or vast quantities of traditional data with
less expense” (p. 65). Further, the authors note,
technological innovations’ “increasing ability
to produce, collect, store, and analyze vast
amounts of data is going to transform our
understanding of the political world” (p. 65).
In the public policy field, Pirog (2014) sees the
value of big data mostly in the availability of
new data sets, such as the open data posted by
the federal government on Data.gov. Value in
her mind is created through the combination
of traditional open data with geospatial data
such as real-time satellite data, GPS locations of
cell phones, economic transactions, or Internet
search data. Researchers are left with the task of
organizing, cleaning, and interpreting the data.
Lazer et al. (2009) focus on real-time availability
and see these big data sets as opportunities to
create a “second-by-second picture of inter
actions over extended periods of time, providing
information about both the structure and
content of relationships” (p. 2).
In summary, the social science articles reviewed
here focus on data collection, analytical techni
ques, and the need for adaptation of existing
research methods and theory building based
on the potential insights generated by big data.
Research communities are still struggling with
definitions and agreed-upon methods and out
comes (“Editorial: Community Cleverness Re
quired,” 2008). The tasks associated with big data
require advanced data analytics and compu
tational power that are usually not located in
traditional social science programs but rather in
computer science or engineering disciplines.
CHARACTERISTICS OF BIG DATA
Big data sets are created in several forms:
messages, updates, and images posted to social
networks; readings from sensors worn by human
beings, such as fitness sensors measuring distance,
calories burned, time/duration, et cetera; GPS
signals from cell phones and other wearables;
online shopping transactions and preferences;
and data collected passively from buildings, pub
lic transit vehicles, or video cameras installed
on street corners. Such data can be combined
with existing administratively collected data; for
example, 911 data (emergency calls), 311 data
(nonemergency reports), government perform
ance data, or open data in government.
One agreed-upon way to define big data is to
describe the characteristics involved. McAffee
and Brynjolfsson (2012), for example, describe
three Vs of big data: volume, velocity, and
variety. Other scholars add the characteristics of
veracity, variability, and visualization.
Volume refers to the scale of data that can no
longer measured in megabytes but that might
still be processable by social scientists. In big
data, volume is expressed in terabytes and
petabytes, for which large server capacity is
necessary (McKinsey Global Institute, 2011).
Velocity refers to the real-time analysis of stream
ing data: moving from periodic data collection
such as U.S. Census surveys to near/real-time
collection and analysis of almost-live data. This
can include cell phone data from phone logs
and social media stream data from Twitter or
Facebook feeds or Foursquare check-ins. A
specific example is the U.S. Geological Survey’s
“Did you feel it?” Internet intensity maps that
combine scientifically collected earthquake
data with expressed impacts posted on Twitter
(Atkinson & Wald, 2007).
Variety refers to the different forms of data that
are no longer nicely structured in a database.
Instead, data formats vary, including photo,
audio, Web, social media, video, geospatial, and
mobile, all of which are highly unstructured
(Neumann, Park, & Panek, 2012).
Veracity refers to highly fuzzy and unstructured
data that create uncertainty surrounding the data
and their quality. For example, during an inci
dent, emergency managers must now triangulate
between multiple incoming 911 phone from cell
phones that might be passing a scene, changing
their geo-location, and providing varying de
grees of quality in their reporting. In addition,
observers at the scene may be posting what
they see to social media sites like Twitter and
Facebook, but it takes a while for emergency
responders to report formally trusted inform
ation about the incident. These different types
of data make it difficult for public managers to
organize incoming data and use them as a basis
for decision making.
Variability is a characteristic of big data that is
similarly challenging to public managers. The
meaning of data can change quickly, so that
analysis and interpretation needs to be contin
uously updated to reflect the most recent changes.
For example, consider the current searches people
are conducting on Google. At one point in time,
a search for a terrorist organization might have
implicated the person searching as a sympath
izer. However, now that terror organizations are
in the news 24-7, such searches might be pri
marily for informational purposes and do not
necessarily indicate a desire to affiliate with the
terrorist group. As another example, Onnela
I. Mergel
et al. (2007) inferred friendship networks and
affiliations from mobile phone data. The chal
lenge for big data analysts is to review the con
text and content in order to understand nuances,
such as sentiment or sarcasm.
Finally, visualization vis-à-vis big data can help
in presenting the information understandably
and readably to human beings, such that people
can identify patterns or landscapes in the data.
The pure volume of mentions of a brand,
organization, or incident on social media is not
necessarily a reliable indicator of a thing’s viral
nature or impact. Instead, one must measure
how the number of mentions leads to value
for an organization. The value of big data is one
of the most difficult points to measure. In a
recent McKinsey and Company report, Kayyali,
Knott, and Van Kuiken (2013) estimated that
especially in the public health sector, big data
will create economic value by combining exist
ing data sets in real time, interpreting the data
faster, intervening in real time, and creating
innovative IT health market segments.
BIG DATA IN PUBLIC AFFAIRS EDUCATION
Technological advances in Internet technologies
and a shift from off-line to online interactions
among citizens, as well as between citizens and
government, have led to the creation of new
types of data sets. In the public sector, there is a
noticeable push from the White House Office
of Science and Technology Policy and the Na
tional Science Foundation to encourage agencies
to review their need to use big data and for
researchers to design projects and deliver inno
vative insights concerning big data (Mervis,
2012). Currently, data types collected by
government agencies include mostly administra
tively data, scientifically measured and collected data, and most recently—but to a far lesser
extent—social media or Internet data. In com
bination, these different data types fall under
the umbrella of big data. New to government
information or government data are those data
sets created through the active use of Internet
technologies, such as clickstream data from
the Web, social media content (tweets, blogs,
Facebook posts, etc.), and video data from
retail and other settings and from video enter
tainment (Davenport, Barth, & Bean, 2012). For
234
intelligence purposes, researchers and government organizations have been analyzing terrorist
networks using a combination of online accounts
such as e-mail exchanges, cell phone data for
calls and text messages, and bank transactions
to derive affiliation, plans, or leanings (such as
recent investigations into recruits for Syrian terror
organizations based on social media inter
actions, online searches, etc.) (Asal & Rethe
meyer, 2015). However, as Desouza (2014) shows,
government agencies see the need to invest in
big data skills but have not made progress in
institutionalizing capacity building or incor
por
ating such skills into existing standard
operating procedures.
In a recent article, Mergel, Rethemeyer, and
Isett (2015) outlined the three main skills that
public administration students need to acquire
to productively work with big data:
1.managing and processing large
accumulations of unstructured
and semistructured data;
2.analyzing that data into meaningful
insights for public operations; and
3.interpreting that data in ways
that support evidence-based
decision making.
A review of handbooks and course listings from
the U.S. News and World Report (2012) top 10
ranked public affairs schools that offer a
concentration in information and technology
management reveals that MPA programs have
not yet incorporated big data topics in their
curricula. Instead, as shown in Table 1, all 10
ranked programs rely on traditional e-govern
ment and information management classes and
even then omit most recent topics, such as
social media and new technologies.
The MPA programs listed in Table 1 usually
offer both public policy and information
management classes but rely on neighboring
disciplines to provide advanced informatics
classes, such as system design, telecommun
ication, GIS analysis, and even government
information management. These neighboring
disciplines include political science, geography,
and computer science departments located in
TABLE 1.
Overview of Information and Technology Management Concentrations in the
Top 10 Public Affairs Schools’ MPA Programs
Rank
School and
program name
Concentration name
Courses
1
Carnegie Mellon University, Heinz College
Public Policy and Management, no information management track.
Instead, offers a Master
in Information Systems.
Information Systems for Managers
Introduction to Geographic Information Systems
Multi-Media
2
Syracuse University, Maxwell School,
Department of Public
Administration and
International Affairs
Technology and
Information Management
study program
Digital Innovation Management
Digital Government
Social Media
Science, Technology, and Public Policy
3
University at Albany–
SUNY, Rockefeller
College of Public
Affairs and Policy
Information Technology and Management concentration
Data, Models, and Decisions
Topics in Information Resource Management
Technology in Financial Market Regulation
Cybersecurity: Long-Term Planning and
Risk Management
Foundations of Government Information
Strategy and Management
Information Technology, Globalization,
and Global Governance
Management Information Systems
Building a Case for IT Investments
in the Public Sector
4
Rutgers University, Newark
Core Curriculum Cluster One - Foundation
Technology and Public Administration
5
Georgia Institute
of Technology
Graduate Certificate
in Science, Technology and Society
Science, Technology, and the Economy
Science, Technology, and Security
Science and Technology Beyond Borders
6
Indiana University,
Bloomington
Information Systems
concentration
Vector-Based Geographic Information Systems
Public Management Information Systems
Database Management Systems
6
University of Nebraska, Omaha
Public Administration/
Management Information Systems
Management of Software Development
Advanced Systems Analysis and Design
Data Communications
Managing the Distributed Computing Environment
Database Management
Managing the IS Function
8
Harvard University, Harvard
Kennedy School
No specific technology
or information management concentration
Technology and Policy
Privacy, Technology, and National Security
Technology, Security, and Conflict in the Cyber Age
Human Rights Advocacy Using Video,
Social Media, and Participatory Media
8
University of Texas
at Austin, Lyndon
B. Johnson School
of Public Affairs
Technology, Innovation,
and Information Policy
Information Policy
Intro to Geographic Info Systems
Technological Innovation in Defense
Notes. Based on U.S. News and World Report (2012) ranking of public affairs programs. Rankings 6 and 8 reflect ties among four different schools.
I. Mergel
iSchools and engineering or business schools.
All schools in Table 1 offer advanced data
analysis skills, such as the Georgia Institute of
Technology’s science and technology classes
and Indiana University’s Public Management
Information Systems class.
This reliance on outside disciplines is not sur
prising given traditional MPA programs’ focus
on core public administration classes and the
relatively recent emergence of topics such as
big data, the Internet of things, and the smart
city, which are mostly driven by industry. An
interesting new program at Northeastern
University has begun to address the challenges
of big data: the Network Science Institute
(networkscienceinstitute.org) includes needed
theoretical and methodological network analy
sis methods as well as computational social
science skills.
Given the apparent lack of coverage in the
MPA curriculum and the concurrent increased
need for big data skills in government (Helms,
2015; Mervis, 2012), I propose that five
dimensions of the topic should be covered in a
management-oriented big data class to prepare
future public managers for some of the pressing
problem areas in the public sector. These
dimensions start from Mason’s (1986, p. 5) socalled PAPA model, which distinguishes four
ethical considerations of information access:
1.Privacy: What information about one’s
self or one’s associations must a person
reveal to others, under what conditions
and with what safeguards? What things
can people keep to themselves and not
be forced to reveal?
2.Accuracy: Who is responsible for the
authenticity, fidelity and accuracy of
information? Similarly, who is to be held
accountable for errors in information
and how is the injured party to be
made whole?
3.Property: Who owns the information?
What are the just and fair prices of ex
changes? Who owns the channels, espe
cially the airways, through which infor
mation is transmitted? How should access
to this scarce resource be regulated?
236
4.Accessibility: What information does a
person or an organization have a right
or a privilege to obtain, under what
conditions and with what safeguards?
Mason’s PAPA model considers issues that most
ly have to do with the information attributes
themselves. While this remains a concern,
today’s big data world calls for training public
managers in additional dimensions that focus
on managerial challenges. Thus I propose ex
panding Mason’s model to these five critical
dimensions that public managers must consi
der when dealing with big data: (1) the ethical
dimension, (2) the technological dimension,
(3) the process dimension, (4) the organizational and institutional change dimension, and
(5) the analytical dimension.
1. Ethical Dimension
Big data proponents in industry, consulting
companies, and business schools use dramatic
terms such as big data revolution (Iansiti &
Lakhani, 2014; McAffee & Brynjolfsson, 2012),
predicting big data’s inevitable and mostly
beneficial impact on society, the economy, or
public health (Kayyali, Knott, & Van Kuiken,
2013; McKinsey Global Institute, 2011). This
bias toward the advantageous impact of big
data usually omits a critical evaluation of the
ethical dimensions of data collection, analysis,
and reuse, especially that by the government
done without explicit citizen consent (boyd &
Crawford, 2012). The NSA’s data collection
method (“Sniff it all, collect it all”) is but one
example of mass data collection that interferes
with existing privacy laws or the U.S.
Constitution. Algorithms that predict
interactions or movements can be useful in
identifying terrorists but can also mistakenly
target peaceful demonstrators or other innocent
people (Eagle, Pentland, & Lazer, 2009;
Onnela et al., 2007). After the Boston
Marathon bombing, people using the social
networking site Reddit identified the wrong
person as the bomber, when in fact he had
committed suicide and had thus dropped off
the site for that reason, not because he was
involved in the bombing (Wade, 2014).
Other ethical considerations involve the use of
public health data collected via fitness apps or
sensors such as Fitbit and other wearables, or
that derived from the genetic sequencing of
individual DNA (Murdoch & Detsky, 2013).
These health-related data can—in combination
with online purchasing behavior, medical trans
actional data, social networking interactions,
and social security numbers—provide insights
into potential health risks for segments of the
population or even individuals. Health insur
ance companies could potentially draw con
clusions from such data that could lead to
significant discrimination against individuals
in terms of insurancecoverage or cost.
At the same time, the individual health data
collected and published on social networking
sites can also create value in the form of
government public health interventions when
such individual data is combined with geotagged air pollution data, for instance, or
mobility data. If citizens can see what value
their data provides, they may be more likely to
volunteer personal information, which could
help government evaluate the impact of
regulations or assess the need for interventions
while tracking infectious diseases such as Ebola
or flu (Cohen et al., 2012; Morse, 2012;
Murdoch & Detsky, 2013).
2. Technological Dimension
The technological dimension of big data
involves emergent topics that are challenging
the investment decisions of chief technology
officers in government. Examples include the
Internet of things, the smart city, and cloud
computing, all of which must be explored for
their usefulness and applicability in the public
sector. The Internet of things refers to the
online transmission of information through
sensors from buildings, cars, human beings, or
animals to machines that store the information
in the cloud. Even though human beings are
actively involved in wearing data-collection
devices, the Internet of things mostly involves
machines communicating with other machines.
For example, homes can automatically transmit
information to utility companies via temperature
sensors or smart meters; smart cement can trans
mit information about contamination levels in
oil wells or cracks in bridges; and cars equipped
with sensors can transmit the weather and road
conditions (Burrus, 2014). Such data, either
transmitted actively by citizens or collected pas
sively via interactions with public infrastructure,
can help public managers make investment deci
sions, deploy resources in real time, conduct ur
ban analysis and modeling of public mobility,
and decide whether or not to intervene manually.
The use of new technologies, and especially the
combination of data collected from different
types of sources (social data, the Internet of
things), contributes to the notion of the smart
city (Bingham-Hall & Law, 2015; O’Grady &
O’Hare, 2012). Online interactions with citizens
and their environment can improve the quality
and performance of a city’s services, reduce en
ergy costs, and improve distribution of resources.
3. Process Dimension
The process dimension of big data involves
incorporating citizen feedback. New technolo
gies, such as crowdsourcing platforms, as well
as political changes and presidential mandates
to engage directly with citizens have changed
how citizens interact online with government
organizations (Miller & Kalil, 2014). Already
tested and proven processes such as participatory
budgeting have created cultural and procedural
acceptance of incorporating large-scale feedback
from citizens in government decision making
(Novy & Leubolt, 2005). Platforms such as the
open innovation tool Challenge.gov have also
shown that there is, on the one hand, public
enthusiasm for such tools but, on the other,
slack capacity vis-à-vis contributing to govern
ment innovation.
Brabham (2008) defined crowdsourcing as “a
new web-based business model that harnesses
the creative solutions of a distributed network
of individuals through what amounts to an open
call for proposals” (p. 76). Citizens are helping
to write policy (Prpić, Taeihagh, & Melton,
2015) and helping government agencies solve
problems that agency employees could not.
Especially organizations such as NASA have
gained experience using citizen insights to
further research projects (Raddick et al., 2010).
I. Mergel
NASA’s online citizen science platform (science.
nasa.gov/citizen-scientists) engages citizens in
microtasks such as the identification of small
objects on photos or videos. These are usually
tasks that machines or algorithms cannot do,
instead needing human logic for identification
and interpretation.
4. Organizational and Institutional
Change Dimension
makers and public managers must use data to
make better-informed, real-time decisions
(Brownson, Fielding, & Maylahn, 2009). The
role of the chief data officer will therefore likely
change to being a chief change manager or
chief inno
va
tion officer who must think
creatively about how to make data available
instead how to archive data.
5. Analytical Dimension
The organizational and institutional change
dim
ension involves government building its
capacity to accommodate advances in big data.
Current practices in public administration reflect
the use of traditional administratively collected
data to monitor performance of government
operations, for example, through models like
CitiStat. Some officials misinterpret big data as
only that data supplied by citizens to govern
ment; for example, the description given by the
governor of Maryland, Martin O’Malley, of
using 911 and 311 data (O’Malley, 2014).
Both of these data sets are created by using
citizen input via traditional databases and ad
ministrative processes; the resulting informa
tion is then used to derive real-time insights
into emergency and nonemergency situations.
The analytical dimension of big data involves
the ability to create predictive insights before
an event occurs or to interpret inflowing data in
real time. The hope is that the data amount and
data types might lead to more accurate pred
ictions, better decisions, and potentially immed
iate interventions.
However, what is needed beyond this is increas
ed organizational capacity. As Court (2015)
states, we need the “creation of new seniormanage
ment capacity to really focus on
data and address cultural and skill-building
challenges needed for the front line to embrace
the change [i.e., organizational change].”
Public managers need to understand how to
include big data insights into decision making
and resource deployment, similar to stock
market analysis. This type of organizational
capacity building needs to go beyond the IT
department and include change managers as
well as data scientists in the redesign of processes
and systems, so that such systems reflect the
changing needs of stakeholders.
McAffee and Brynjolfsson (2012) give the ex
ample of airlines’ determining estimated arrival
times as useful analysis of big data; airlines look
at publicly available data, such as weather fore
casts, along with flight schedules, radar station
input, subjective pilot estimates, and other in
ternal information to improve deployment of
resources, facilitate smoother operations, and
reduce flight delays. Lazer, Kennedy, King, and
Vespignani (2014), however, warn that human
interpretation must be involved, citing the ex
ample of Google Flu Trends, which amassed
searches of key flu terms by Google users and
published the results; computer algorithms can
fail in the absence of human interpretation of
data, leading to misinterpretation.
Organizational and cultural change challenges
will continue to occur as the nature of decision
making changes with advances in big data.
Data are no longer merely for archiving. Instead
of only protecting and safeguarding data, as
chief data officers had to do in the past, policy
The analytical dimension for public managers,
therefore, does not necessarily mean a focus on
algorithms, which data scientists apply. Instead,
this dimension must focus on human interpre
tation and decisions based on new information
provided through big data.
238
Many government agencies are already using
dashboards to review, for example, 311 non
emergency reports provided by citizens. How
ever, the insights derived and how public man
agers act on the data vary. For example, though
the Federal IT Dashboard (itdashboard.gov)
brings some transparency to government IT
investment, actual changes in behavior and
buying decisions are not yet observable.
A SYLLABUS FOR TEACHING BIG DATA IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
To expand public management skills to include
the above five dimensions vis-à-vis big data,
I propose the following modules for an MPAlevel course titled Big Data in the Public Sector.
Figure 1.
Proposed Course Syllabus: Big Data in the Public Sector
Proposed Course Syllabus: Big Data in the Public Sector
Module 1: Big Data: Introduction, Concepts, Definitions
The public affairs context
Readings
Ahonen, P. (2015, July). Institutionalizing big data methods in social and political
research. Big Data and Society. doi:10.1177/2053951715591224.
Lazer, D., Pentland, A. S., Adamic, L., Aral, S., Barabasi, A. L., Brewer, D., et al.
(2009). Computational social science. Science, 323(5915), 721–723.
Pentland, A. S., & Berinato, S. (2014, November). With big data comes big
responsibility. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2014/11/
with-big-data-comes-big-responsibility.
Module 2: Big Data’s Volume, Velocity, Variety, and Veracity
Characteristics of big data and data sources
Readings
Court, D. (2015, January). Getting big impact from big data. McKinsey Quarterly.
Retrieved from http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/business_technology/getting_big_
impact_from_big_data.
Cukier, K. N. (2010, February 25). Data, data everywhere. Economist. Retrieved
from http://www.economist.com/node/15557443.
Davenport, T. H., Barth, P., & Bean, R. (2012). How “big data” is different. MIT Sloan
Management Review, 54(1), 43–46. Retrieved from http://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/
how-big-data-is-different.
Gray, E., Jennings, W., Farrall, S., & Hay, C. (2015, June). Small big data: Using multiple
data-sets to explore unfolding social and economic change. Big Data
and Society. doi:10.1177/2053951715589418.
Case
Su, N., & Nagaash, Pr. (2014). Volkswagen Group: Driving big business with big data.
London, ON: Ivey.
I. Mergel
Figure 1.
Proposed Course Syllabus: Big Data in the Public Sector (continued)
Module 3: Big Data Ethics
Ethical considerations in the interpretation of personally identifiable
information (PII), discrimination, tailoring services and rates, underage
users’ and minors’ using social media and Internet
Readings
Basic HHS policy for protection of human research subjects, 45 C.F.R. 46 (2009).
boyd, d., & Crawford, K. (2012). Critical questions for big data. Information,
Communication and Society, 15(5), 662–679.
Duhigg, C. (2012, February 16). How companies learn your secrets. New York
Times Magazine.
Gorman, S., Perez, E., & Hook, J. (2013, June 7). U.S. collects vast data trove. Wall Street
Journal. Retrieved from http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB1000142412788732429910457
8529112289298922.
Hargittai, E., & Hsieh, Y. P. (2013). Digital inequality. In W. H. Dutton (Ed.), Oxford
Handbook of Internet Studies (pp. 129–150). Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford
University Press.
McCallister, E., Grance, T., & Scarfone, K. (2010). Guide to protecting the confidentiality
of personally identifiable information (PII): Recommendations of the National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST Special Publication 800-122). Gaithersburg, MD:
NIST. Retrieved from http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-122/sp800122.pdf.
Schneier, B. (2013, April 30). Do you want the government buying your data from
corporations. Atlantic. Retrieved from http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/
archive/2013/04/do-you-want-the-government-buying-your-data-fromcorporations/275431.
Zwitter, A. (2014, November). Big data ethics. Big Data and Society.
doi:10.1177/2053951714559253.
Cases
Acquisri, A., & Gross, R. (2009). Predicting Social Security Number from public data.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106(27),
10975–10980.
Dannen, C. (2009, July 1). On Facebook? New algorithm can guess your SSN. Fast
Company. Retrieved from http://www.fastcompany.com/1305136/facebook-newalgorithm-can-guess-your-ssn.
Hogan, M. (2015, July). Data flows and water woes: The Utah Data Center. Big Data and
Society. doi:10.1177/2053951715592429.
NSA Domestic Surveillance Directorate. (n.d.). Your data: If you have nothing to hide, you
have nothing to fear. Retrieved from https://nsa.gov1.info/data.
240
Figure 1.
Module 4:Value Proposition of Big Data
Supporting national priorities and economic development opportunities
Readings
LaValle, S., Lesser, E., Shockley, R., Hopkins, M. S., & Kruschwitz, N. (2011, Winter).
Big data, analytics and the path from insights to value. MIT Sloan Management Review,
21–32.
McKinsey Global Institute. (2011). Big data: The next frontier of innovation, competition, and
productivity. Retrieved from http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/business_technology/
big_data_the_next_frontier_for_innovation.
Shmueli, E., Mazeh, I., Radaelli, L., Pentland, A. S., & Altshuler, Y. (2015). Ride sharing:
A network perspective. In N. Agarwal, K. Xu, & N. Osgood (Eds.), Social computing,
behavioral-cultural modeling, and prediction (pp. 434–439). Berlin, Germany:
Springer International.
Case
Parker, S., & Ramasastry, C. S. (2014). Luminar: Leveraging big data using corporate
entrepreneurship (W14175-PDF-ENG). Brighton, MA: Harvard Business Publishing.
Module 5: The Technological Dimension
Cloud computing, sensors, machine-to-machine communication
Readings
Armbrust, M., Fox, A., Griffith, R., Joseph, A. D., Katz, R., Konwinski, A., et al. (2010).
A view of cloud computing. Communications of the ACM, 53(4), 50–58.
Iansiti, M., & Lakhani, K. (2014, November). Digital ubiquity: How connections, sensors,
and data are revolutionizing business. Harvard Business Review, 92(11), 91–99.
Kaufman, L. M. (2009, July/August). Data security in the world of cloud computing.
Security and Privacy, IEEE, 7(4), 61, 64.
Onnela, J. P., Waber, B. N., Pentland, A., Schnorf, S., & Lazer, D. (2014). Using
sociometers to quantify social interaction patterns. Scientific Reports, 4(5604).
doi:10.1038/srep05604.
Paquette, S., Jaeger, P. T., & Wilson, S. C. (2010). Identifying the security risks associated
with governmental use of cloud computing. Government Information Quarterly, 27(3),
245–253.
Case
Kanter, R. M. (2014). The Weather Company. Harvard Business School Case 314-083.
Retrieved from http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=46052.
I. Mergel
Figure 1.
Module 6: Predictive Analytics
Potential and current use of big data insights
Readings
Bogomolov, A., Lepri, B., Staiano, J., Oliver, N., Pianesi, F., & Pentland. A. (2014).
Once upon a crime: Towards crime prediction from demographics and mobile data.
In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Multimodal Interaction, Istanbul,
Turkey, November 12–16, 2014 (pp. 427–434). New York, NY: Association for
Computing Machinery.
Choi, H., & Varian, H. (2012). Predicting the present with Google trends. Economic
Record, 88(s1), 2–9.
City of Reno dashboard: http://dashboard.reno.gov.
City of Springfield urban planning dashboard: http://gallery.idashboards.com/
preview/?guestuser=webgov&dashID=226.
Davenport, T. H. (2013, December). Analytics 3.0. Harvard Business Review.
Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2013/12/analytics-30.
Ganapati, S. (2011). Using dashboards in government. Retrieved from IBM Center for the
Business of Government website: http://www.businessofgovernment.org/report/
use-dashboards-government.
Gov.UK performance data dashboard: http://www.gov.uk/performance.
Case
Khachatryan, D. (2014). Jennie Maze Limited: Enhancing call center performance using
predictive analytics (Babson College Case BAB263-HCB-ENG). Brighton, MA: Harvard
Business Publishing.
Module 7: The Process Dimension
Crowdsourcing citizen insights to create innovation for government
Readings
Brabham, D. (2008). Crowdsourcing as a model for problem solving: An introduction and
cases. Convergence, 14(1), 75–90.
Howe, J. (2006, June 1). The rise of crowdsourcing. Wired. Retrieved from http://www.
wired.com/2006/06/crowds.
Cases
Boudreau, K. J., Gaule, P., Lakhani, K. R., Riedl, C., & Woolley, A. W. (2014). From
crowds to collaborators: Initiating effort and catalyzing interactions among online creative
workers (Harvard Business School working paper). Retrieved from http://nrs.harvard.
edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:12111352.
NASA’s citizen scientists website: http://science.nasa.gov/citizen-scientists.
242
Figure 1.
Module 7:The Process Dimension (continued)
Tushman, M. L., Lifshitz-Assaf, H., & Herman, K. Houston, we have a problem: NASA and
open innovation (A) (Harvard Business School Case 414-044). Retrieved from http://
www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=47334.
Module 8: Organizational Alignment and New Organizational Structures
• Expanding the C-suite in government: chief data scientists, chief innovation managers, et cetera
•Embedding big data in the organizational culture
Readings:
George, G., Haas, M. R., & Pentland, A. (2014). Big data and management. Academy of
Management Journal, 57(2), 321–326.
Stone, A. (2015, March 4). Chief data officers: Shaping one of the newest positions in
government. Governing Technology. http://www.govtech.com/data/Chief-Data-OfficersShaping-One-of-the-Newest-Positions-in-Government.html.
Module 9: Smart Cities and the Internet of Things
Smart city concepts, functionalities, sensors, data collection
Readings
Bingham-Hall, J., & Law, S. (2015, August). Connected or informed? Local Twitter
networking in a London neighbourhood. Big Data and Society.
doi:10.1177/2053951715597457.
Gil-Garcia. R., Helbig, N., & Ojo, A. (2014, June). Being smart: Emerging technologies
and innovation in the public sector. Government Information Quarterly, 31(s1),. I1–I8.
Lee, I., & Lee, K. (2015). The Internet of things (IoT): Applications, investments, and
challenges for enterprises. Business Horizons, 58(4), 431–440.
O’Grady, M., & O’Hare, G. (2012). How smart is your city? Science, 335(6076), 1581–
1582.
Thrift, N. (2014, June). The “sentient” city and what it may portend. Big Data and Society.
doi:10.1177/2053951714532241.
Wood, C. (2014, November 3). Smart cities: Understanding the untapped value of sensor
data. Government Technology. Retrieved from http://www.govtech.com/data/SmartCities-Understanding-the-Untapped-Value-of-Sensor-Data.html.
Case
Ovchinnikov, A. (2013). Global warming revisited (B) (Darden School of Business Case
UV6690-PDF-ENG). Brighton, MA: Harvard Business Publishing.
I. Mergel
Figure 1.
Module 10: Big Data in Government
Open data, social media data, administratively collected data, scientific data
Readings
Baack, S. (2015, July). Datafication and empowerment: How the open data movement
re-articulates notions of democracy, participation, and journalism. Big Data and Society.
doi:10.1177/2053951715594634.
Helms, J. (2015, February 25). Five examples of how federal agencies use big data. IBM
Center for the Business of Government blog. Retrieved from http://www.
businessofgovernment.org/blog/business-government/five-examples-how-federalagencies-use-big-data.
Lyon, D. (2014, July). Surveillance, Snowden, and big data: Capacities, consequences,
critique. Big Data and Society. doi:10.1177/2053951714541861.
Mervis, J. (2012). Agencies rally to tackle big data. Science, 336(6077), 22.
Pirog, M. A. (2014). Data will drive innovation in public policy and management research.
Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 33(2), 537–543.
Case
Atkinson, G. M., & Wald, D. J. (2007). “Did you feel it?” Intensity data: A surprisingly
good measure of earthquake ground motion. Seismological Research Letters, 78(3), 362–368.
Module 11: Big Data in Politics
Political engagement, social movements, uncovering online networks, elections
Readings:
Asal, N. N., & Rethemeyer, R. K. (2015, February 26). Building terrorism from social ties: The
dark side of social capital. Civil Wars, 1–23. doi:10.1080/13698249.2014.981942.
Clark, W. R., & Golder, M. (2014). Big data, causal inference, and formal theory:
Contradictory trends in political science? PS: Political Science and Politics, 48(1), 65–70.
Dumas, C. L., LaManna, D., Harrison, T. M., Ravi, S., Kotfila, C., Gervais, N., et al.
(2015, August). Examining political mobilization of online communities through
e-petitioning behavior in We the People. Big Data and Society.
doi:10.1177/2053951715598170.
Eagle, N., Pentland, A., & Lazer, D. (2009). Inferring friendship network structure by
using mobile phone data. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United
States of America, 106(36), 15274–15278.
Sudhahar, S., Veltri, G. A., & Cristianini, N. (2015, March). Automated analysis of the US
presidential elections using big data and network analysis. Big Data and Society.
doi:10.1177/2053951715572916.
Case
Diesner, J., Frantz, T., & Carley, K. M. (2005). Communication networks from
the Enron email corpus: “It’s always about the people. Enron is no different.”
Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, 11(3), 201–228.
244
Figure 1.
Module 12: Big Data in Public Health
Predicting pandemic outbreaks, tracking infectious diseases, assessing health
implications, using sensors, implementing mobile health applications
Readings
Christakis, N. A., & Fowler, J. H. (2007). The spread of obesity in a large social network
over 32 years. New England Journal of Medicine, 357, 370–379.
Cohen, B., Ferng, Y. H., Wong-McLoughlin, J., Jia, H., Morse, S. S., & Larson, E. L.
(2012). Predictors of flu vaccination among urban Hispanic children and adults. Journal
of Epidemiology and Community Health, 66(3), 204–209. doi:10.1136/
jech.2009.099879.
Lazer, D., Pentland, A. S., Adamic, L., Aral, S., Barabasi, A. L., Brewer, D., et al. (2009).
Computational social science. Science, 323(5915), 721.
Morse, S. S., Mazet, J. A., Woolhouse, M., Parrish, C. R., Carroll, D., Karesh, W. B., et al.
(2012). Prediction and prevention of the next pandemic zoonosis. Lancet, 380(9857),
1956–1965. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61684-5.
Morse, S. S. (2012). Public health surveillance and infectious disease detection. Biosecurity
and Bioterrorism: Biodefense Strategy, Practice, and Science, 10(1), 6-16. doi:10.1089/
bsp.2011.0088.
Olson, S. H., Reed, P., Cameron, K. N., Ssebide, B. J., Johnson, C. K., Morse, S. S.,
et al. (2012). Dead or alive: Animal sampling during Ebola hemorrhagic fever outbreaks in humans. Emerging Health Threats Journal, 5. doi:10.3402/ehtj.v5i0.9134.
Module 13:Data Analysis Practicum
• Social network analysis for social scientists
• Introduction into NodeXL for social media data collection and analysis
Readings
Contractor, N., Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (2006). Testing multitheoretical, multilevel
hypotheses about organizational networks: An analytic framework and empirical
example. Academy of Management Review, 31(3), 681–703.
Gandomi, A., & Haider, M. (2015). Beyond the hype: Big data concepts, methods, and
analytics. International Journal of Information Management, 35(2), 137–144.
Gray, E., Jennings, W., Farrall, S., & Hay, C. (2015, June). Small big data: Using multiple
data-sets to explore unfolding social and economic change. Big Data and Society.
doi:10.1177/2053951715589418.
Schroeder, R. (2014, December). Big data and the brave new world of social media
research. Big Data and Society. doi:10.1177/2053951714563194.
I. Mergel
CONCLUSION
The suggested syllabus for the Big Data in Pub
lic Affairs class is derived from the needs of
practitioners and the apparent lack of MPA
classes that address comparable issues. The dev
elopment of government information manage
ment or information technology management
concentrations and course offerings seems to
have stalled, and the MPA programs reviewed
in this article (see Table 1) rely heavily on
courses offered in neighboring disciplines, such
as computer science, engineering, or business.
This does not seem to be the best scenario for
MPA programs, students, or future public
managers. For example, tuition dollars from
MPA students interested in technology
management innovations in the public sector
do not accrue to MPA programs. Also, given
the nature of other disciplines, I predict that
most of these outside classes will not provide
contextual information or qualitative insights
into the most recent developments observable
in the public sector. At the same time, the fastmoving trend toward integrating new tech
nologies in government, not only for external
public affairs, but also for internal use of new
data sets, requires that future public managers
be schooled in big data.
The modules for the suggested Big Data in
Public Affairs class provide a systematic review
of the five management dimensions vis-à-vis
big data that future public managers should be
aware of, as well as a research methods prac
ticum in which students collect, analyze, and
interpret social media data. The integration of
both managerial practices and analytical skills
provides MPA students with insights into
emergent big data concepts, which can be
combined with traditional performance
management or CitiStat classes. The modules
focused on specific public affairs domains—
such as government, public health, or politics—
are designed to capture a variety of practical
applications that classes in computer science or
engineering programs might not address.
The integration of such a class into a generalist
MPA curriculum is not meant to compete with
existing public management or public policy
246
classes that focus on the analysis and inter
pretation of administratively collected data.
Instead, this new course is designed to augment
existing data analysis classes that focus on clean
data sets. Big data is messy and far from clean.
Similarly, methods of big data analysis are still
developing. Nevertheless, it is important to
prepare MPA students for the new realities of
the public affairs workplace and equip them for
careers in organizational roles such as data
scientists and chief innovation officers.
REFERENCES
Asal, N. N., & Rethemeyer, R. K. (2015, February 26).
Building terrorism from social ties: The dark side of
social capital. Civil Wars, 1–23. doi:10.1080/13698
249.2014.981942.
Atkinson, G. M., & Wald, D. J. (2007). “Did you feel
it?” Intensity data: A surprisingly good measure of
earthquake ground motion. Seismological Research
Letters, 78, 362–368.
Bingham-Hall, J., & Law, S. (2015, August).
Connected or informed? Local Twitter networking
in a London neighbourhood. Big Data and Society.
doi:10.1177/2053951715597457.
boyd, d., & Crawford, K. (2012). Critical questions for
big data. Information, Communication and Society,
15(5), 662–679.
Brabham, D. (2008). Crowdsourcing as a model for
problem solving: An introduction and cases. Con
vergence, 14(1), 75–90.
Brownson, R. C., Fielding, J. E., & Maylahn, C. M.
(2009). Evidence-based public health: A funda
mental concept for public health practice. Annual
Review of Public Health, 30, 175–201. doi:10.1146/
annurev.publhealth.031308.100134.
Burrus, D. (2014). The Internet of things is far bigger
than anyone realizes. Wired. Retrieved from http://
www.wired.com/insights/2014/11/the-internet-ofthings-bigger.
Clark, W. R., & Golder, M. (2014). Big data, causal
inference, and formal theory: Contradictory trends
in political science? PS: Political Science and Politics,
48(1), 65–70.
Cohen, B., Ferng, Y. H., Wong-McLoughlin, J.,
Jia, H., Morse, S. S., & Larson, E. L. (2012).
Predictors of flu vaccination among urban Hispanic
children and adults. Journal of Epidemiology and
Community Health, 66(3), 204–209. doi:10.1136/
jech.2009.099879.
Court, D. (2015, January). Getting big impact from
big data. McKinsey Quarterly. Retrieved from http:
//www.mckinsey.com/insights/business_technology
/getting_big_impact_from_big_data.
Cox, M., & Elsworth, D. (1997, October 18–24).
Application-controlled demand paging for outof-core visualization. Paper presented at the 8th
IEEE Visualization ’97 Conference, Phoenix, AZ.
Retrieved from http://www.evl.uic.edu/cavern/
rg/20040525_renambot/Viz/parallel_volviz/
paging_outofcore_viz97.pdf.
Cukier, K. N. (2010, February 25). Data, data
everywhere. Economist. Retrieved from http://www.
economist.com/node/15557443.
Cukier, K. N., & Mayer-Schoenberger, V. (2013, May/
June). The rise of big data: How it’s changing the
way we think about the world. Foreign Affairs.
Retrieved from http://www.foreignaffairs.com/
articles/2013-04-03/rise-big-data.
Davenport, T. H., Barth, P., & Bean, R. (2012). How
“big data” is different. MIT Sloan Management
Review, 54(1), 43–46. Retrieved from http://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/how-big-data-is-different.
Desouza, K. (2014). Realizing the promise of big data.
Washington, DC: IBM Center for the Business of
Government. Retrieved from http://www.businessofgovernment.org/sites/default/files/Realizing the
Promise of Big Data.pdf.
Eagle, N., Pentland, A., & Lazer, D. (2009). Inferring
friendship network structure by using mobile phone
data. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
of the United States of America, 106(36), 15274–15278.
Editorial: Community cleverness required. (2008).
Nature, 455(1). Retrieved from http://www.nature.
com/nature/journal/v455/n7209/full/455001a.html.
Friedman, U. (2012, October 8). Big data: A short history. Foreign Policy. http://foreignpolicy.com/2012/
10/08/big-data-a-short-history.
Gartner. (n.d.). Gartner IT glossary: Big data. Retrieved
from http://www.gartner.com/it-glossary/big-data.
George, G., Haas, M. R., & Pentland, A. (2014). Big
data and management. Academy of Management
Journal, 57(2), 321–326.
Helms, J. (2015). Five examples of how federal agen
cies use big data. Retrieved from IBM Center for the
Business of Government website: http://www.businessofgovernment.org/blog/business-government/
five-examples-how-federal-agencies-use-big-data.
Iansiti, M., & Lakhani, K. (2014). Digital ubiquity: How
connections, sensors, and data are revolutionizing
business. Harvard Business Review, 92(11), 91–99.
Kayyali, R., Knott, D., & Van Kuiken, S. (2013). The
big-data revolution in US health care: Accelerating
value and innovation. Retrieved from McKinsey
and Company website: http://www.mckinsey.com/
insights/health_systems_and_services/the_bigdata_revolution_in_us_health_care.
Lazer, D., Kennedy, R., King, G., & Vespignani, A.
(2014). The parable of Google flu: Traps in big data
analysis. Science, 343(6176), 1203–1205.
Lazer, D., Pentland, A. S., Adamic, L., Aral, S., Barabasi,
A. L., Brewer, D., et al. (2009). Computational
social science. Science, 323(5915), 721–723.
Mason, R. O. (1986, March). Four ethical issues of the
information age. MIS Quarterly, 5–12.
McAffee, A., & Brynjolfsson, E. (2012). Big data: The
management revolution. Harvard Business Review,
90(10), 60–68.
McKinsey Global Institute. (2011). Big data: The next
frontier of innovation, competition, and productivity.
Retrieved from http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/
business_technology/big_data_the_next_frontier_
for_innovation.
Mergel, I., Rethemeyer, R. K., & Isett, K. (2015). Big data
in public affairs. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Mervis, J. (2012). Agencies rally to tackle big data.
Science, 336(6077), 22.
I. Mergel
Miller, J., & Kalil, T. (2014). Crowdsourcing ideas to
accelerate economic growth and prosperity through
a strategy for American innovation. Retrieved from
White House website: http://www.whitehouse.gov/
blog/2014/07/28/crowdsourcing-ideas-accelerateeconomic-growth-and-prosperity-throughstrategy-ameri.
Morse, S. S. (2012). Public health surveillance and
infectious disease detection. Biosecurity and
bioterrorism: biodefense strategy, practice, and science,
10(1), 6–16. doi:10.1089/bsp.2011.0088.
Murdoch, T. B., & Detsky, A. S. (2013). The inevitable
application of big data to health care. Journal of the
American Medical Association, 309(13), 1351–1352.
Neumann, W. R., Park, Y. J., & Panek, E. (2012).
Tracking the flow of information into the home:
An empirical assessment of the digital revolution in
the U.S. from 1960–2005. International Journal of
Communication, 6, 1022–1041.
Novy, A., & Leubolt, B. (2005). Participatory
budgeting in Porto Alegre: Social innovation and
the dialectical relationship of state and civil society.
Urban Studies, 42(22), 2023–2036.
Raddick, M. J., Bracey, G., Gay, P. L., Lintott, C. J.,
Murray, P., Schawinski, K., et al. (2010). Galaxy
zoo: Exploring the motivations of citizen science
volunteers. Astronomy Education Review, 9(1).
Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/abs/1303.6886.
U.S. News and World Report. (2012). Best grad
schools: Information and technology management.
Retrieved
from
http://grad-schools.usnews.
rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/
top-public-affairs-schools/information-technologymanagement-rankings?int=a95909&int=a06908.
Wade, C. (2014, April 15). The Reddit reckoning.
Slate. Retrieved from http://www.slate.com/
articles/technology/technology/2014/04/reddit_
and_the_boston_marathon_bombings_how_the_
site_reckoned_with_its_own.html.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
is associate professor of public ad
ministration and international affairs at Syracuse
University’s Maxwell School of Citizenship and
Public Affairs. Her research focuses on network
ed governance as well as digital and managerial
innovations in the public sector.
Ines Mergel
O’Grady, M., & O’Hare, G. (2012). How smart is
your city? Science, 335(6076), 1581–1582.
O’Malley, M. (2014). Doing what works: Governing
in the age of big data. Public Administration Review,
74(5), 555–556.
Onnela, J., Saramäki, J., Hyvönen, J., Szabó, G.,
Lazer, D., Kaski, K., et al. (2007). Structure and
tie strengths in mobile communication networks.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the
United States of America, 104(18), 7332–7336.
Overby, S. (2013). 6 IT outsourcing lessons learned
from HealthCare.gov’s troubled launch. Retrieved
from CIO website: http://www.cio.com/article/
2381755/outsourcing/6-it-outsourcing-lessonsl e a r n e d - f r o m - h e a l t h c a r e - g ov - s - t r o u b l e d launch.html.
Pirog, M. A. (2014). Data will drive innovation in
public policy and management research. Journal of
Policy Analysis and Management, 33(2), 537–543.
Prpić, J., Taeihagh, A., & Melton, J. (2015). The
fundamentals of policy crowdsourcing. Policy and
Internet. doi:dx.doi.org/10.1002/poi3.102.
248
GIS Education in U.S. Public
Administration Programs: Preparing
the Next Generation of Public Servants
Nancy J. Obermeyer
Indiana State University
Laxmi Ramasubramanian
Hunter College
Lisa Warnecke
SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry
GeoManagement Associates Inc.
ABSTRACT
Geographic information systems (GIS), data, and analysis are common and crucial resources for
public agencies throughout the United States. Applications of GIS run the gamut from delivery of
emergency services to monitoring the spread of infectious diseases and environmental contamination
and more. Today’s public sector job descriptions often identify GIS knowledge as a must-have skill
for new public administration graduates. Thus, public administration programs have a responsibility
to their students, to the public agencies who hire their graduates—and to the citizenry—to provide
adequate preparation in GIS skills. This article reports the results of a survey of public administration
programs in the United States to determine how well such programs have integrated GIS instruction.
Our results suggest that although there is interest in GIS among public administration programs, GIS is
not yet well integrated into their curricula; however, there is momentum to enhance the role of GIS.
KEYWORDS
Public administration, geospatial, geographic information systems, GIS, education
Geographic information systems (GIS) along
with geographic information science principles
and analytical methods have become a common
and crucial resource at all levels of government
throughout the United States and beyond. Al
though GIS is often associated with software, it
is an integrated system that includes hardware,
software, data, and people. Effective GIS use
requires the acquisition of specialized know
ledge and skills. At the heart of GIS lies the
“First Law of Geography,” which geographer
JPAE 22 (2), 249–266
Waldo Tobler (1970) described thus: “Every
thing is related to everything else, but near things
are more related than distant things” (p. 236).
Coincidentally, Tobler is also the geographer
who figured out how to convert analog maps to
digital format, thus paving the way for GIS.
Location is the linchpin within and among
many disparate functions of local, state, and
federal governments; nonprofit organizations;
and private businesses. Leveraging this location
linchpin using GIS capabilities provides unpre
N. J. Obermeyer, L. Ramasubramanian, & L. Warnecke
cedented opportunities for coordination and
collaboration that increase the effectiveness of
public services.
Public sector applications of GIS run the gamut
from delivery of both daily and emergency
services, to monitoring the spread of infectious
diseases, to assisting in redrawing voting and
school districts, to locating the presence of
environmental contamination, to deploying
drones, and much more. The basic fact that
everything has a location sets the stage for the
widespread use of GIS and geographical analy
sis in the public sector. Huxhold (1991, p. 23)
estimates that at least 80% of all information
collected and used at the local level is related to
geography. Sarkar and Pick (2012, p. 2) echo
this statistic in their discussion of geographic
data in the business community. In fact, Haque
(2001), writing in Public Administration Re
view, noted that GIS “has significantly influenc
ed the way public administrators implement
public policy” (p. 260).
Public organizations at all jurisdictional levels
throughout the world use GIS. According to
Halpern and Troupp (2013),
The federal government and policy makers
increasingly use geospatial information
and tools like GIS for producing flood
plain maps, conducting the census, map
ping foreclosures, congressional redistricting, and responding to natural hazards
such as wildfires, earthquakes, and tsun
amis. For policy makers, this type of
analysis can greatly assist in clarifying
complex problems that may involve local,
state, and federal government, and affect
businesses, residential areas, and federal
installations. (p. vii)
Additional examples of government agencies at
all levels using GIS may be found in jurisdictions
around the world. Implementing GIS often
reaps economic benefits for the jurisdiction by
generating savings, decreasing costs, increasing
efficiency, or improving the effectiveness of
public agencies (Thomas, Parr, & Hinthorne
2012). For example, Riverside, California’s use
250
of GIS to fight graffiti saves $200,000 per
year in its graffiti-abatement budget. A returnon-investment analysis in Baltimore County,
Maryland, determined that investment in GIS
returned more than $4.5 million in gross
annual benefits. The Navajo Nation’s use of
GIS to inventory roads led to an increase in
Indian Reservations Roads funding of 30%
(Thomas, Parr, & Hinthorne 2012).
Geographic information systems have been
used since the 1960s. As noted, Tobler made it
possible to digitize maps in 1959. The earliest
broad-based public sector GIS, the Canadian
GIS, was established in 1964; it integrated
agriculture, forestry, wildlife, and recreation, as
well as present land use and the boundaries of
census subdivisions using a computer-based
mapping system (Tomlinson, 2012). The U.S.
federal government began use of geoprocessing during the 1960s in both the defense and
civilian sectors; for example, in the U.S.
Geological Survey and U.S. Census Bureau
(Foresman, 1998). State governments in the
United States did similarly at about the same
time, often in combination with aerial photo
graphy and initially for land planning, as
in Connecticut, Minnesota, and New York
(Warnecke, 1998). About half the states had an
automated natural resource information system
by the end of the 1970s, some of which
included GIS capabilities for singular or
multiple purposes such as water resources,
forestry, or wildlife management. By the end of
the 1980s, “each of the 50 states had some GIS
activity…which included not only natural
resources and planning, but also transportation, public utility regulation, environmental
protection, emergency management, economic
development, and social service functions”
(Warnecke, 1998, pp. 268–269). At the same
time, more than 40 federal agencies were
known to be using GIS (Federal Interagency
Coordinating Committee on Digital Carto
graphy [FICCDC], 1990).
While GIS use grew during these early decades,
it was accompanied by much experimentation,
and computer programming expertise was
often needed to conduct geographical analysis.
GIS Education in US Public Administration Programs
Times have changed. GIS technology, data and
storage, and analytical and user interface cap
abilities are now far more affordable and ubi
quitous—and easier to use—than in the past.
Commercial-off-the-shelf software can be
expensive, although free and open-source GIS
software is now readily available as well. Equally
important, ready-to-use geographic data sets
are now widely available and shared relatively
freely across governmental jurisdictions. In
fact, a great deal of basic data are gathered,
maintained, and made available by govern
mental agencies. Federal agencies that provide
digital maps and data that can be easily
downloaded at no cost include the U.S. Census
Bureau, the U.S. Geological Survey, and the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Admin
istration. State and local digital maps and data
are also available. Most of the 50 states and the
federal government have data clearinghouses.
For example, the Indiana Geographic Infor
mation Council, a nonprofit organization
with members in both the public and private
sector, has built a website from which anyone
may download geographic data from any (or
all) of the state’s 92 counties at no cost
(www.indianamap.org).
In short, geographic information systems and
science are well integrated in the public sector
today. Moreover, position descriptions for
public sector employment increasingly identify
GIS as a must-have skill for newly minted
public administration graduates. GIS-related
jobs include positions at all levels, from analyst
to GIS managers. Even for jobs that are not
specifically GIS-oriented, knowledge of geo
graphic information science is a plus. Signi
ficantly, the U.S. Department of Labor has
identified the geospatial sciences as a “high
growth industry,” specifically noting that
“revenues from the public sector lead geospatial
market growth and account for more than onethird of total revenue” (U.S. Department of
Labor, Employment and Training Admini
stration [ETA], 2015). While noting that
federal agencies were among the early adopters
of GIS, the Department of Labor also
acknowledges the growing use of GIS among
state and local governments and describes the
technology’s uses as “widespread and diverse”
(U.S. Department of Labor, ETA, 2015).
Nonprofit organizations are also adopting GIS
(Al-Kodmany, 2012; Eisman, 2011).
Thus, public administration programs have a
growing responsibility, both to their students
and to the public agencies for which they
nurture their graduates, to provide adequate
pre
paration in GIS skills as well as in
understanding its scientific and technical
underpinnings (Obermeyer, 1995). Moreover,
given that governmental agencies are responsible
to their client groups and to the citizenry at
large, so too are the institutions that prepare
the public leaders of tomorrow. This raises the
question, are public administration programs
up to the challenge?
This article reports the results of a survey of
public administration programs in the United
States to assess the degree to which they have
integrated GIS training. Respondents complet
ed the online survey during the summer of
2015. We begin the article with a discussion of
the growing use of GIS in the public sector,
establishing the importance of education in
geographic information science for aspiring
public administrators. We continue with a
discussion of existing studies on the prevalence of GIS in public administration degree
programs. We then describe and detail our
survey findings and conclude by presenting
recommendations for preparing the next
generation of public administrators.
GIS IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
As noted, GIS is now in use at all levels of
government, from local to county, to state, to
national, to international, and everything in
between, having overcome early bureaucratic
hurdles (Obermeyer, 1990, 2007). In this section,
we discuss the diffusion of GIS into the public
sector from its early days to the present, starting
with local government implementations.
Implementation of GIS at the local level has
been relatively difficult to track, given that
there are more than 80,000 cities and counties
in the United States. The International City/
County Management Association (ICMA)
regularly conducts nationwide surveys of local
governments. In 1995, ICMA’s nationwide
computer technology survey of cities included
a question about GIS. Over half of the re
sponding cities with a population over 250,000
indicated use of GIS at the time (International
City/County Management Association [ICMA],
1995). Warnecke, Beattie, Kollin, and Lyday
(1998) used these and other data from the
National Association of Counties and other
organizations to design a survey about GIS
implementation at the local level; the re
spondent sample consisted of 120 cities and 80
counties distributed over four regions of the
United States. Their findings indicated that use
of GIS among the surveyed cities and counties
rose from 40% in 1992 to a predicted 87% by
1997. The greatest GIS use was indicated and
expected in the West and South; the least such
use, in the northeastern states. Concurrently,
the number of staff members working with
GIS rose from an average of 5 per jurisdiction
in 1992 to 7 in 1996. The study concluded that
GIS had not been used to its fullest potential
(Warnecke, Beattie, Kollin, & Lyday, 1998).
Furthermore, survey respondents indicated
that they were not sharing geographic data as
broadly as technological advances allowed.
Warnecke et al. (1998) explored the institutional
infrastructure for GIS as a means to evaluate
the capacity for sharing data and other GIS
resources. Over 69% of responding jurisdictions
indicated having a lead office for GIS, but less
than half of respondents officially designated
these roles (Warnecke et.al., 1998, p. 59). Even
fewer had data clearinghouses for GIS, and
only 14% had official data clearinghouses (p.
61), Other studies from the late 1990s and
early 2000s include work by Caron and Bédard
(2002); Haithcoat, Warnecke, and NedovicBudic (2001); Kreizman (2002); the National
Research Council (2003); Norris and Demeter
(1999); and Walsham and Sahay (1999). These
studies echo the conclusion that GIS is valuable
in the public sector and note the need for further
development and increased implementation.
Nedovic-Budic and Godschalk (1996) identi
fied three reasons why GIS is attractive to
252
local governments. First, as noted previously
(Huxhold 1991), a large percentage (around
80%) of the data used in local agencies are
geographically referenced. Second, information
is considered to be a fundamental governmental
resource. Third, GIS has the potential to
improve the efficiency and effectiveness of
public organizations (Nedovic-Budic &
Godschalk, 1996, p. 554; Thomas, 2012).
A more recent study (Nedovic-Budic, Knaap,
Budhathoki, & Cavric, 2009) focused on
metropolitan areas in the United States,
emphasizing the “provision and integration of
spatial data at the metropolitan level” (p. 5).
Note the emphasis on geographic data, a viable
surrogate for GIS in the context of our current
study. The authors focused on metropolitan
agencies because of their sharing of geographic
data across jurisdictional boundaries (usually
city and county levels) and the broad range of
their official duties. These duties include
“transportation, economic development, air and
water quality, social equity, growth, housing,
and other urban and regional challenges,”
including emergency management (NedovicBudic et al., 2009, p. 10). In fact, there is a long
history of public access to cartographic infor
mation assembled by governmental agencies
(Obermeyer, 2015).
Building on the value of geographic data to
public agencies, Pirog (2014) identifies data as
“key inputs to the production of public policy
and management research,” noting that the
federal Data.gov website lists “80,000 datasets,
searchable by key words, and produced by gov
ernments at all levels, universities, nonprofits,
commercial, and collaborative efforts” (p. 537).
The author goes on to note the increasing
availability of real-time spatially referenced
data, suggesting that “geographically situated
data will continue to push geospatial modeling to the forefront” and drive public policy
and management research in the next decade
(Pirog, 2014, pp. 537–540). Similarly, Gana
pati (2011) identifies GIS as “one of the core
technologies facilitating local e-government
processes” in the United States (p. 426). The
growth of public participation GIS (PPGIS) is
another element of this trend (Obermeyer,
1998a; Ramasubramanian, 2010).
Research on GIS implementation at the state
level began in the early 1980s (Caron &
Stewart, 1984; Cornwell, 1982). A few years
later, the Council of State Governments (CSG)
sponsored an exhaustive investigation into GIS
in all 50 states, known as the “50 States
Compendium” (Warnecke, Johnson, Marshall,
& Brown, 1992). In 1991, Georgia governor
Zell Miller invited the leader of each state’s
compendium initiative to meet in Atlanta; 38
of them attended. Together, these leaders
formed the National States Geographic
Information Council (NSGIC) to learn from
each other and to represent a unified voice
about state government GIS issues and needs,
particularly to the federal government. NSGIC
has maintained a website and held at least one
meeting each year since then. State-level
organizations, like the Indiana Geographic
Information Council are aligned with NSGIC.
Several subsequent investigations into GIS in
the 50 states have been systematically conducted since NSGIC was organized. However,
after the mid-1990s, increasing GIS adoption
made it essentially impossible to systematically
investigate all state agencies with GIS activities
across all 50 states (Warnecke, 1995). Research
thereafter changed focus to primarily insti
tutional GIS conditions in all 50 or a subset of
the states, including authorizing directives;
coordination of entities, groups, roles, and
functionality; and resource mechanisms and
levels, including those for financing and staffing
GIS coordination efforts. For example, almost
all states had at least one GIS coordinating
group by 1995, and two thirds also had an
authorized GIS coordinator position or office
(Warnecke, 1995). These findings are similar
to those concerning large local government
jurisdictions (Warnecke et al., 1998). All
hard-copy documents provided by each of
the 50 states to CSG and Warnecke for the
compendium, as well as subsequent queries,
are available for research use at the main library
of the State University of New York College
of Environmental Science and Forestry, located
in Syracuse (SUNY-ESF).
While studies have documented early GIS
developments in individual federal agencies
(see, e.g., Foresman, 1998), there have been
few systematic investigations across agencies.
The most extensive research conducted to date
was done by the National Academy of Public
Administration (NAPA) in 1998. The study
arose in response to congressional requests to
investigate options for consolidating civilian
federal surveying and mapping activities and to
propose new organizational approaches to
facilitate the expanding use of GIS and related
technology at all levels of government. In 1994,
President Bill Clinton signed Executive Order
No. 12,906 to coordinate GIS-related activities
at the federal level.
The NAPA panel made several recommend
ations based on extensive investigation, pro
ducing the organization’s largest report to that
time (National Academy of Public Administra
tion [NAPA], 1998). Key recom
mendations
were to draft a federal statute to define federal
agency roles and responsibilities, establish a
Geographic Data Service to unify data devel
opment and management efforts, and create an
advisory committee including state, local, and
other representatives. As a result, the National
Geospatial Advisory Committee (NGAC) was
formed to provide input to the Federal Geo
graphic Data Committee (FGDC), the latter
created in 1990 from a previous interagency
federal committee focused on coordinating
dig
ital cartography. The other two recom
mendations have not been followed to date,
but FGDC and NGAC continue to conduct
coordinating and data disseminating efforts.
Two congressional offices have also conducted
investigations about federal GIS-related acti
vities, including the U.S. Government Account
ability Office (and its predecessor, the General
Accounting Office) and the Congressional
Research Service, though these investigations
have been much shorter in duration and
produced fewer results than the NAPA study.
In addition, the National Academy of Sciences
has conducted studies related to GIS for various
federal agencies and topics over the years.
As cited previously, the Federal Interagency
Coordinating Committee on Digital Carto
graphy (FICCDC), identified over 40 federal
agencies with GIS activities in 1990, and this
number has since grown. Federal agencies, like
state and local governments, develop and
disseminate vast amounts of geographically
referenced data and imagery. For example, the
U.S. Geological Survey provides downloadable
satellite imagery and digital data that has
traditionally been used for mapping, and the
U.S. Census Bureau makes demographic and
socioeconomic information available for down
load. The federal Data.gov website provides
access to more than163,000 data sets at all
levels of government available for download
(catalog.data.gov/dataset).
GIS IN THE JOB MARKET
All of this leads to questions about the impor
tance of GIS training as a means to qualify
for jobs in public administration. In an August
2015 search of USAJobs.gov, a federal website, we identified 58 federal job openings that
re
quired GIS expertise. The opportunities
included positions in crime analysis, wildlife
biology, archeology, community planning, for
estry, hydrology, and soil conservation. On the
same day, a search of the GIS Jobs Clear
inghouse (www.gjc.org) identified 174 jobs in
GIS in the United States, in both the public
and private sectors. These search results did not
include positions that did not focus exclusively
on GIS but for which knowledge about it
would be valuable.
We do know, however, that GIS has been ident
ified as an increasingly valuable knowledge and
skill set. In 2004, the U.S. Department of
Labor identified the geospatial industry as a
high-growth field (U.S. Department of Labor,
ETA, 2015). In particular, the Department of
Labor identified the diffusion of GIS to state
and local governments as a critical development
that has increased the value of geospatial know
ledge and expertise, opening positions across
the country. Quoting the Geospatial Informa
tion and Technology Association, the Depart
ment of Labor noted that “because the uses for
geospatial technology are so widespread and
254
diverse, the market is growing at an annual rate
of almost 35%, with the commercial subsection
of the market expanding at the rate of 100%
each year” (U.S. Department of Labor, ETA,
2015). The Department of Labor went on to
suggest that apprenticeship programs may play
a role in putting more GIS professionals in the
pipeline. Public administration programs can
play a key role in this trend.
Similarly, the National Geospatial Advisory
Committee (NGAC, 2012) suggests that there
is “a shortage of qualified and skilled workers”
in the field. “Solving these workforce issues
requires new methods, practices, partnerships,
and outreach for this high growth, high tech
nology industry among industry, academia,
and government” (p. 3). NGAC (2012) goes
on to suggest that the Federal Geographic Data
Committee should work with academic part
ners to “facilitate development of appropriate
training and curricula to address emerging
geospatial workforce needs” (p. 16).
GIS IN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION EDUCATION
Academic discussions in public administration
have long recognized the value of GIS for
public administration graduates. Mergel’s (2012)
research suggests that “most information man
agement syllabi in the top 50 public affairs
schools provide programming skills for database management, website programming skills,
or applied exercises of…GIS applications”
(p. 472). Note that GIS is one of three IT
applications taught. Mergel goes on to suggest
a growing role for social media as an important
element in the increasingly networked work
place and the need to integrate this into public
administration programs. Several authors have
specifically identified emergency services as a
rapidly evolving public sector GIS application
(Comfort & Wukich, 2013; Crosby, 2010;
McGuire & Schneck, 2010). The past president of the Network of Schools of Public Policy,
Affairs, and Administration (NASPAA), Jack
Knott, identified GIS as a relevant factor that is
transforming public service education by using
spatial analysis and visualization technologies
to analyze and address public policy issues
(Knott, 2013).
At Austin Peay University, public administra
tion faculty and GIS technicians implemented
a pilot program designed to integrate GIS into
their research methods and urban planning
courses. Their approach emphasized online
resources and selected topics to “prepare public
service professionals who understand, and can
make advantageous use of GIS as an admin
istrative tool” rather than preparing students to
become GIS technicians (Starnes, 2008, p. 6).
This pilot program did not evolve into a per
manent element of the curriculum (B. J. Starnes,
personal communication, July 8, 2015).
Significantly, 10 years ago, Akhlaque Haque
(2005), under the auspices of NASPAA, took a
“60-second survey” of 135 NASPAA-accredited
public administration programs to gauge the
integration of GIS into their curricula. At that
time, only 2 of the 135 programs surveyed
(1.5%) required that their students complete a
GIS course. Just over half of the programs
(72, or 52%) allowed their students to take
GIS as an elective course. Thirty-five programs
(26%) offered GIS courses occasionally, while
42 programs (31%) had GIS resources within
their departments. Most of the respondents
(112, or 83%) did not recommend that
NASPAA make GIS instruction an accredita
tion requirement. Only 16 (12%) did recom
mend adding such instruction.
The above summary suggests that GIS and
geospatial data and analysis are well integrated
into the public sector. Furthermore, the public
administration community is well aware of
these topics’ significance, and education in
GIS is gaining ground. This brings us to our
current study.
THE CURRENT STUDY
Three separate national organizations provided
support for our survey efforts: NASPAA, the
American Society for Public Administration
(ASPA), and the University Consortium for
Geographic Information Science (UCGIS).
The groundwork for this study was laid at
ASPA’s annual conference in March 2015 in
Chicago, at a special session discussing the
integration of GIS into the curricula of public
administration programs. Less than three
months later, at the beginning of June 2015,
we launched the survey via an ASPA webinar.
The target audience for our survey was direct
ors (or other authorized faculty) of public
administration programs in the United States.
While our original intent was to focus only on
NASPAA-accredited programs, of which there
are just over 170 (NASPAA, 2014), we quickly
recognized that not all public administration
programs are accredited, and we broadened
our outreach. Ultimately, our target survey
population was drawn from U.S. News and
World Report’s “Best Public Affairs Schools”
rankings. Using this list, we created an Excel
file that included the name of the university
where each public administration program is
located, along with its score and ranking ac
cording to U.S. News and World Report’s 2012
assessment (the most recent available). This
list included 265 schools. We used the links
embedded in the U.S. News and World Report
rankings to find the public administration
program admission websites.
Recognizing that this information still had
limitations, we then searched the websites of
the public administration programs and ident
ified a contact person—usually the program
director—for each of the programs listed (some
of the programs were listed but not ranked;
we included all programs listed). Using this
contact information, we e-mailed each public
administration program director, asking for his
or her help in completing the survey. We
received 27 and 34 responses in each of the 2
following weeks, respectively. We kept track of
which schools responded, thanking the
administrators who completed the survey. At
2-week intervals, we sent e-mail reminders to
directors who had not yet completed the survey.
In addition, NASPAA and ASPA sent out
e-mail reminders about our survey. In all, we
received 189 responses to our survey, although
this number included duplicates and otherwise
unusable responses. After reviewing the surveys,
we had 141 that were usable, for a response rate
of 54.2%. One minor, yet unexpected factor
that affected our sample size is that we learned
that several public administration programs
that had existed when the U.S. News and World
Report rankings were published in 2012 have
since closed or significantly changed their pro
grammatic focus.
We then asked, “Does your program offer any
courses in geographic information systems
(GIS)?” Just over 38% (54, or 38.30%) of
respondents said that their programs do offer
GIS, while 61.7% said they do not. Haque’s
2005 survey suggested that 26% of NASPAAaccredited programs offered GIS courses
occasionally. While our questions are not
identical to that earlier survey, there does seem
to be an increase in the number of programs
offering GIS courses in the decade since.
Depending on the accounting systems at the
specific university, there may be an advantage
to offering GIS courses in-house. Doing so
keeps such enrollments and credit hours inhouse as well, rather than allowing other
campus departments to count them toward
their enrollment totals. Keeping GIS instruction
in-house may also increase costs for hardware,
software, and maintenance.
We developed the survey using SurveyMonkey,
a standard tool for managing online surveys.
The survey began with five demographic ques
tions. Depending on the respondent’s answer
to a required yes/no question—“Does your
program offer any courses in GIS?—the re
spondent was directed to one of two different
sets of questions.
RESULTS
Our first key question was, “How would you
rate the importance of education in geographic
information systems (GIS) for your students?”
The vast majority of respondents (88.57%)
rated GIS as either important (21.43%), some
what important”(43.57%), or very important
(23.57%). Only 11.43% rated GIS education
for public administration as not important
(Figure 1 shows rounded percentages).
Of the 54 public administration programs that
allowed students to take GIS courses, about
two thirds (66.67%) allowed students to take a
FIGURE 1.
Respondents’ Rating of Importance of GIS Education
Not important
Rating
Important
11.40%
21.40%
Somewhat important
Very important
43.60%
23.60%
0% 5% 10% 15%20%25% 30%35%40%45% 50%
Percentage of Responses
Note. N = 140.
256
FIGURE 2.
Degrees of Integration
Integration of GIS in Public Administration Curricula
All categories listed below
Includes a GIS certificate or concentration
Includes at least one dedicated GIS course
Includes at least one course with a GIS module
Takes courses anywhere in university as an elective
01020 3040506070
Percentage of Responses from Programs that Include GIS
Note. N = 54.
GIS course from any campus department, as an
elective; about one quarter (25.93%) included
at least one in-house course with a GIS module;
and nearly half (48.15%) offered at least one
dedicated GIS course in-house. These options
were not mutually exclusive. Seven of the
programs’ (12.96%) curricula included a GIS
certificate or concentration. It is clear that
public administration programs are enhancing
the opportunities for their students to gain
expertise in GIS (Figure 2).
We attempted to learn about how many public
administration students take at least one GIS
course. Our results suggest that our choice op
tions could have been better. First we asked,
“What percentage of undergraduate students in
your program take at least one course in GIS?”
The options were 0% to 20%, 21% to 40%,
41% to 60%, 61% to 80%, and 81% to 100%.
About 40% (40.43%) of the schools responded
that a small proportion (0% to 20%) of their
undergraduates take GIS courses; about 4%
(4.26%) responded that 41% to 60% take GIS
courses; and about 4% (4.26%) responded that
81% to 100% take GIS courses (Figure 3).
We asked the same question about graduate
students. In about 60% (60.38%) of the pro
grams, 20% or fewer graduate students take at
least one GIS course. In about 19% (18.87%)
of the programs, 21% to 40% of graduate
students take at least on GIS course. In about
6% (5.66%) of the programs, 41% to 60% of
graduate students take at least one GIS course.
In one program (1.89%), 61% to 80% of
graduate students take at least one GIS class,
And in about 6% (5.66%) of the programs,
81% to 100% of graduate students take at least
one GIS course (Figure 4).
We then asked, “Are students in your program
able to take GIS courses elsewhere on your cam
pus?” Nearly 80% (79.63%) of the programs
said yes and 16.67% said no. Respondents for
two of the programs (3.70%) were unsure.
Given the growing awareness of the value of
GIS in the public sector and in public admin
istration programs, we attempted to gauge the
degree to which survey respondents plan to
modify GIS course offerings in the near future.
Seventy-five percent of the graduate programs
FIGURE 3.
Percentage of undergraduate students
Percentage of Undergraduate Students Taking At Least One GIS Course
81% to 100%
4%
61% to 80% 0%
41% to 60%
4%
21% to 40% 0%
0% to 20%
40%
0% 5% 10% 15%20%25% 30%35%40%45% 50%
Percentage of responding PA programs
Note. N = 47.
FIGURE 4.
Percentage of graduate students
Percentage of Graduate Students Taking At Least One GIS Course
81% to 100%
61% to 80%
41% to 60%
6%
2%
6%
21% to 40%
19%
0% to 20%
60%
0% 5% 10% 15%20%25% 30%35%40%45% 50%60%
Note. N = 53.
Percentage of responding PA programs
plan to modify their GIS course offerings in the
next academic year, while another 40% plan
modifications in the next 2 to 3 years. There is
some overlap in these percentages, suggesting
that modifications are likely to be made over
multiple years. Twenty percent of the under
graduate programs plan to modify their GIS
course offerings in the next 2 to 3 years.
258
Twenty-five percent of all survey respondents
said that they plan to modify GIS course offer
ings in both their graduate and undergraduate
programs in the next academic year, while 40%
suggested that they would make such modifi
cations in the next 2 to 3 years. Overall, it
appears that of the 52 respondents who answer
ed this question, about 65% plan to modify
FIGURE 5.
Anticipated Program Changes to Include GIS Course Offerings
40% Both
40% Grad
Yes, in the next 2 to 3 years
Timeline: 0 to 3 years
20% Undergrad
25% Both
75% Grad
Yes, in the next academic year
0% Undergrad
61% Both
33% Grad
No, not at this time
6% Undergrad
0% 10% 20% 30%40%50% 60%70%80%
Percentage of respondents
Note. N = 52.
both their graduate and undergraduate pro
grams either in the next academic year or in the
next 2 to 3 years (Figure 5).
Public administration students are able to access
GIS software on their campuses in multiple
ways. Free software is sometimes made available
through site licenses with GIS vendors (33.33%
of programs). GIS software downloads are some
times available for home computers (27.08%).
Remote login to campus computers is some
times available (25.00%), and laptop loans are
another option (4.17%). Of the public admin
istration programs with GIS course offerings,
27.08% have a dedicated GIS lab in-house,
and 50.00% share a computer lab with another
program or department. In 22.92% of the
programs, GIS is available on all campus
computers. Note that these responses are not
mutually exclusive and that programs may use
more than one of these options (Figure 6).
We were also interested in learning about the
status of the faculty who teach the GIS classes
in programs where these courses are offered.
Are the instructors tenured or tenure-track? Are
they adjuncts or visiting? Respondents were
permitted to choose all options that applied.
Our results indicate that 37.74% of the
programs hire adjunct (part-time) faculty to
teach GIS; 7.55% hire visiting faculty (fulltime, limited-term contract). Other programs
hire permanent faculty: 9.43% hire a lecturer
or equivalent (permanent, full-time); 37.74%
have a tenure-track faculty member; and
41.51% have a tenured faculty member.
We asked the above questions only of programs
that offered at least one GIS course. For
programs that did not offer at least one GIS
course, we asked, “Do you plan to create GIS
course offerings in the near future?” One third
of respondents indicated that they intend to
FIGURE 6.
Access to GIS Software On- and Off-Campus
Different ways of accessing GIS software
All of the above
1
Shared computer lab with another
program/department on campus
24
GIS software is available on ALL campus
computers available to students
11
Dedicated GIS lab
within our program
Laptop loan program (with GIS software
loaded) for on-campus users
13
2
Remote login to campus computers
to access GIS software
12
GIS software available for download
for home computers
13
Free software available through
arrangements with vendors
16
0
5
10
15
20
25
Number of respondents
Note. N = 48.
FIGURE 7.
Future Plans of Programs That Do Not Offer GIS
28% Both
Yes, in the next 2 to 3 years
61% Grad
Timeline: 0 to 3 years
11% Undergrad
50% Both
Yes, in the next academic year
17% Grad
33% Undergrad
54% Both
41% Grad
No, not at this time
4% Undergrad
0% 10% 20% 30%40%50% 60%70%80%
Percentage of respondents
Note. N = 82.
260
30
create a GIS course offering at the undergrad
uate level in the next academic year; about 11%
(11.11%) said they will do so in the next 2 to 3
years. Nearly 17% (16.67%) of respondents
said they plan to create a graduate-level GIS
course in the next academic year; about 61%
(61.11%) said they will do so in the next 2 to 3
years. Half of respondents said that they will
create both an undergraduate and graduatelevel GIS course in the next academic year;
almost 28% (27.78%) said they will do so in
the next 2 to 3 years. Again, the answers were
not mutually exclusive (Figure 7).
RESPONDENTS’ COMMENTS
Our survey allowed respondents to make freeform comments, which we found very infor
mative. For example, one respondent said there
is a strong need for public administration
scholars and instructors to better understand
the kinds of GIS skills that would be of value to
their students. The value of geographical analy
sis is high, and yet relatively few public admin
istration faculty have the necessary foundation
in geographical concepts and techniques (e.g.,
geostatistics) to teach GIS. Several respondents
noted that they outsource their GIS course
offerings to other programs and departments
on their campuses. Geography, landscape archi
tecture, planning, forest resources, earth and space
sciences, and oceanography were all mentioned
as departments from which students gained
GIS instruction. As previously noted, students
who take classes in these other programs and
departments may represent lost full-time-equi
valent enrollments and class credits, which in
turn may reduce allocation of funds to the
public administration program.
Several respondents suggested that GIS is “a
tool,” one of many that public administration
students may need to become successful in
their field. Other respondents said that, based
on feedback from regional employees, alumni,
and students, they anticipate continued and
expanded use of GIS across organizations. One
survey respondent who teaches budgeting
courses said that “GIS is useful in pointing out
impacts of financial decisions” and would be
valuable to students. Another respondent said
that “understanding GIS tools is a must these
days for academics, non-profits, public admini
strators.” Still another said that GIS “needs to
become mandatory.”
This raises significant questions about how GIS
should be integrated into public administration
curricula. There is no “one size fits all” solution,
because each public administration program is
unique. As we have seen, there are many
approaches to integrating GIS into curricula.
One way to introduce GIS instruction would
be to develop modules that could be embedded
in another course. For example, a case study
could illustrate how a public organization (with
a jurisdiction and mission relevant to the
course) has used GIS in performing its duties.
A visit from a full-time public servant—or a
visit to a specific agency—may be of value. This
“infusion” approach to adding GIS to curricula
has been suggested for business schools (Sarkar
and Pick, 2012).
A variant of this infusion approach could be a
short course on GIS that uses data from the
jurisdiction in which the public administration
is located to demonstrate how to undertake
geographical analysis. This course could be 1
week (5 workdays) in length, meeting both
morning and afternoon, perhaps during a
school break. The idea would be to help
students understand how GIS is used by the
organizations for which they may one day work
as a non-GIS specialist. Even in positions that
do not actively require GIS expertise, there is a
good chance that the public organization does
spatial analysis using GIS.
For universities that pay a site license for com
mercial-off-the-shelf GIS software, students may
be eligible to take online courses from the soft
ware vendor at no additional cost. For example,
an undergraduate student in a fall of 2014 GIS
class at Indiana University’s School of Public
and Environmental Affairs became an under
graduate teaching assistant during the spring
semester, and he took online courses available
from the school’s GIS software vendor. He
graduated in the spring of 2015 and is now
working full-time as a resource specialist, using
GIS, with the Indiana State Department of
Agriculture’s Division of Soil Conservation.
Stand-alone GIS courses are another alternative.
These courses may be taught either in the pub
lic administration program or through another
department on campus. An introductory course
would provide a sound basis of GIS knowledge
to any aspiring public servant, particularly
if this aspirant does not plan to become a
GIS specialist.
For public administration programs that seek
to prepare GIS specialists, a certificate or spe
cialization would be appropriate. This special
ization would logically begin with an intro
ductory course, then move to an applications
course, and then to a management course. The
introductory course could (and should) require
that each student complete a GIS project of his
or her choice. This is the beauty of geography:
everything has a location and thus each student
will be able to find a project that matches his
or her interests and/or specialization within the
public administration program. The applications
course would require that students take on a
larger project, perhaps a service-learning project
undertaken in conjunction with a public or
nonprofit organization in the area. The GIS
management course would cover a variety of
GIS topics, including assessing an agency’s
needs; con
sid
ering its mission, budget, and
personnel; and preparing the aspiring public
servant to supervise the implementation of a
GIS project, program, or enterprise. (A GIS
project is a one-off study; a program is an
ongoing GIS implementation within a specific
organization; enter
prise GIS occurs when
multiple public agencies within a jurisdiction
share GIS hardware, software, and data and an
institutionalized approach has been established
to coordinate and manage GIS throughout the
jurisdiction.) Given the growth of GIS within
public agencies, there is also great potential for
developing internship programs focusing on
GIS, yet another means for students to learn
more and gain credits toward their public
administration degrees.
262
CONCLUSION
It is clear that GIS is becoming more ubiqui
tous and institutionalized in the public sector
with each passing year. Many public servants,
whether or not they have GIS expertise, are
being exposed to geographic analysis and either
contribute or use geographic data (sometimes
without even knowing they are doing so).
Exposure to GIS in academia is valuable for
aspiring public servants in order for them to
objectively understand the inputs, utility, and
potential limitations of GIS analysis.
Academic units on university campuses may
oper
ate as separate silos or, worse yet, find
themselves competing against one another for
full-time-equivalent student enrollments and
college credits. For public administration pro
grams without GIS capabilities, working across
disciplinary boundaries can be beneficial. Geo
graphy programs and departments are an ob
vious potential partner. Given the broad nature
of public administration programs, it may also
be of some value to consider hiring a geographer
as a member of the program faculty.
Today, many GIS resources are readily available.
It would be useful for public administration
faculty to learn more about these resources. For
example, the University Consortium for Geo
graphic Information Science (ucgis.org) has been
instrumental in developing a body of know
ledge for GIS. If a university is a member of
UCGIS, public administration faculty and
staff should make a point of talking with their
school’s representative. In addition, UCGIS has
recently added a membership option that en
ables a single university department to become
a member.
Learning about on-campus or nearby GIS
faculty, facilities, and resources as well as rel
evant resources at state and local governments
can be very useful. The Federal Geographic Data
Committee (www.fgdc.gov) and the National
States Geographic Information Council (www.
nsgic.org), for example, are two groups that
provide information about expertise, activities,
and resources within specific states. Many
universities and state governments have an
annual “GIS Day” (usually in November) and/
or GIS conferences that can be very informative
and helpful for identifying potential collabor
ators. GIS organizations may be able to help
develop internship programs for public admini
stration students. Affiliated state organizations
often have reduced membership rates for stu
dents, providing valuable learning and network
ing opportunities.
The GIS Certification Institute (GISCI; www.
gisci.org), a national organization created in
2003, certifies individuals as “GIS Professionals”
(GISPs) based on education, work experience,
and contribution to the profession. The organ
ization will soon add an examination to its
evaluation process. To date, more than 9,300
individuals have been certified as GISPs. An
Excel file listing all certified GISPs is available
from the institute, including each GISP’s
position title, location, and place of employment
(www.gisci.org/Recertification/GISPRegistry.
aspx). This could be a valuable resource for
identifying guest lecturers, developing servicelearning courses, or building internship oppor
tunities for public administration students.
The institute has played an important role in
establishing and promoting ethical standards
for GIS professionals (Craig, 1993; Obermeyer, 1998b).
The Urban and Regional Information Systems
Association (URISA; www.urisa.org) is another
useful resource. A current URISA initiative is
the GIS Management Institute which is
completing work on a capability maturity
model for GIS implementations in public
organizations. URISA members are individuals
and most work in the public sector, again a
resource for possible visiting lecturers, site
visits, service-learning projects, and internships.
The organization offers a reduced membership
rate for students.
The Association of American Geographers
(www.aag.org) is yet another organization that
has helped shape the evolution of GIS and is a
resource for many aspects of the field, including education. As well, the National Center for
Geographic Information and Analysis (www.
ncgia.ucsb.edu) has played a key role in shaping
research in GIS as well as developing a core
curriculum for GIS.
Another avenue for discussion involves the
public administration community itself, both
ASPA and NASPAA. As noted, we developed
and participated in a session about GIS public
administration at ASPA’s annual conference in
2015. The October 2015 NASPAA conference
offered a similar session, which included a
presentation of our survey results. We hope that
this article stimulates further investigations and
dialogue about the growing role of GIS in
public organizations and helps the public
administration community prepare the next
generation of public servants.
REFERENCES
Al-Kodmany, K. (2012). Utilizing GIS in nonprofit organizations for urban planning applications: Experiences from the field. Journal of Geographic Information, 4, 279–297. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.
org/10.4236/jgis.2012.44034.
Baker, T. R., Kerski, J. J., Huynh, N. T., Viehrig, K.,
& Bednarz, S. W. (2012). Call for an agenda and
center for GIS education research. Review of Inter
national Geographical Education Online, 2(3), 254–
288. Retrieved from http://www.rigeo.org/vol2
no3/RIGEO-V2-N3-1.pdf.
Caron, C., & Bédard, Y. (2002). Lessons learned from
the case studies on implementation of geospatial
technologies. URISA Journal, 16(1), 17–36.
Caron, L. M., & Stewart, D. S. (1984). An inventory of
state natural resources information systems. Lawrence:
Kansas Applied Remote Sensing Program, Univer
sity of Kansas.
Clarke, K. C. (2011). Getting started with GIS. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall–Pearson.
Comfort, L. K., & Wukich, C. (2013). Developing
decision-making skills for uncertain conditions:
The challenge of educating effective emergency
managers. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 19(1),
53–71.
Cornwell, S. B. (1982). History and status of state nat
ural resource systems. Computers, Environment and
Urban Systems, 7(4), 253–260.
Craig, W. J. (1993). A GIS code of ethics: What can
we learn from other organizations? Journal of Urban
and Regional Information Systems Association, 5(2),
13–16.
Crosby, B. C. (2010). Leading in the shared-power
world of 2020. Public Administration Review, 70(s1),
s69–s77.
Eisman, J. (2011, October). From disaster response to
relief and development: An integrated GIS approach
for non-profits. GeoWorld, 18–21.
Exec. Order No. 12,906, 57 Fed. Reg. 17,671 (1994).
Retrieved from http://www.archives.gov/federalregister/executive-orders/pdf/12906.pdf.
Federal Interagency Coordinating Committee on Digital Cartography (FICCDC). (1990). A summary
of GIS use in the federal government. Washington,
DC: FICCDC.
Foresman, T. W. (Ed.). (1998). The history of geographic
information systems: Perspectives from the pioneers.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Ganapati, S. (2011). Uses of public participation
geo
graphic information systems applications in
e-government. Public Administration Review, 71(3),
425–434.
GIS Jobs Clearinghouse. (2015). Retrieved from
http://www.gjc.org.
Haithcoat, T., Warnecke, L., & Nedovic-Budic, Z.
(2001). Geographic information technology in local
government: Experience and issues. In The munici
pal year book 2001 (pp. 47–57). Washington, DC:
International City/County Management Association.
Halpern, A., & Troupp, M. (Eds). (2013). Federal
geospatial information: Management and coordination.
New York, NY: Nova Science Publishers.
264
Haque, A. (2001). GIS, public service, and the issue
of democratic governance. Public Administration
Review, 61(3), 259–265.
Haque, A. (2005, October 14). Special session on
GIS in public administration programs. NASPAA
conference, Washington, DC.
Huxhold, W. (1991). Introduction to Urban geographic
information systems (pp. 22–23). New York, NY:
Oxford University Press.
International City/County Management Association
(ICMA). (1995). Computer technology in local
government survey. Washington, DC: ICMA.
Kerski, J. J. (2008). Geographic information systems
in education. In J. Wilson & A. S. Fotheringham
(Eds.), The handbook of geographic information
science (pp. 540–556). Victoria, Australia: Blackwell.
Knott, J. H. (2013). Looking outward; The changing
context of public service education. Journal of
Kreizman, G. (2002, December). U.S. public-sector GIS
survey: Key issue and trends. Retrieved from Gartner
website:
http://www.gartner.com/doc/379849/
publicsector-gis-survey-key-issues.
McGuire, M., & Schneck, D. (2010). What if Hur
ricane Katrina hit in 2020? The need for strategic
management of disasters. Public Administration Re
view, 70(s1), s201–s207.
Mergel, I. (2012). The public manager 2.0: Preparing
the social media generation for a networked work
place. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 18(3),
467–492.
Miller, F., Mangold, W. G., & Holmes, T. (2006).
Integrating geographic information systems (GIS)
applications into business courses using online
business geographics modules. Journal of Education
for Business, 82(2), 74–79.
National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA).
(1998). Geographic information for the 21st century:
Building a strategy for the nation. Washington,
DC: NAPA.
National Geospatial Advisory Committee (NGAC).
(2012). Geospatial workforce development: A com
pendium of white papers focused on advancing geospatial workforce development. Retrieved from http://
www.fgdc.gov/ngac/ngac-geospatial-workforcedevelopment-paper-final.pdf.
National Research Council. (2003). GIS for housing
and urban development. Washington, DC: National
Academies of Science.
National States Geographic Information Council
(NSGIC). (2015). About NSGIC. Retrieved from
http://www.nsgic.org/about-nsgic.
Nedovic-Budic, Z., & Godschalk, D. R. (1996).
Human factors in the adoption of geographic
information systems: A local government case study.
Nedovic-Budic, Z., Knaap, G-J., Budhathoki, N.
R., & Cavric, B. (2009). NSDI building blocks:
Regional GIS in the United States. URISA Journal,
21(2), 5–23.
Administration (NASPAA). (2014). 2014–2015
roster of accredited programs. Retrieved from https://
annual-roster-of-accredited-programs-updated-0901-14.pdf.
Norris, D. F., & Demeter, L. A. (1999). Information
technology and city governments. In The municipal
year book 1999. Washington, DC: International
City/County Management Association.
e-government in the United States: Transformation or incremental change? Public Administration
Review, 73(1), 165–175.
Obermeyer, N. J. (2009). Virtue ethics for GIS pro
fessionals. In G. Navratil (Ed.), Research trends in
geographic information science (pp. 27–38). Berlin,
Germany: Springer Verlag.
Obermeyer, N. J. (2015). Public access to cartographic
information. In M. Monmonier (Ed.), History of
cartography (Vol. 6, pp. 558–560). Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
Obermeyer, N. J., & Pinto, J. K. (2008). Managing
GIS (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Ramasubramanian, L. (2010). Geographic information
science and public participation. Heidelberg, Ger
many: Springer Verlag
Ramasubramanian, L., & Goldberg, D. W. (2012,
January 12). GIS adoption and use on college
campuses: An end-of-year review and look ahead to
2012. Directions Magazine. Retrieved from http://
www.directionsmag.com/entry/gis-adoption-anduse-on-college-campuses-an-end-of-year-reviewand-loo/225329.
Pick, J. (2008). Geo-business: GIS in the digital organ
ization. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.
Pirog, M. A. (2014). Point/counterpoint: Data will
drive innovation in public policy and management
research in the next decade. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 33(2), 537–543. doi:10.1002/
pam.21752.
Obermeyer, N. J. (1990). Bureaucratic factors in
the adoption of GIS by public organizations.
Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 14(4),
261–271.
Sarkar, A., & Pick, J. (2012). GIS in business school
curricula: Trends and a case study. In 2012 Pro
ceedings of the Information Systems Educators Con
ference, New Orleans, Louisiana (Vol. 29, pp. 1–11).
Retrieved from http://proc.isecon.org/2012/pdf/
1969.pdf.
Obermeyer, N. J. (1995). The hidden GIS technocracy.
Cartography and GIS, 22(1), 78–83.
Starnes, B. J. (2008). Applying GIS technology in pub
lic administration education. PA Times, 31(10), 6.
Obermeyer, N. J. (1998a). The evolution of public
participation GIS. Cartography and GIS, 25(2), 65–66.
Thomas, C., Parr, B., & Hinthorne, B. (2012).
Measuring up: The business case for GIS. Redlands,
CA: Esri Press.
Obermeyer, N. J. (1998b). Professional responsibility
and ethics in the spatial sciences. In D. R. F. Taylor
(Ed.), Policy issues in modern cartography (Vol. 3 of
the Modern Cartography series, pp. 215–232). Ox
ford, United Kingdom: Elsevier Science/Pergamon.
Tobler, W. (1970). A computer movie simulating urban
growth in the Detroit region. Economic Geography,
46, 234–240. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/
stable/143141.
Obermeyer, N. J. (2007). GIS: The maturation of a
profession. Cartography and GIS, 34(2), 129–134.
Tomlinson, R. (2012, Fall). Origins of the Canada
geographic information system. ArcNews. Retrieved
from Esri website: http://www.esri.com/news/arcnews/fall12articles/origins-of-the-canada-geogra
phic-information-system.html.
USAJobs. (2015). Program analyst (GIS specialist).
Retrieved from http://www.usajobs.gov/Search?Key
word=GIS&Location=&search=Search&AutoCom
pleteSelected=False.
U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Train
ing Administration (ETA). (2015). High growth
industry profile—geospatial technology. Retrieved
from http://www.doleta.gov/brg/indprofgeospatial
_profile.cfm.
U.S. News and World Report. (2012). Best public affairs
schools. Retrieved from http://grad-schools.usnews.
rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/
top-public-affairs-schools.
Walsham, G., & Sahay, S. (1999). GIS for districtlevel administration in India: Problems and oppor
tunities. MIS Quarterly, 23(1), pp. 39–66.
Warnecke, L. (1987). Geographic information coordi
nation in the states: Past efforts, lessons learned and
future opportunities. In L. J. Allison & R. J. Olson
(Eds.), Piecing the puzzle together: A conference on
integrating data for decision making, May 27–29,
1987 [Proceedings]. Washington, DC: National
Governors’ Association.
Warnecke, L. (1995). Geographic information/GIS instit
utionalization in the 50 States: Users and coordinators.
Santa Barbara, CA: National Center for Geographic
Information and Analysis, University of California.
Warnecke, L. (1998). State and local GIS initiatives. In
T. W. Foresman (Ed.), The history of geographic infor
mation systems: Perspectives from the pioneers (pp.
265–289). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Warnecke, L., Beattie, J., Kollin, C., & Lyday, W. (1998).
Geographic information technology in cities and coun
ties: A nationwide assessment. Chicago, IL: Urban
Regional Information Systems Association and the
American Forests.
Warnecke, L., Johnson, J. M., Marshall, K., & Brown, R.
S. (1992). State geographic information activities compendium. Lexington, KY: Council of State Governments.
Wise, S., & Craglia, M. (Eds.). (2010). GIS and evidencebased policy making. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
266
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Nancy Obermeyer earned her Master of Public
Administration from Indiana University’s School
of Public and Environmental Affairs and her
PhD in geography from the University of
Chicago. She has worked in public transit and
energy planning in Chicago and Springfield,
Illinois. She is a co-founder of the GIS Certi
fication Institute (GISCI) and served as board
member of the Urban and Regional Informa
tion Systems Association (URISA) and as
GISCI’s ethics officer. She was certified as a
GIS Professional (GISP) in 2004, one of the
first to earn this title. She is lead author of
Managing Geographic Information Systems (2nd
ed.; Guilford, 2008).
is an associate pro
fessor in the Department of Urban Policy and
Planning at Hunter College, City University of
New York. She has written extensively about
the complexities of GIS adoption and GIS use
in different organizational settings. Her book,
Geographic Information Science and Public Par
ticipation, was published by Springer in 2010.
She is the past president of the University Con
sortium for Geographic Information Science
(UCGIS), an alliance of over 65 universities
focused on advancing research and education
in GIS.
Laxmi Ramasubramanian
Lisa Warnecke began her career as a town ad
ministrator in Colorado after receiving a Bach
elor of Science in public administration from
Virginia Tech. Her research about nationwide
public sector GIS started in 1982 through her
professional (MBA) and academic (PhD) work,
including with clients such as the U.S. Gov
ernment Accountability Office, the Nation
al
Academy of Public Administration, the National
Academy of Sciences, over 10 federal agencies,
various national organizations, and others.
An Ostrich Burying Its Head in the
Sand? The 2009 NASPAA Standards
and Scope of Information Technology
and E-Government Curricula
Sukumar Ganapati
Florida International University
University of Texas at San Antonio
ABSTRACT
This article examines the scope of information technology and e-government (IT/e-government) in
public administration curricula following the 2009 Network of Schools of Public Policy, Affairs,
and Administration (NASPAA) standards. We ask, are we preparing public administration students
for the realities of governance in the digital world? We surveyed NASPAA principal representatives
and analyzed the NASPAA database of Master of Public Administration (MPA) program selfstudies. The analysis shows that MPA curricula do not give IT/e-government adequate importance,
especially in schools accredited under the 2009 standards. The stark findings hold important lessons
for public administration education. If curricula continue to systematically underrepresent IT/egovernment, we will train a workforce unprepared for the digital world. The NASPAA competencies
should acknowledge IT/e-government as a dominant theme in present-day governance. If not,
those of us in public administration education will be like an ostrich burying its head in the sand
as technological advancements pass us by.
KEYWORDS
E-government, information technology, public administration curriculum, NASPAA standards
In this article, we explore the scope of
information technology and e-government
(IT/e-government) instruction in the public
administration curriculum. In particular, we
examine the impact of the 2009 Network of
Schools of Public Policy, Affairs, and Admini
stration (NASPAA) accreditation standards,
the latest standards adopted. The NASPAA
accreditation process and guidelines have
evolved since their initiation in 1974. The first
phase of accreditation standards (until 1992)
JPAE 22 (2), 267–286
was input-oriented, focusing on curriculum
coverage. The next phase (until 2009) was
output-oriented, taking a program’s mission
into consideration. The third generation (post2009) is arguably outcome-oriented, shifting
from emphasis on specific subject areas to
emphasis on core competencies. Information
technology, which was part of the outputoriented curriculum under the old standards, is
not explicitly part of the competencies in the
new standards. Public administration programs
have no mandate to offer IT/e-government
courses. Thus, we ask, are we preparing public
administration students for the realities of
governance in the digital world? We explore
three dimensions of this question: the extent to
which IT/e-government courses are included in
the curriculum, the challenges of offering such
courses, and the impact of the 2009 standards
on the availability of such courses. We are not
aware of another study on the state of
information technology in the public admini
stration curriculum since the 2009 standards
were adopted.
Information technology is arguably one of the
most significant forces shaping present govern
ance systems. Many scholarly works over the
last decade have compellingly highlighted the
influence of Internet and related technologies
on society and governance. Castells (2000)
argued that information and communications
technologies have given rise to the network
society. Dunleavy, Margetts, Bastow, and Tink
ler (2006a, 2006b) claimed that there has been
a shift from new public management toward
digital-era governance centered on information
technology. Owen (2015) outlined how recent
Internet technologies have disrupted establish
ed state powers. Information technology has
seeped into almost every aspect of daily life in
general and is transforming public organizations.
Haque (2015) argued that public administrators
need to reconcile the values of information and
public service to bridge effective practice and
democratic ideals in the information age.
Inclusion of IT/e-government in the public
administration curriculum is crucial in several
respects. Government agencies invest heavily in
information systems: the annual federal gov
ernment IT budget is over $86 billion (U.S.
Office of Management and Budget [OMB],
2015), and the U.S. state and local government
IT market is valued at over $70 billion (Thiele
mann & Sood, 2015). Government agencies use
various IT systems internally, such as manage
ment information systems, enterprise resource
programs, database management systems, sys
tems analysis or design, citizen relationship man
agement, and geographic information systems
268
(Bretschneider, 1985; Ganapati, 2011; Garson,
2006; Kiel, 1986; Kraemer et al., 1986; Mila
kovich, 2012; White, 2015). Internet techno
logies have enabled e-government, which refers
to 24-7 citizen access to government services
via the Internet (government to government,
government to business, or govern
ment to
citizens) (Moon, Lee, & Roh, 2014; Norris,
2010). Variants of e-government include digital
government, mobile government (m-govern
ment), open government, smart government,
and the virtual state (Fountain, 2001; Garson,
2006; Heeks, 2006; Scholl, 2010; Townsend,
2013; West, 2005). Technological features—
such as wired and wireless communications
systems, broadband infrastructure, social media
platforms, and big data—have also been
affecting public agencies’ delivery of services
(Desouza & Jacob, 2014; Lathrop & Ruma,
2010; Lavertu, 2015; Mergel, 2013; Noveck,
2009). Advances in Internet technologies have
created new opportunities for citizen
participation in decision making (Mergel,
2012; Nabatchi & Leighninger, 2015) and
citizen co-production of government services
(Lathop & Ruma, 2010; Noveck, 2009).
Nonprofit agencies (e.g., the Sunlight Found
ation, www.sunlightfoundation.com) are using
Internet technologies to facilitate government
transparency; others (e.g., Code for America,
www.codeforamerica.org) assist government
agencies in using Internet tech
nologies pro
ductively (e.g., creating mobile apps, opening
government data, etc.).
Responding to the significant impact of infor
mation technologies, federal and state laws
have begun to accommodate such technologies
in government processes. The Clinger-Cohen
Act of 1996 (CCA) provided guidelines for IT
investment and management in federal agencies
and established the position of chief information officer (CIO). The E-Government Act of
2002 established the basic principles of elec
tronic delivery of federal government services.
The Government Paperwork Elimination Act of
2003 enabled the legal framework for imple
menting electronic signatures, transactions, and
record keeping. The Federal Information Tech
nology Acquisition Reform Act of 2014 (FIT
2009 NASPAA Standards and Curricula
ARA) significantly strengthened the CIO’s role
in an agency’s IT investment and management.
Information technology and e-government pose
challenges for public agencies. IT projects have
had mixed results in terms of enhancing the
internal organizational efficiency and effective
ness (Brown, 2015; Dawes, 2008; Foley &
Alfonso, 2009). A large share of IT projects
remain unfinished or experience cost overruns;
some contribute little to the organizational
mission (Goldfinch, 2007; Government Account
ability Office [GAO], 2015). E-government
critics argue that it has not transformed gov
ernment agencies, contrary to the grand visions
of technology champions (Coursey & Norris,
2008; Norris, 2010; Norris & Moon, 2005;
Norris & Reddick, 2013). Managing IT/egovernment projects is a key challenge, as high
lighted by a range of failures. The most recent
high-profile failure is the federal HealthCare.
gov debacle, when the e-portal was launched in
October 2013. In 2015, the U.S. Government
Accountability Office (GAO) added “Improv
ing the Management of IT Acquisitions and
Operations” as a high-risk category for federal
spending. The GAO (2015), found that failed
and poorly performing IT investments suffered
from “ineffective management, such as project
planning, requirements definition, and program
oversight and governance” (p. 2).
The importance of including IT/e-government
in the public administration curriculum can hardly be understated. Managing IT/e-government
projects are too important to be left to infor
mation science and technology experts. Even
for CIOs, their effectiveness depends more on
the soft skills of organizational management
and leadership than on technological acumen
(Waller, Hallenbeck, & Rubenstrunk, 2010).
Yet, curiously, as our study shows, public
administration programs do not give adequate
importance to IT/e-government in their curri
cula, especially in schools accredited under the
new NASPAA accreditation standards. Our
stark findings hold important lessons for the
future of public administration. If the public
administration curriculum does not sufficiently
address IT developments, we will train a work
force lacking the skills to deal with the digital
world. We argue that IT must be integral to
developing required competencies for public
employees. NASPAA standards must recognize
the significance of IT/e-government for the
public administration curriculum. If they do
not, those of us in public administration
education will be like an ostrich burying its
head in the sand, waiting for the technological
storm to pass.
To explore the scope of IT in the public admin
istration curriculum, we first review the literature
related to IT and NASPAA standards. Second,
we outline our study’s research methods. Third,
we examine the scope of IT/e-government in
the public administration curriculum, exploring the extent to which public administration
programs offer IT/e-government courses; the
challenges associated with such offerings; and
the impact of the 2009 NASPAA standards.
Lastly, we conclude with implications for future
NASPAA standards.
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
AND NASPAA STANDARDS
Curriculum requirements according to NASPAA
standards have evolved since the standards’
inception in 1974. The voluntary peer review
system began in 1977, and the NASPAA
accreditation process was formally adopted in
1983 (Berry, 2011). Three generations of
NASPAA accreditation standards, governing
the public administration curriculum, have
since evolved. These generations can be broadly
characterized as (1) input-oriented, (2) missionoriented, and (3) outcome-oriented (Berry,
2011; Raffel, Maser, & Calarusse, 2011). Speci
fications for including IT in the curriculum have
also changed. Miles (1967) and Saltman (1974)
were among early proponents who recognized,
respectively, the need for computer training
and information science as a part of the curri
culum. Periodic surveys conducted by scholars
since the 1980s show an overall increase in
recognizing the significance of IT for public
administrators but varied curriculum coverage
of the topic (Brown & Brudney, 1998; Cleary,
1990; Holzer & Lin, 2007; Kiel, 1986, 1987).
The first generation of NASPAA standards
(until 1992) aimed at achieving curricular uni
formity among accredited schools. The public
administration curriculum was input-oriented,
focused on specific topics (e.g., budgeting and
financial management, human resources, etc.).
NASPAA’s Ad Hoc Committee on Computers
in Public Management Education, formed in
1985, saw the need for including computer
education in the curriculum (Kraemer et al.,
1986). Although computer use had permeated
government agencies, only 18% of NASPAAaccredited schools offered a course on computer
fundamentals, and only 10% required a course
on computer applications or management infor
mation systems. Based on the ad hoc committee’s
report, IT was added as a part of the core curri
culum requirement, whereby schools required
basic computer knowledge to fulfill NASPAA
accreditation requirements. But the minimum
requirement quickly became outmoded, as high
schools began providing computer education.
The ad hoc committee envisioned the need “to
raise public management program standards to
the level of the state of the computing discipline
and of the public sector work place” (Kraemer
et al., 1986, p. 7).
The ad hoc committee’s recommendations did
not have much promise of being implemented, according to Kiel (1986). Kiel’s survey of
NASPAA-accredited programs (sent to compu
ter information systems instructors and program
chairs) showed that nearly half of respondents
did not think that information systems should
become a requirement for Master of Public Ad
ministration (MPA) students. Over one third
thought that computer applications should be
integrated into existing course curriculum. The
gap in curriculum IT coverage, however, was
becoming increasingly evident. In his study of
public administration programs, Cleary (1990)
concluded, “Support clearly exists for greater
emphasis in the curriculum on infor
mation
systems and computer skills, ethics, and non
profit management” (p. 670). In his survey of
MPA program principal representatives, 15.6%
of respondents indicated a coverage gap, and
9.2% indicated a need for national coverage of
information systems in the curriculum. Hy,
270
Waugh, and Brudney (1993) also found that
MPA programs did not offer IT courses
on record and data management functions,
even though such skills were essential to
practitioners and recognized as such by MPA
program representatives.
The second generation of NASPAA standards
(1992–2009) shifted toward output-based ac
creditation, focusing on the program’s mission.
Program curriculum requirements in key areas
remained, but they were linked to achieving the
program’s outputs and mission. The curriculum
was organized into common and specialization
components. NASPAA classed information
man
agement and technology applications as
common curriculum components under the
rubric of “Management of Public Service Org
anizations.” The clear emphasis on information
technology increased offerings of related courses
in accredited programs. Brown and Brudney’s
(1998) survey of MPA program principal
representatives (conducted in 1995) found that
70% of the MPA programs integrated comput
er skills into coursework, and 56% offered at
least one required course on microcomputing.
Koven, Goetzke, and Brennan’s (2008) study of
the 76 programs (in public administration,
public policy, and public affairs) across the top
50 universities (according to U.S. News and
World Report rankings) found that 30% of
accredited MPA programs required coursework
in management information systems or infor
mation technology.
The second generation of NASPAA standards
shifted from justifying the need for IT courses
to assessing the content of such courses. Brown
and Brudney (1998) argued that only a few
MPA programs covered topics mandated by the
Clinger-Cohen Act. About 30% of surveyed
programs provided instruction on CCA
management issues, such as IT planning, IT
acquisition, and evaluation of outcomes. A
subsequent survey conducted in 2003 showed
an increase in coverage of CCA topics to over
50% (Brown, Brudney, & Waugh, 2005). The
authors argued for a core course focused on
using IT for increasing productivity, efficiency,
and service delivery; on planning, adopting,
and implementing IT; on policies to minimize
negative impacts of IT; and on facilitating
strategic information resource management.
Highlighting the dynamic nature of IT,
Rocheleau (1998) argued that IT course
content must be revisited often to keep up with
rapid changes in the field. IT courses could also
vary depending on an MPA program’s nature,
students, employers targeted, and available
resources. He emphasized five facets of IT that
generalist public administrators should be
taught: information systems as a tool for
managers; information systems as a strategic
asset (an innovation that should be implemented
by organizations); conceptual frameworks for
adopting technology in public organizations;
the structure of IT systems within public
organizations; and IT management (e.g.,
training, acquisition, etc.). Generalists need to
be aware of how IT can strategically benefit
organizational productivity, whereas specialists
deal with the technical aspects of implementing
and supporting the technology.
Kim and Layne (2001) underscored the impor
tance of linking public administration educa
tion to the evolving world of e-government,
pointing to several technological opportunities
and challenges for government organizations:
new business practices (e.g., interactions with
citizens and businesses), public-private partner
ships and collaborations, business process re
engineering, and privacy and security. They
argued for two levels of curricular changes: first,
the addition of emerging e-government topics
to existing MPA curriculum; and second, the pro
vision of advanced curriculum content, espe
cially that related to e-government leadership.
Dawes (2004) identified five competencies for
effective government information strategy and
management relevant to MPA education: strat
egic thinking and evaluation, system-oriented
analytical skills, information stewardship, tech
nical concepts, and complex project manage
ment skills. Holzer and Lin’s (2007) analysis of
46 randomly selected public administration
programs indicated that about half offered
courses on data processing and information sys
tems. The authors argued that such programs
should recognize the importance of the theory
and applications of information systems and
management in the public sector. Programs
should emphasize topics such as “database
management, e-government applications, geo
gra
phic information systems, and Internet
technologies” (Holzer and Lin, 2007, p. 361).
The third generation of NASPAA standards
(since 2009) retains a mission-based focus, broad
ly within the realm of public service values. In
terms of recommended MPA curri
cu
lum, the
standards articulate four sets of competencies:
•universally required competencies,
•mission-specific required competencies,
•mission-specific elective competencies, and
•professional competencies.
Few public administration programs incorpor
ate the final three competencies. However, for
accreditation, all programs must include the
universally required competencies. Five domains
make up the universally required competencies
(NASPAA, Commission on Peer Review and
Accreditation, 2014), which circumscribe the
course curriculum:
1.ability to lead and manage in
public governance;
2.ability to participate in and
contribute to the policy process;
3.ability to analyze, synthesize,
think critically, solve problems,
and make decisions;
4.ability to articulate and apply a
public service perspective; and
5.ability to communicate and interact
productively with a diverse and
changing workforce and citizenry.
Clearly, these core competencies do not man
date IT instruction, possibly providing a dis
incentive for such instruction. Indeed, if an
MPA program does offer IT courses, it must
justify how the courses fit within the scope of
the core competencies and the program’s mis
sion. IT/e-government may not even be on a
program’s radar. Nevertheless, the importance
of information technology for public admini
stration programs cannot be understated, thus
our research question: are we preparing public
administration students for the realities of
governance in the digital world?
RESEARCH METHODS
Similar to previous studies, we surveyed NASPAA
principal representatives. We collaborated with
NASPAA staff and conducted the survey online
in the summer of 2014 using Qualtrics, soft
ware used by many academic institutions to do
professional-quality surveys. We sent a cover letter
to designated NASPAA staff that ex
plained
our project’s scope and purpose and included a
link to the online survey. NASPAA staff then
administered the survey through the NASPAA
mailing list, consisting of the 270 principal
representatives of MPA programs affiliated with
(but not necessarily accredited by) NASPAA.
TABLE 1.
MPA Program Size and MPA Program
Director’s Tenure
How many students have graduated from the MPA
program on average annually in the last three years?
Frequency
Percentage
0–20 students
32
31.1
21–40 students
32
31.1
41–60 students
15
14.6
61–80 students
10
9.7
81–100 students
5
4.9
Over 100 students
Total
9
8.7
103
100
How many years have you been the
MPA director/program coordinator?
Frequency
Percentage
One year or less
20
19.8
Two years
21
20.8
Three years
10
9.9
Four years
9
8.9
Five years
3
3.0
38
37.6
101
100
More than five years
Total
272
We asked 11 questions, mainly multiple-choice;
2 questions required additional explan
ation.
The survey was mobile device–friendly.
We obtained responses from 134 principal repre
sentatives after two rounds of e-mail reminders.
Of these, 107 responses were valid, giving an
overall response rate of 39.6% (the number of
respondents was slightly lower for some ques
tions). Our response rate was similar to that of
surveys conducted by previous scholars (Bow
man, Chen, Tinkersley, & Hillard, 1993; Ginn
& Hammond, 2012; Rosenbloom & Naff,
2010). In order to get candid responses, we as
sured respondents of their anonymity (we did
not record names or institutional affiliations).
Table 1 lists MPA program size (average num
ber of students graduated annually in the three
years prior to the survey). A small number of
very large MPA programs graduate over 100
stu
dents annually (8.7%). The bulk of the
programs (62.2%) are small- to medium-sized,
graduating 40 or fewer students annually.
Table 1 also lists the tenure of the principal repre
sentatives (usually the MPA program’s director
or coordinator). The table shows a bimodal dist
ribution: 40.6% of respondents have served two
years or less; 37.6%, more than five years. These
results are not unexpected: the position of MPA
program director or coordinator can experience
a lot of turnover in the short term, but some fac
ulty thrive in the position and have long tenures.
Survey respondents were from a fairly even mix
of programs with respect to the NASPAA stand
ards under which they were accredited: 43.1%
indicated accreditation under the old (i.e., pre2009) standards; 41.2%, under the new (i.e.,
2009) standards. The remaining 15.7% of
respondents were not from NASPAA-accredited
programs. Compared to our respondents, 27.7%
of all NASPAA-affiliated programs are accred
ited under the old standards; 43.3%, under the
new standards; and 28.8% are not accredited.
Our survey sample is thus more representative
of programs accredited under the new standards
than those accredited under the old standards
or unaccredited.
FIGURE 1.
Perceived Importance of IT/E-Government Coursework
60.0%
50.6%
50.0%
40.0%
29.1%
30.0%
21.5%
20.0%
17.7%
11.4%
10.0%
Uninterested
faculty
Other course
demands
Low enrollment
In addition to the survey, we requested data
from NASPAA on MPA self-studies submitted
after 2009 (for accreditation under the new
standards). NASPAA staff provided us with the
summary database of the self-studies. The database included those programs that had submitted
self-studies, regardless of whether the programs
received accreditation. Some programs submitted multiple self-studies for different years (for
various reasons, such as application deferral,
one-year conditional accreditation, etc.). Over
all, the database contained self-studies for 125
unique programs. Self-study data included the
program’s mission statement, list of specializa
tions, and descriptions of the program’s univer
sal competencies.
EXTENT OF IT/E-GOVERNMENT COURSES
IN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION CURRICULA
To explore the scope of IT/e-government
coursework in MPA programs, we first analyzed
survey respondents’ attitudes toward including
such course content in the MPA curriculum.
We asked, “As the MPA Director/Program
Coord
inator, please give your perception of
the importance of the need for Information
Other course
demands
Other
Technology related coursework for MPA stud
ents on a 5-point scale (extremely unimportant
to extremely important).” MPA directors and
coordinators are program leaders; hence, their
perception is crucial to a program’s curriculum design.
Figure 1 summarizes the responses to this ques
tion. A combined 43.9% of respondents viewed
IT-related coursework as “very important” or
“extremely important.” Thus, less than a major
ity of respondents perceived IT/e-government
as a high-priority subject. More interestingly,
28.9% of respondents viewed such coursework
as “extremely unimportant” or “very unimport
ant.” That more than a quarter of program
leaders gave such a low weight to IT/e-government coursework is rather stark, given the deep
penetration and related impact of IT in public
organizations. Such a negative view is unlikely
to result in programs’ giving sufficient im
portance to IT/e-government coursework. This
negative perception further raises the question
of whether or not program leaders are taking
into consideration the emerging realities of IT
in the workplace.
Table 2 summarizes the responses to three sur
vey questions about IT/e-government course
offerings. The first question asked, “Is IT and
e-government (or a course of similar scope) a
required course for MPA students as of 2013–
14?” About half of respondents indicated that
they offer a separate course (22.4% offer a core
course and 27.1% offer an elective course).
TABLE 2.
IT/E-Government Course Offerings
Is IT and e-government (or a course of similar scope) a required course for MPA students as of 2013–14?
Frequency
Percentage
Yes, we have a core course on IT and e-government
(or of similar scope)
24
22.4
Yes, we have an elective course on IT and e-government
(or of similar scope)
29
27.1
No, there is no exclusive IT and e-government (or of similar scope)
course; the course is taught as a part of other courses
30
28.0
No, we do not offer an IT and e-government
(or of similar scope) course
24
22.4
Total
107
100.0
How often has the IT and e-government (or of similar scope)
course been offered in the MPA program in the last three years?
Frequency
Percentage
We have offered at least one course each semester
in the last three years
12
23.1
We have offered at least one course every academic year
in the last three years
25
48.1
We have offered at least one course every other year
10
19.2
Other (please specify)
Total
5
9.6
52
100.0
Approximately what percentage of the graduated students in the last three years of your
master’s program have taken the course on IT and e-government (or course of similar scope)?
Frequency
Almost none (less than 10%)
Percentage
5
9.6
12
23.1
Moderately small percentage (26% to 49%)
7
13.5
Almost half (nearly 50%)
3
5.8
Moderately big percentage (51% to 74%)
1
1.9
Very big percentage (75% or above)
1
1.9
Almost all (nearly 100%)
23
44.2
Total
52
100.0
Very small percentage (25% or below)
274
Another 28% indicated that they include
IT/e-government as a part of another course.
Thus, overall, about 78% of respondents
indicated that they provide some form of
exposure to IT/e-government topics. However,
there are two caveats. First, as Rocheleau (1998)
warns, the extent to which other, substantive
courses successfully integrate such subject matter
is questionable; there are tradeoffs between sub
stantive course IT/e-government coverage and
skills taught, and substantive courses may not
provide as much exposure as dedicated IT/egovernment courses do. Second, IT/e-government topics are not well integrated with another
required core course common to most public
administration programs (e.g., human resources
or public budgeting). Some survey respondents
indicated that IT/e-government subject matter
is included in courses that cover research
methods, communications strategy, public rela
tions, privatization, and public-private partner
ships. While research methods is commonly a
core MPA course, the others are not. If IT/egovernment topics are not integrated with one
or more of the core courses, it is unlikely that a
majority of students will be exposed to the
concepts. Furthermore, 22.4% of respondents
indicated that they do not offer a core IT class.
In our view, the share of programs (one in
three) not offering an IT course is alarmingly
high given the present digital age.
The second question in Table 2 asked about the
frequency of IT/e-government course offerings
in the three years prior to the survey. About 23%
of respondents indicated that they had offered
such a course every semester; 48.1%, every aca
demic year. Thus, of the programs that offered
such classes, 71% did so regularly. The remain
ing 29% offered such courses less frequently.
The third question in Table 2 asked what per
centage of graduated students had taken an
IT/e-government course in the three years prior
to the survey. Of the MPA program respondents
who indicated they offered a core IT/e-government class, almost 100% of grad

uates had
taken the course (the frequency of these parti
cular respondents in the first and last questions
in Table 2 is about the same). Of the 29
respondents who indicated they offered an
elective IT/e-government class, 24 (over 80%)
indicated that less than half of graduated stu
dents had taken the course. These results sug
gest that students are unlikely to take an IT/egovernment when it is offered as an elective.
CHALLENGES OF OFFERING
IT/E-GOVERNMENT COURSES
One survey question explicitly focused on the
challenges of offering IT/e-government courses.
The question asked, “What are your main
challenges in offering the IT and e-government
(or of similar scope) course?” Figure 2 shows
that 29.1% of respondents said that they had
no challenges in offering such a course. A large
majority (nearly 70%) of MPA programs
surveyed thus have some form of challenge in
offering an IT/e-government course. Quite
interestingly, over half of respondents indicated
that more important courses demand their
faculty’s time. Clearly, there is a crowding-out
factor: IT/e-government is not a high-priority
course compared to other subjects. Of those
surveyed, 17.7% of respondents said they do
not have faculty interested in IT/e-government
subject matter. Another 11.4% indicated that
such courses have low enrollments when they are
offered, indicating a low level of interest among
MPA students. Also shown in Figure 1, 21.5%
of respondents said that they have “other”
challenges in offering IT/e-government courses.
About half of these “other” challenges were relat
ed to limited faculty or other program needs.
Our survey asked two additional questions that
highlight the challenge of faculty resources when
it comes to teaching IT/e-government. One
question asked about overall faculty size (in
cluding tenured/tenure track, research/clinical,
and adjunct) and the number of faculty whose
research interests or professional exper
ience
related to IT/e-government. About one third of
respondents indicated that none of their faculty
had such research interests or professional
experience. As shown in Figure 3, respondents
had an average of 9.2 tenured or tenure-track
faculty, of whom 1.6 had research interests or
professional experience in IT/e-govern
ment.
Non-tenure-track research/clinical faculty num
FIGURE 2.
Challenges of Offering IT/E-Government Courses
60.0%
50.6%
50.0%
40.0%
29.1%
30.0%
21.5%
20.0%
17.7%
11.4%
10.0%
0.0%
Uninterested
faculty
Other course
demands
Low enrollment
No challenges
Other
Note. Percentages do not sum to 100% because respondents could choose one or more categories.
FIGURE 3.
Average Number of Faculty and Those With Research or Professional Interests in IT/E-Government
10.00
9.21
9.00
Overall
8.00
IT/E-Government
7.00
7.02
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.44
1.00
0.00
Tenure/tenure track
276
Research/clinical (nontenure)
Adjunct/instructors
bered 1.5 faculty on average per program, of
whom 0.5 had research interests or professional experience in the subject. Adjunct faculty
numbered 7 on average per program, of whom
1.2 had research interests or professional
experience in the subject. Overall, programs
typically appear to have 1 faculty member with
research interests or professional experience
in IT/e-government.
The second question about faculty asked about
who teaches IT/e-government courses. Figure 4
shows that among the respondents who said
that they offered an IT/e-government course
(as a core or elective), about half said that such
courses were taught by tenured or tenure-track
professors. Another 19.2% said that adjunct
professors taught such courses; 15.4% said
that practitioners taught such courses. The
dependence on adjunct faculty and practitioners
for teaching IT/e-government courses is quite
useful, because such faculty are aware of current
practices in a rapidly evolving field. At the same
time, such dependence demonstrates the lack
of full-time faculty resources dedicated to
teaching IT/e-government.
The limited faculty interest in and resources
dedicated to IT/e-government is intriguing
given that rapidly evolving information techno
logies are affecting public organizations. Studies
from the 1990s indicate a paucity of IT/egovernment research in public administration.
Northrop (1997) found that among the top
five public administration journals (Public Ad
ministration Review, Administration and Society,
American Review of Public Administration, Jour
nal of Public Administration Research and Theory,
and Public Administration Quarterly), fewer
than 5% of the articles related to computing
issues. Most articles were written by a small
group of faculty, prompting Northrop (1997)
FIGURE 4.
Who Teaches IT/E-Government Courses?
Other:15.4%
Tenured / tenure track: 50.0%
Practitioner:15.4%
Adjunct:19.2%
to conclude, “The problem may be that only a
few researchers or universities are interested in
the topic” (p. 43). Public administration text
books provided inconsistent coverage as well,
and computing was not well integrated with
other topics.
More recent analyses of publications show a
similar lack of integration of IT/e-government
with mainstream organizational studies (Orli
kowski & Scott, 2008; Zammuto, Griffith,
Majchrzak, Dougherty, & Faraj, 2007). Pang,
Lee, and DeLone (2014) found that between
1990 and 2012, in the top 10 journals in the
fields of public administration, economics,
political science, public economics, and indus
trial organization, five core articles related to
public-sector IT. As the researchers noted,
“public administration researchers have paid
scant attention to IT value in the public-sector
organizations” (Pang, Lee, & DeLone, 2014,
p. 189). Analysis of six major public administration journals from 1965 to 2010 showed
that only 3.4% of the articles were related to
IT/e-government (Moon et al., 2014). In
public management, IT research holds a
“ghettoized” position, despite IT’s significant
growth over the last decade (Buffat, 2015;
Hood & Margetts, 2010; Pollitt, 2011).
We must acknowledge that there is vibrant
growth of IT research in the public sector, and
this research is interdisciplinary in nature. The
E-Government Reference Library (EGRL) data
base at the University of Washington shows an
exponential growth in e-government-related pub
lications: an almost fivefold increase between
the EGRL database version 1 (published in 2005)
and version 11 (published in 2015). There are a
few core journals in the field: Government Infor
mation Quarterly; Information Polity; Interna
tional Journal of Electronic Government Research;
Transforming Government: People, Process and
Policy; Electronic Government, an International
Journal; and Electronic Journal of Electronic
Government. A few textbooks in public admin
istration also focus specifically on IT/e-government (Garson, 2006; Milakovich, 2012;

Reddick, 2013); one introductory textbook in
public administration devotes a chapter to
278
IT/e-government (Holzer & Schwester, 2015).
Yet, this explosive growth in IT/e-government
research is remarkably independent of public
administration research and education. In our
analysis, we found that only 112 of the 7,553
articles cataloged in EGRL version 11 were from
the five journals referenced by Northrop (1997).
IT/e-government research is overwhelmingly
published in specialized journals, with little or
no integration into mainstream public admini
stration literature. The pedagogical use of these
specialized journals in public ad
ministration
classes is likely to be quite limited.
IMPACT OF 2009 NASPAA STANDARDS ON
IT/E-GOVERNMENT COURSE OFFERINGS
The old (pre-2009) NASPAA standards for ac
creditation included IT as a part of the common
curriculum components within the rubric of
“Management of Public Service Organizations.”
Given their outcome-oriented emphasis, the
2009 standards do not specify courses per se.
The 2009 standards emphasize five universally
required competencies, broadly aligned with
program mission and public service values.
Since these core competencies require no
explicit focus on IT/e-government, one could
reasonably expect that MPA programs may not
offer such coursework. Here, we analyze if the
2009 standards indeed had this impact.
One of our survey questions asked, “Do you
agree or disagree with the following statement?
NASPAA accreditation played a role in the
decision to offer or not to offer an IT and
e-government course.” The responses were on a
five-point Likert scale (strongly agree, agree,
neither agree nor disagree, disagree, and
strongly disagree). Figure 5 shows that 40.2%
of respondents “strongly disagree” or “disagree”
with the statement; 21.6% “strongly agree” or
“agree.” There is thus some evidence that MPA
program IT/e-government course offerings are
influenced by NASPAA accreditation standards.
We conducted a Pearson chi-square test to fur
ther analyze the role of NASPAA standards on
course offerings in IT/e-government. Table 3
shows cross-tabulations between the NASPAA
FIGURE 1.
Perceived Importance of IT/E-Government Coursework
40.0%
34.6%
35.0%
30.0%
27.2%
25.0%
20.0%
19.6%
15.0%
10.0%
9.3%
9.3%
5.00%
0.00%
Strongly agree
unimportant
Very
unimportant
Neither important
nor unimportant
Very
important
Extremely
Important
Note. Total respondents = 107.
standards (old and new) under which an MPA
program is accredited and whether or not the
respondent believed that NASPAA standards
influenced the decision to offer an IT/e-government course. Among those programs accredited
under the old NASPAA standards, respondents
are more or less evenly distributed between
those who indicated “strongly agree” and “agree”
(13 respondents) versus those who indicated
“strongly disagree” and “disagree” (15 respond
ents). However, among those programs accred
ited under the new NASPAA standards, a few
respondents indicated “strongly agree” and “agree”
(6 respondents) and most indicated “strongly
disagree” and “disagree” (18 respondents). The
Pearson chi-square statistic has a strong value of
19.31, which is significant at the p = .01 level.
There is a statistically significant difference
between the influence of old and new NASPAA
standards in a program’s decision to offer IT/egovernment courses. Programs are obligated to
offer an IT/e-government course under the old
standards but not under the new standards.
Table 4 delves deeper into the relationship
between NASPAA standards (old vs. new) and
IT/e-government course offerings. The table
shows that more programs accredited under the
old standards offered IT/e-government stand
alone courses: 29 programs had such standalone
courses and 15 did not. The reverse is true for
those programs accredited under the new
standards: 17 programs had such stand-alone
courses and 25 did not. The Pearson chisquare statistic has a value of 10.63, which is
significant at the 10% level, indicating statis
tically meaningful differences. These results show
that programs accredited under the old
standards are more likely than programs
accredited under the new standards to offer an
IT/e-government course.
Overall, whereas MPA programs were influ
enced under the old NASPAA standards to offer
IT/e-government courses, programs accredited
under the new NASPAA standards have no
such mandate. The flexibility under the new
TABLE 3.
Cross-Tabulations of Program Accreditation Status (Old vs. New NASPAA Standards)
and Its Role in the Decision to Offer an IT/E-Government Course
If the MPA program is accredited, is
the program accredited under the
old or the new NASPAA standards?
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
NASPAA accreditation played a role in the decision to offer or not
to offer an IT and e-government course.
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Neither
Agree
nor
Disagree
Program accredited under old
NASPAA standards
6
7
16
12
3
44
Program accredited under new
NASPAA standards
0
6
18
8
10
42
Program not accredited
by NASPAA
0
0
8
2
6
16
Total
6
13
42
22
19
102
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Total
Note. Pearson’s chi square =19.31, p = .01.
NASPAA standards are indeed useful for pro
grams as they strategize to tailor offerings to
their mission. However, the larger question is,
are we preparing our students for the emerging
realities of digital-era governance? If a program
offers an IT/e-government course, then the
course needs to be aligned with the competencies
under the new NASPAA standards. The onus
is on the program to establish a link between
the course and the program’s mission. This
task is harder under new NASPAA standards
(compared to the old standards) because none
of the five core competencies under the new
standards emphasize information technology.
Arguably, the need for IT instruction is indirect
ly inherent in the core competencies. However, our analysis of the self-studies submitted
by NASPAA-affiliated schools since 2009
(regardless of accreditation) shows that only 24
programs (out of 125) had any mention of
technology, e-government, or database in any of
the five competency domains. Ten programs
included these terms in the first (ability to lead
and manage in public governance) and fifth
(ability to communicate and interact produc
tively with a diverse and changing workforce
and citizenry) domains. Seven programs men
280
tioned the terms under the third domain
(ability to analyze, synthesize, think critically,
solve problems and make decisions). It is ques
tionable whether or not the curricula of public
administration programs achieve much integra
tion of IT/e-government topics. Conversations
about IT/e-government may not be present in
most programs.
On another front, practitioner attitudes and
work experiences concerning IT/e-government
also influence whether or not programs con
sider such courses. Surveys of practitioners do
not rate IT/e-government as a high priority,
although there are some variations. NASPAA
and the International City/County Manage
ment Association conducted a survey of 400
city managers in 2006. Based on this survey,
Raffel, Maser, and Calarusse (2011) claimed,
“When asked to check the three most important
skills in their organizations, respondents added
budgeting and financial management to this
list, but e-governance, information technology,
policy analysis, and statistical analysis never
made it above the ground level” (p. 74). How
ever, 71% and 58% of survey respondents did
rate information technology and e-governance
TABLE 4.
Cross-Tabulations of Program Accreditation Status (Old vs. New NASPAA Standards)
and IT/E-Government Course Offerings
If the MPA program is accredited, is
the program accredited under the
old or the new NASPAA standards?
Choose the best answer to the following statement:
Is IT and e-government (or a course of similar scope)
a required course for MPA students as of 2013–14?
Yes,
we have
a core
course
on IT and
e-government
(or one
of similar
scope)
Yes,
we have
an elective course
on IT and
e-government
(or one
of similar
scope)
No, there
is no exclusive IT and
e-government
(or of similar
scope) course;
the course is
taught as a
part of other
courses
No, we
do not
offer an
IT and
e-government
(or of
similar
scope)
course
Total
Program accredited under
old NASPAA standards
13
16
11
4
44
Program accredited under
new NASPAA standards
9
8
13
12
42
Program not accredited
by NASPAA
2
5
3
6
16
24
29
27
22
102
Total
Note. Pearson’s chi square =10.63, p = .01.
applications/solutions, respectively, as “extremely
important” or “important” (NASPAA, 2006);
comparatively, respondents rated policy analysis and statistical analysis 69% and 42%,
respectively, in the two Likert scales of
importance. In a similar NASPAA survey of
392 federal employees in 2007, respondents’
ratings for the two categories of importance
were 73% and 63%, respectively; policy
analysis and statistical analysis rated 69% and
59%, respectively (NASPAA, 2007). NASPAA
has not conducted a similar survey since. We
should view these results cautiously, as
information technology has advanced rapidly.
For example, emphasis has shifted from Web
2.0 tools to mobile-first solutions; social media
applications are also popular with public
agencies. Practitioners’ attitudes toward IT/egovernment may be changing, too, in this
context. In their recent survey of federal agency
leaders, the National Academy of Public
Administration (NAPA) and ICF International
(2015) concluded, “Federal leaders believe the
government is reaping benefits from having
adopted technology, and that technology helps
agencies achieve their missions” (p. 2).
Moreover, almost all MPA programs teach
statistical analysis (or research methods) as a
part of their core curricula. Statistical analysis is
also directly embodied in the third domain of
NASPAA’s core competencies (the ability to
analyze); our analysis of the self-studies of
125 programs shows that nearly half of the
schools included “statistics” in this domain
(other domains barely mentioned the term).
While we do not contest the need for such
analytical ability, we are simply pointing out
that this subject—which carries lower priority
with practitioners—is nevertheless included in
the curriculum, likely for good reasons (and
perhaps because skill in research methods is a
basic one for faculty compared to informa
tion technology).
CONCLUSION
Are we preparing public administration students
to face the realities of governance in the digital
world? Our analysis shows that IT/e-government topics are not given adequate importance
in the public administration curriculum. Less
than half of our survey respondents viewed
IT/e-government as an important course; more
acutely, over a quarter of respondents did not
deem it important for the MPA program.
About half of respondents indicated that their
program offered IT/e-government coursework
as a core or elective subject. In the programs
offering IT/e-government as an elective, less
than half of the students take the class. Over
another quarter of respondents indicated that
they integrated IT/e-government topics in
another course, but the other such courses were
often not core courses typically offered in pub
lic administration programs. So it is unlikely
that IT/e-government subject matter is incor
porated into another substantive course offered
in MPA programs.
About 70% of survey respondents indicated
some sort of barrier to offering IT/e-government
coursework. Over half of respondents indicated that more important courses demand their
faculty’s time. This reinforces the view that IT/
e-government is not a high priority compared
to other subjects. About half of respondents
indicated that an IT/e-government course,
when offered, was taught by tenured or tenuretrack faculty. Limited faculty and other pro
gram resources also hindered offering such
a course. About one third of respondents
indicated that they have no faculty (tenured/
tenure-track, research/clinical, or adjunct) with
research interests or professional experience in
information technology. IT/e-government also
receives little attention in mainstream public
administration journals and textbooks.
Overall, we may not be preparing public ad
ministration students for the digital age, espe
cially under the new 2009 NASPAA standards.
The Pearson chi-square analysis shows a statis
tically significant difference between respondents
governed by the old versus new NASPAA ac
creditation standards in terms of a program’s
282
decision to offer IT/e-govern
ment courses.
Programs accredited under the old standards
are more likely than those accredited under the
new standards to offer an IT/e-government
course. While the old NASPAA standards in
fluenced programs to offer information tech
nology courses, the new NASPAA standards
have no such mandate. Essentially, there has
been a shift in the importance attached to
information technology in the curriculum,
with programs placing less emphasis on IT/egovernment coursework. Because the 2009
NASPAA standards focus on five core com
petencies that do not explicitly include inform
ation technology, we fear that IT/e-government
may not even be a part of the curriculum
conversation under these new standards.
These stark findings hold important lessons for
public administration education. If the MPA
curriculum systematically ignores IT/e-government, we will fail to train a workforce that is
prepared for the digital world. It is important
for public administrators to understand the
role of information technology in the modern
digital workforce. Society is becoming increas
ingly interconnected, and technology is the
main driver. The Internet is reshaping how
citizens interact with government agencies and
influence decision making. Government agen
cies spend sub
stantially on IT/e-government
projects, yet many such efforts do not succeed
(mainly due to management issues). Retreating from adequately preparing public admin
istration students in IT/e-government will
|only increase the probability of such failures.
In this respect, we believe that the metaphor
of an ostrich burying its head in the sand is
appropriate. Public sector agencies are often
perceived to lag behind private sector firms in
adopting information technology (National
Academy of Public Administration [NAPA] and
ICF International, 2015). With technological
advancements, public organizations must devel
op the capacity to adapt their management and
structure accordingly. As Bretschneider and
Mergel (2011) argue, the challenge “is not the
technology itself, but the adaptation of the
technology within the given political and
bureaucratic situation and institutional barriers”
(p. 199). The public administration curriculum
needs to incorporate the linkages between in
formation technology, organizational efficiency,
transformation, and connecting with citizens.
The third generation of NASPAA standards
should build on the strides made during the
first and second generations. Our task should
not be to rejustify the need for IT/e-government
inclusion in public administration curricula,
but to ensure that public administrators are
capable of dealing with the digital world. We
argue that the NASPAA standards should
consider information technology as a funda
mental force that is reshaping public organi
zations and work processes. Consideration of
information technology as a fundamental force
requires some reconceptualization of the
NASPAA core competencies. The competencies
need to recognize the rapidly evolving techno
logies that affect daily life as well as governance
mechanisms. MPA students should get some
sense of how to deal with the management
issues that arise in the technological world. If
we do not teach that, then we, as public
administration educators, will be burying our
heads in the sand, ignoring what future prac
titioners need.
We recommend that NASPAA form an ad hoc
committee to examine the relationship between
NASPAA accreditation standards and IT/egovernment, similar to the 1985 Ad Hoc Com
mittee on Computers in Public Management
Education. The new ad hoc committee should
specifically consider how the core competencies
allow for inclusion of IT/e-government in the
public administration curriculum. It could be
worth revisiting the competencies in order to
recognize and incorporate the significance of
the technological environment in which public
organizations operate. At the least, the NASPAA
standards should recognize IT/e-government as
a significant force shaping governance systems.
Undoubtedly, IT/e-government offers both
prospects and challenges for public organiza
tions. The public administration curriculum
should explicitly recognize both and provide
adequate exposure to IT/e-government topics
so that students are prepared to deal with the
digital world. In today’s fast-paced technolog
ical environment, such coursework would un
doubtedly need to adapt and change quickly.
A large body of specialized literature on IT/egovernment has been rapidly evolving over the
last two decades, providing the knowledge and
tools that future public administrators will
need to keep up with changes in technology.
REFERENCES
Berry, F. (2011). The changing climate for public affairs
education. Journal of Public Affairs Education,
17(1), 1–6.
Bowman, J. S., Chen, F. F., Tinkersley, W. B., & Hillard,
K. R. (1993). Patterns in MPA admission decisionmaking: An application of social judgment theory.
Public Administration Quarterly, 17(3), 356–372.
Bretschneider, B. (1985). Teaching computer
technology for information management in schools
of public affairs and administration. Social Science
Computer Review, 3(2), 93–102.
Bretschneider, S. I., & Mergel, I. (2011). Technology
and public management information systems:
Where we have been and where we are going. In D.
C. Menzel & H. L. White (Eds.), The state of public
administration: Issues, challenges and opportunities
(pp. 187–203). New York, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
Brown, M. M. (2015). Revisiting the IT productivity
paradox. American Review of Public Administration,
45(5), 565–583. doi:10.1177/0275074014523102.
and Society, 30(4), 421–442.
Brown, M. M., Brudney, J. L., & Waugh, W. L.
(2005). Bridging the gap between information
technology needs in the public sector and in public
administration graduate education. In G. D. Garson
(Ed.), Handbook of public information systems (2nd
ed., pp. 11–26). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Buffat, A. (2015). Street-level bureaucracy and
e-government. Public Management Review, 17(1),
149–161.
Garson, G. D. (2006). Public information technology
and e-governance: Managing the virtual state.
Burlington, VT: Jones and Bartlett Learning.
Castells, M. (2000). The rise of the network society (2nd
ed.). Oxford, United Kingdom: Blackwell.
Ginn, M. H., & Hammond, A. (2012). Online education in public affairs. Online Journal of Distance
Learning Administration, 14(2). Retrieved from
http://www.westgaedu/~distance/ojdla/summer
152/ginn_hammond152.html.
Cleary, R. E. (1990). What do public administration
masters programs look like? Do they do what
is needed? Public Administration Review, 50(6),
663–673.
Coursey, D., & Norris, D. F. (2008). Models of
e-government: Are they correct? An empirical
assessment. Public Administration Review, 68(3),
523–536.
manager: Priorities and strategies for public
management education. Journal of Public Affairs
Education, 10(1), 5–17.
Dawes, S. S. (2008). The evolution and continuing
challenges of e-governance. Public Administration
Review, 68, s86–s102.
Desouza, K. C., & Jacob, B. (2014). Big data in the
public sector: Lessons for practitioners and scholars.
Administration and Society (Advance online publi
cation). doi:10.1177/0095399714555751.
Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S., & Tinkler, J.
(2006a). Digital era governance: IT corporations, the
state, and e-government. Oxford, United Kingdom:
Oxford University Press.
Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S., & Tinkler,
J. (2006b). New public management is dead—
long live digital-era governance. Journal of Public
Administration Research and Theory, 16(3),
467–494.
Foley, P., & Alfonso, X. (2009). E-government and
the transformation agenda. Public Administration,
87(2), 371–396.
Goldfinch, S. (2007). Pessimism, computer failure,
and information systems development in the
public sector. Public Administration Review, 67(5),
917–929.
Haque, A. (2015). Surveillance, transparency, and
democracy: Public administration in the information
age. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
Heeks, R. (2006). Implementing and managing
e-government: An international text. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Holzer, M., & Lin, W. (2007). A longitudinal
perspective on MPA education in the United States.
Holzer, M., & Schwester, R. W. (2015). Public
administration: An introduction (2nd ed.). New
York, NY: Routledge.
Hood, C., & Margetts, H. (2010). Cyber-bureaucracy:
If information technology is so central to public
administration, why is it so ghetto-ized? In J.
Pierre & P. W. Ingraham (Eds.), Comparative
administrative change and reform (pp. 114–135).
Montreal, QC: McGill-Queens University Press.
Hy, R. J., Waugh, W., & Brudney, J. L. (1993). An
assessment of institutional arrangement and
microcomputer skills and competencies in public
administration graduate education. International
Journal of Public Administration, 16(4), 467–489.
Fountain, J. (2001). Building the virtual state:
Information technology and institutional change.
Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
Kiel, L. D. (1986). Information systems education
in masters programs in public affairs and
administration. Public Administration Review,
46(Special issue), 590–594.
Ganapati, S. (2011). Uses of public participation
geographic information systems applications in
e-government. Public Administration Review, 71(3),
425–434.
Kiel, L. D. (1987). Requiring computer and
information systems courses in MPA curricula:
A report of faculty opinion. Social Science
Microcomputer Review, 5(3), 341–346.
284
Kim, S. H., & Layne, K. (2001). Making the connection:
Koven, S. G., Goetzke, K., & Brennan, M. (2008).
Profiling public affairs programs: The view from the
top. Administration and Society, 40(7), 691–710.
Kraemer, K., Bergin, T., Bretschneider, S., Duncan,
recommendations for public management
education in computing: The final report of the
NASPAA Ad Hoc Committee on Computers in
Public Management Education. Social Science
Computer Review, 4(1), 1–37.
Lathrop, D., & Ruma, L. (2010). Open Government:
Collaboration, transparency, and participation in
practice. San Francisco, CA: O’Reilly Media.
Lavertu, S. (2015). We all need help: “Big data”
and the mismeasure of public administration.
Public Administration Review (Advance online
publication). doi:10.1111/puar.12436.
Mergel, I. (2012). Social media in the public sector:
Participation, collaboration, and transparency in a
networked world. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/
Wiley.
Mergel, I. (2013). Social media in the public sector. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Milakovich, M. E. (2012). Digital governance: New
technologies for improving public service and
participation. New York, NY: Routledge.
Miles, R. E. (1967). The search for identity of graduate
schools of public affairs. Public Administration
Review, 27(4), 343–356.
Moon, M. J., Lee, J., & Roh, C-Y. (2014). The
evolution of internal IT applications and
e-government studies in public administration:
Research themes and methods. Administration and
Society, 46(1), 3–36.
Administration (NASPAA). (2006). City and county
manager survey (result summary). Retrieved from
http://www.naspaa.org/execMPA/naspaa_surveys/
CityManagerSurvey.pdf.
Administration (NASPAA). (2007). Federal
employer survey (result summary). Retrieved from
http://www.naspaa.org/execMPA/naspaa_surveys/
FederalEmployerSurvey.pdf.
Administration
(NASPAA),
Commission
on Peer Review and Accreditation. (2014).
NASPAA standards: Accreditation standards for
master’s degree programs. Retrieved from https://
naspaa-accreditation-standards.pdf.
Norris, D. F. (2010). E-government 2020: Plus
ca change, plus c’est la meme chose. Public
Administration Review, 70(s1), s180–s181.
Norris, D. F., & Moon, M. J. (2005). Advancing
e-government at the grass roots: Tortoise or hare?
e-government in the United States: Transformation
or incremental change? Public Administration
Review, 73(1), 165–175.
Northrop, A. (1997). Public administration:
Computing education in public administration
journals and textbooks. Social Science Computer
Review, 15(1), 40–47.
Noveck, B. S. (2009). Wiki government: How technology
can make government better, democracy stronger, and
citizens more powerful. Washington, DC: Brookings
Institution Press.
Orlikowski, W. J., & Scott, S. V. (2008).
Sociomateriality: Challenging the separation of
technology, work and organization. Academy of
Management Annals, 2(1), 433–474.
Nabatchi, T., & Leighninger, M. (2015). Public
participation for 21st century democracy. Hoboken,
NJ: John Wiley and Sons.
Owen, T. (2015). Disruptive power: The crisis of the
state in the digital age. New York, NY: Oxford
University Press.
National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA)
and ICF International. (2015). Federal leaders digital
insight study. Retrieved from http://napawash.org/
images/reports/2015/Federal_Leaders_Digital_
Insights_Study.pdf.
Pang, M. S., Lee, G., & DeLone, W. H. (2014).
IT resources, organizational capabilities, and
value creation in public-sector organizations: A
public-value management perspective. Journal of
Information Technology, 29(3), 187–205.
Pollitt, C. (2011). Mainstreaming technological change
in the study of public management. Public Policy
and Administration, 26(4), 377–397.
Waller, G., Hallenbeck, G., & Rubenstrunk, K. (2010).
The CIO edge: Seven leadership skills you need to drive
results. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.
Raffel, J. A., Maser, S. M., & Calarusse, C. (2011). Ac
creditation and competencies in education for lead
ership. In D. C. Menzel & H. L. White (Eds.), The s
tate of public administration: Issues, challenges and opportunities (pp. 70–88). New York, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
West, D. (2005). Digital government technology and
public sector performance. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Reddick, C. (2013). Public administration and infor
mation technology. Burlington, VT: Jones and Bartlett Learning.
Rosenbloom, D. H., & Naff, K. C. (2010). The status
of law in contemporary public administration literature, education, and practice. In R. O’Leary, D.
M. Van Slyke, & S. Kim (Eds.), The future of pubic
administration, public management, and public
service around the world: The Minnowbrook perspective (pp. 211–220). Washington, DC: Georgetown
University Press.
Saltman, R. (1974). Educating public administrators
for managing science and technology. Public Ad
ministration Review, 34(4), 343–356.
Scholl, H. J. (2010). Electronic government (Advances
in Management Information Systems [AMIS], Vol
ume on Electronic Government). New York, NY:
M. E. Sharpe.
Thielemann, K., & Sood, R. (2015). Market insight:
State and local government IT market primer, United
States, 2015 (Gartner Industry Market Strategies
Worldwide). Retrieved from http://www.nascio.
org/events/sponsors/vrc/Market Insight_State and
Local Government IT.pdf.
Townsend, A. (2013). Smart cities big data, civic hack
ers, and the quest for a new utopia. New York, NY:
W. W. Norton.
U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO). (2015).
High-risk series: An update (Report No. GAO-15290). Retrieved from http://www.gao.gov/assets/
670/668415.pdf.
U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
(2015). Analytical perspectives, budget of the United
States government, fiscal year 2016. Washington, DC:
U.S. Government Printing Office.
286
White, J. (2015). Managing information in the public
sector. New York, NY: Routledge.
Zammuto, R. F., Griffith, T. L., Majchrzak, A.,
Dougherty, D. J., & Faraj, S. (2007). Information
technology and the changing fabric of organization.
Organization Science, 18(5), 749–762.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Sukumar Ganapati is an associate professor in the
Department of Public Administration at Florida International University (FIU), in Miami.
He is also director of the PhD program in pub
lic affairs. He has taught several courses related
to information technology and e-government at
FIU. His research on information technology
encompasses open government and emerging
information technologies and their adoption in
public organizations.
is a professor and chair
of the Department of Public Administration at
the University of Texas at San Antonio. Pro
fessor Reddick’s research and teaching interests are in information technology and public
sector organizations.
E-Government Education
in Turkish Public Administration
Graduate Programs:
Past, Present, and Future
Mete Yildiz
Hacettepe University
Cenay Babaoğlu
Nigde University
Mehmet Akif Demircioğlu
Indiana University, Bloomington
ABSTRACT
The study of e-government is becoming increasingly important around the world in the field of
public administration. This article examines the historical development, current status, and future
prospects of graduate e-government courses in Turkish public administration programs. To that
end, we performed content analysis of e-government course syllabi and evaluated relevant archival
documents. We then conducted semistructured surveys of past and current instructors of graduate
e-government courses. The article concludes by discussing the future prospects of e-government
education in Turkey, including the problems that instructors need to solve in order to improve
instruction and the relevance and impact of such courses on students and faculty of public
administration programs in Turkey and elsewhere.
KEYWORDS
E-government education, Turkey, graduate schools
Although e-government is a relatively young
subfield of the public administration discipline,
it has gained significant academic and practical
popularity during the last three decades. This
popularity is particularly due to the increasing
and ubiquitous use of various information and
communication technologies (ICTs). These are
mainly but not limited to the Internet and used
by people from different walks of life and by all
types of organizations, both public and private
(Mao, 2004; Yazici, 2010; Yildiz, 2007). Thanks
JPAE 22 (2), 287–302
to the practical and academic interest in e-govern
ment, its teaching as an academic subject has
also attracted some scholarly attention (Biasiotti
& Nannucci, 2004; Parycek & Pircher, 2003).
Nevertheless, there are still relatively fewer
studies on e-government teaching compared to
other kinds of e-government research.
The contribution of this article is threefold:
First, despite many publications on e-govern
ment theory and practice, few exclusively exam
M. Yildiz, C. Babaoğlu, & M. A. Demircioğlu
ine e-government education. Second, while the
state of e-government education in developed
countries is relatively well documented (Biasiotti
& Nannucci, 2004; Jaeger & Bertot, 2009;
Parycek & Pircher, 2003), the relevant Englishlanguage literature is limited. Third, according
to our extensive review of e-government educa
tion in Turkey, only three articles have analyzed
e-government education in Turkish universities
(Akilli, Babaoğlu, & Demircioğlu, 2013; Babaoğlu, Akilli, & Demircioğlu, 2012; Babaoğlu &
Demircioğlu, 2012), and they focused on only
undergraduate education. This article aims to
help fill these gaps.
In Turkey, undergraduate and graduate educa
tion in general, and e-government education in
particular, vary significantly and deserve separ
ate academic attention. First, on the one hand,
an overwhelming majority of undergraduate
stu
dents in Turkey, both in public admini
stration and other disciplines, are full-time stu
dents. They typically start their undergraduate
programs immediately after graduating from
high school, without any significant work ex
perience. On the other hand, a sizable portion
of graduate students in public administration
programs are professionals. Many of them, par
ticularly those who study in Ankara (the capital
of Turkey), where the percentage of bureaucrats
among the general population is very high, are
part-time students and work in public sector
agencies at various levels. Thus, the contents
and the audiences of undergraduate and grad
uate e-government courses, as well as the ex
pectations of both the students and instructors,
are quite different.
Second, the motivation of students in under
graduate and graduate e-government courses
differs. The selection system for undergraduates
is very centralized through one university
entrance exam (in which about two million
people competed for university enrollment in
2015), whereas the selection process for graduate
students is decentralized, carried out through
exams conducted by each program. Further,
graduate students are selected based on their
grades from written-language exams, aptitude
tests, and oral evaluations conducted by depart
288
mental faculty. This means that while graduate
students are generally interested and sometimes
knowledgeable about public administration in
general and e-government in particular, many
undergraduates are neither knowledgeable nor
necessarily interested in these topics. This can
especially be the case when undergraduates are
assigned to a program not among their top
choices, because of their central exam score.
Such undergraduates who take e-government
courses may not even be interested in these
classes in the first place. On the other hand,
departmental committees select graduate stu
dents from among the most successful and
promising candidates. Such students are more
likely to choose elective e-government classes
due to their interest in the topic.
Third, and finally, in the fast-changing techno
logical world, public administration graduate
students, as future public managers, will need
to adapt to changing circumstances by learning
about new and emerging technologies and their
impacts on government. Even if these students
will never need to develop e-government policy
models or personally deal with e-government
applications, they should still become familiar
with topics such as social media and e-govern
ance (Koliba & Zia, 2015, pp. 15–17). For these
three reasons, examining graduate e-government
courses in Turkey may provide unique value in
addition to similar studies focused on the
undergraduate level.
LITERATURE REVIEW: E-GOVERNMENT
AND E-GOVERNMENT EDUCATION
There is no one accepted definition of e-govern
ment, and many scholars define e-government
differently depending on the context, objec
tive(s), and/or application (Yildiz, 2007). Jaeger
and Bertot (2009) define e-government narrowly
as “the provision of government information
and services through the online environment” (p. 39). Tat-Kei Ho (2002) argues that
“explosive growth in Internet usage and rapid
development of e-commerce in the private
sector have put growing pressure on the public
sector to serve citizens electronically, which is
often known as the ‘e-government’ initiative”
(p. 434). A report by the United Nations and
E-Government Education in Turkey
American Society of Public Administration
says that “e-government can include virtually
all information and communication technology
(ICT) platforms and applications in use by the
public sector…[specifically, e-government in
volves] utilizing the internet and the worldwide-web for delivering government informa
tion and services to citizens (Ronaghan, 2002,
p. 1). We prefer to use the definition of Richard Heeks, a leading e-government researcher:
e-government is “an application of digital ICTs
in the public sector” (Yildiz, 2007, p. 655).
Although the emergence of ICTs goes back to
World War II, early applications of e-govern
ment and government computer usage for auto
mation projects started to take root in the late
1980s and early 1990s as more and more public
managers began using personal computers. It was
also during these years that increasing numbers
of e-government projects emerged in all sectors
of public activity, from education to finance
(Yildiz, 2007). The U.S. government has
pioneered the use of e-government projects
since the early 1990s (Lee & Reed, 2015); and
studies on e-government—which began appear
ing in the 1990s mainly in the United States,
United Kingdom, and Canada—spread to
other developed and developing countries
(Terzi, 2006).
This fast growth in the popularity of e-govern
ment theory and practice had many reasons.
Many countries responded to budgetary pres
sures by employing ICTs to reduce government
expenditures (Parycek & Pircher, 2003) and
increase the efficiency and effectiveness of their
bureaucracies (Cordella & Tempini, 2015). In
addition, e-government was considered not only
as a tool for “modernization and digitalization
of public administrations” but also as significant
for “the enhancement of citizen participation”
(Biasiotti & Nannucci, 2004, p. 460). Research
suggests that information technology (IT) in
general and e-government in particular have
increased democratic access for citizens around
the world (Lee & Reed, 2015; Mao, 2004).
Moreover, e-government applications have pro
vided opportunities to increase accountability
and transparency in public services (Jreisat, 2005),
and they can empower citizens and communities
(Tat-Kei Ho, 2002). In this regard, e-govern
ment serves both administrative purposes, such
as effectiveness and efficiency, and political
ones, such as participation, transparency, and
accountability. Sobaci and Karkin (2013) state
that, due to e-government and ICTs,
citizens, on the one hand, can electroni
cally access government information in
relation to decisions and services, take
part in the process of decision making
that directly affects them, and commun
icate their opinions and views about the
services delivered by the public institu
tions to the relevant officials. Govern
ments, on the other hand, by collecting
the preferences, opinions and views of
the citizens about policies and services,
are likely to use them as an input in the
process of improving policies and ser
vices. Therefore, governments strengthen
their legitimacy by generating more ac
cept
able policies and satisfactory ser
vices. Finally, this process characterizes
ICT-based transparent, participatory and
citizen-oriented public services. (p. 418)
Hence, e-government research can help govern
ments discover how to be more accountable
and transparent as well as how to provide a
better quality of life for their citizens. Whatever
the potential gains from e-government may be,
education in e-government, either for creating
public awareness or for better implementing its
applications, is critically important (Seddiky &
Ara, 2015, p. 387). High-quality e-government
education increases e-government readiness,
which is one indicator of a society’s ICT use
capability; and in order to assess such e-govern
ment readiness, the human resources capacity
of governments should be examined (Basu,
2004, p. 114). Teaching e-government is also
important because teaching and research are
two sides of the same coin, with certain syn
ergies (Akilli et al., 2012). All of these factors
have facilitated the creation of e-government
education programs and courses throughout
the world (Hunnius, Paulowitsch, & Schuppan,
2015, p. 2116).1 For example, the Bangladeshi
government gave extensive ICT training to its
staff to overcome the lack of e-government skills
(Hamiduzzaman, 2012, p. 196).
In short, in both developed and developing
countries, educational institutions have strived
to respond to the increasing importance of
e-government research, practice, and education
with
in the public administration discipline.
Bonser (2015) makes the same point when
he argues that “many of the newer public
administration/public policy programs were a
direct response to the concern for the societal
disarray of that time [late 1960s and early
1970s], and the criticism that universities
needed to be more relevant to society” (p. 7).
However, it is not just the academic world that
has a heightened awareness and needs increased
education about e-government. E-government
is a major transformation that all affected par
ties need to be aware of. Consequently, Janowski
(2012, p. 2270) argues that all the actors in the
e-government system—political and bureau
cratic leaders, project managers, management
staff, technical staff, service staff, businesses,
and citizens—should have at least some training
in e-government.
The need to teach e-government is increasing
not only because of its growing impact but also
because of its multidisciplinary nature. Multi
disciplinary studies of technology adoption are
increasingly popular worldwide and the public
administration discipline should try not to be
left behind. For example, in their analysis of
Korean public administration programs, Park
and Park (2006) found that, for teaching pur
poses, public administration departments colla
borate neither with information and computer
sciences nor with telecommunication studies.
On the contrary, business schools have strong
collaborative ties with those same disciplines in
order to offer management information system
(MIS) degrees or concentrations. According to
the authors, this is a significant problem; due to
the multidisciplinary nature of e-government
courses, public administration departments
have a lot to gain by collaborating with other
departments and areas of expertise. Such joint
offerings may also have benefits beyond the
290
courses themselves, such as the creation of
collaborative research projects.
Still, the main reason that public administra
tion programs should develop and offer ICT and
e-government courses (Chiu, 2007; Dawes, 2004;
Jennings, 2002; Kim & Layne, 2001; Pavlichev,
2004) is that organizations and insti
tu
tional
environments are very dynamic and constantly
changing, and the public administration curri
culum should reflect that (National Association
of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration
[NASPAA], 1986; Park & Park, 2006; Perry,
2001). Indeed, many public administration
programs worldwide have added e-government
courses (Akilli et al., 2012; Babaoğlu &
Demircioğlu, 2012; Babaoğlu et al., 2012; Park
& Park, 2006). However, only a few studies
have tried to explain why graduate programs have
adopted e-government courses and how these
adoption processes have worked. This article aims
to address these questions for public admin
istration departments of Turkish universities.
Research on e-government in Turkey started in
the late 1990s. Computer engineers pioneered
this research, supported by informatics non
governmental organization. Centers on e-gov
ernment then formed within leading academic
institutions, such as the Middle East Technical
University and the Public Administration In
stitute for Turkey and the Middle East; and
such institutions have researched e-government
and its instruction (Medeni, Mustafa, Medeni,
Balci, & Merih, 2009; Yazici, 2010). Addi
tionally, partly thanks to the need to confirm to
European Union (EU) governance standards,
Turkey has invested a lot of money in e-govern
ment projects since the 1990s (Babaoğlu et
al., 2012).
E-government instruction has grown in the
wake of e-government projects. Babaoğlu and
Demircioğlu (2012) found that of 166 univer
sities in Turkey in 2012, 68 of them had
departments titled either “public administra
tion” or “political science and public admini
stration.” All of these departments offered a
basic-level ICT-use class (65 mandatory, 3 elec
tive), but those classes mostly taught use of
Web browsers and word processors. Only 14
universities offered undergraduate e-government
courses as of 2012. The first such course was
offered in 2006 by Hacettepe University and
the number had dramatically increased by
2012 (2006: 1 university, 2007: 2 universities,
2008: 4 universities, 2009: 7 universities, 2010:
12 universities, 2012: 13 universities). The
authors identified three reasons for the increase
of undergraduate e-government courses in Tur
key: (1) faculty academic interest in the topic
(42%); (2) transfer of such a course from other
universities where it had been successful (i.e.,
mimetic isomorphism, 33%); and (3), instruc
tors having studied abroad for their graduate
degrees, where they were exposed to the topic
of e-government (25%).
METHODOLOGY
We opted to study e-government instruction in
Turkey for several reasons. Although it is a dev
eloping country, Turkey is a member of the
G20 and has an upper-middle income level
(World Bank, 2016). We also considered the
country’s historical importance, geographic
location, high population (close to 80 million),
and particularly its increasing number of uni
versities in the last decade (Yildiz, Demircioğlu,
& Babaoğlu, 2011).
To find and evaluate the content of e-govern
ment courses taught in public administration
depart
ments in Turkey, we first identified
graduate e-government courses, their instruc
tors, and syllabi using departmental websites.
We also examined each university’s Bologna
Process information page.2
Reviewing the websites of Turkish universities,
we found that 96 of 190 universities had a
public administration department in 2015. This
was a big change from the 68 such departments
identified by Babaoğlu and Demircioğlu in 2012.
One important reason for this increase was the
opening of new universities. The number of
universities in Turkey increased from 166 to 190
in the last three years (YOK [Turkish Higher
Education Council], 2015). Additionally, some
relatively newly established universities have
opened public administration departments.
Of the 96 public administration departments
we identified, 18 (19%) offered graduate
e-government courses. These 18 departments
had 24 graduate programs in total, 17 of which
were master’s programs that require a thesis, 3
of which were executive master’s programs that
do not require a thesis, and 4 of which were
doctoral programs.
We then performed content analysis of e-govern
ment course syllabi and evaluated relevant arch
ival documents. These archival documents are
the official and unofficial records of depart
mental discussions and formal decisions regard
ing the creation of e-government classes.
The 24 graduate programs offered a total of 25
e-government courses (see Table 1). Among these
25 courses, 3 were inactive due to the program’s
recent establishment or lack of qualified teach
ers; another 3 courses had no available infor
mation, and so we labeled them “inaccessible.”
The remaining 19 courses seemed to be active
as of September 1, 2015. Therefore, we exam
ined a total of 19 active and accessible graduate
e-government courses in this study.
Finally, we sent e-mail surveys that contained
structured questions, both open- and closedended, to the instructors of the graduate e-gov
ernment courses in the 24 graduate programs
(the Appendix lists the questions). Because
some instructors teach more than one course in
a graduate program, or teach one course each in
more than one program, we identified a total of
14 instructors who actively taught the 19 active
and accessible graduate e-government courses;
we e-mailed surveys to those 14 instructors. Only
10 instructors responded, providing information
about 14 of the 19 different graduate e-govern
ment courses that these 10 instructors taught.
FINDINGS
Our initial findings about university location,
the degree that the e-government course is a part
of, course titles, whether the course is actively
being taught or not, and the year that these
graduate e-government courses were first taught
are presented in Table 1.
TABLE 1.
Graduate E-Government Courses in Turkish Public Administration Programs
University
Location
Degree
Course title
Activity
Mandatory
(M) or
elective (E)
Year of
origin
Abant Izzet Baysal
University
Bolu
MSc
E-Government
Active
E
2002
Aksaray University
Aksaray
MSc
E-Government
in Public
Administration
Inactive
E
2013
Atilim University
Ankara
MSc
E-Government
Theory and Practices
Active
E
2009
Bilecik Şeyh
Edebali University
Bilecik
MSc
Governance and
E-Government
Inactive
Inaccessible
No
response
Cumhuriyet
University
Sivas
MSc
E-Government and
Public Administration
Active
E
2005
PhD
E-Government and
Active
E
2005
Dicle University
Diyarbakır
MSc
E-Government
and Administration
Inaccessible
Inaccessible
No
response
Hacettepe
University
Ankara
MSc
Information Technologies and Public
Administration
Active
E
2005
MBA
Information
Society and Public
Administration
Active
E
2005
PhD
Information
Technologies
and Public
Administration
Active
E
2005
Active
E
2014
Inactive
E
2013
Hitit University
Çorum
MSc
Information Society
and Administration
Karamanoğlu
Mehmet Bey
University
Karaman
MSc
Information Society and Public
Administration
We further found an increase in both the exist
ence and complexity of graduate e-government
courses (Figure 1) as well as an increasing
number of expert academicians and instructors
who teach them.
The first e-government course at the graduate
level was taught at the Public Administration
Institute for Turkey and the Middle East in 2002.
This was closely followed by Hacettepe and
Cumhuriyet Universities in 2005. It is interest
292
ing that at the undergraduate level, the first
e-government course was taught in 2006, slightly later than these first graduate courses. Thus,
whereas the number of undergraduate public
administration programs was higher than such
graduate programs, graduate schools pioneered
the offering of e-government courses in Turkey.
Analysis of the syllabi of graduate e-government
courses revealed that, in general, the practical
aspect overshadows the theoretical; that is, the
TABLE 1.
Graduate E-Government Courses in Turkish Public Administration Programs (continued)
University
Location
Degree
Course title
Activity
Mandatory
(M) or
elective (E)
Karadeniz Teknik
University
Trabzon
PhD
Information Society &
Inaccessible
E
No
response
Muş Alparslan
University
Muş
MSc
E-Government
Inaccessible
Inaccessible
No
response
Nevşehir Haci
Bektaş University
Nevşehir
MSc
Technological
Change in Public
Administration
Active
E
2015
MBA
Technological
Change in Public
Administration
Active
E
2015
Pamukkale
University
Denizli
MSc
E-Government
and Its Practices
Active
E
2012
Institute for Turkey
and the Middle East
Ankara
MSc
E-Government
Active
E
2002
Comparative
E-Government
Active
E
2014
Selçuk University
Konya
MSc
E-Government
Active
E
2012
MBA
Crisis in Public
Administration
and E-Government
Active
E
2012
PhD
Information and
Communication
Technologies and
E-Government
Active
E
2012
Süleyman Demirel
University
Isparta
MSc
E-Government
Active
E
No
response
Uludağ University
Bursa
MSc
Information and
Communication
Technologies in
Active
E
2011
Yeditepe University
Istanbul
MSc
Information
Technologies and
Public Sector
Active
M
2015
critical evaluation of ongoing e-government
pro
jects takes precedence over analyses of
technological change in the public sector.
Applications of various technologies to different
sectors of government (such as education,
health, transportation, and justice) usually
merit individual weekly attention. The syllabi
also show increasing attention to innovative
methods of service provision and new tech
nologies (such as mobile applications, public
agencies’ social media presence, smart cities,
Year of
origin
open government/data, and big data). Last, but
not least, the syllabi reflect the political facets of
technological change in the public sector,
including modules on e-voting, e-participation,
and applications that aim to promote greater
participation, transparency, and accountability.
Syllabi topic selection seems to be affected by
e-government trends, as the topics listed above
are popular worldwide. Use of social media, big
data, e-participation, and smart cities is not
FIGURE 1.
Number of Graduate E-Government Courses in Turkish Public Administration Programs
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
20002002 20052009 2011 2012 20132014 2015
Note. Includes only courses that have an identifiable year of origin (N = 16).
particular to Turkey. Studies have found that
almost all national and larger local governments,
public agencies (e.g., the UK Food Standards
Agency and the Canadian Treasury), and police
departments actively use social media (e.g.,
Twitter and Facebook) for internal and external
communication, discussing public policies, and
increasing transparency and accountability
(Grimmelikhuijsen & Meijer, 2015; Lee &
Reed, 2015; Mergel, 2012; Mickoleit, 2014;
Picazo-Vela, Gutierrez-Martinez, & LunaReyes, 2012). It seems as if the similarity of
e-government applications worldwide affects
how similar e-government course syllabi are in
different countries as well. Analysis of the
syllabi also showed that almost all graduate
e-government courses in Turkey are elective
courses, as shown in Table 1.
Analysis of the syllabi also revealed that a few
graduate e-government courses exist only
nominally in departmental program listings or
that information about them is not publicly
294
available. Although we sent several instructors
our survey questions about the courses listed on
departmental websites, we could not reach
instructors from Dicle, Karadeniz Teknik, and
Muş Alparslan Universities. Similarly, although
the departmental websites of Aksaray, Bilecik
Şeyh Edebali, and Karamanoğlu Mehmet Bey
Universities show the existence of graduate
e-government courses, we could not identify
the instructors for these courses. These three
universities were recently established, so it may
be that these departments appreciate the
importance of e-government and want to
include the class in their programs but have not
yet been able to find qualified instructors.
As a final note about the syllabi, although course
titles differ among institutions (e.g., E-Govern
ment, E-Government in Public Administration,
Governance and E-Government, Information
Technologies and Public Administration, Tech
nological Change in Public Administration,
etc.), course content is quite similar. Different
course titles for similar content support findings
of previous studies (Babaoğlu & Demircioğlu,
2012; Babaoğlu, et al., 2012) that e-government
courses have not been standardized in Turkey.
In the survey responses, we found that in
structors face specific problems in designing
and teaching e-government classes. First, there
is a lack of Turkish-language teaching materials
about e-government that treat both the theor
etical and practical aspects of the subject. And
the use of English-language teaching materials
is limited by graduate students’ low level of
English-language competency, especially among
those who are professional public administrators.
The second problem is access to reliable and
timely data about e-government applications so
as to effectively use case studies in e-government
courses. One solution is to ask practitioner
students to prepare reports about e-government
projects they are a part of or knowledgeable
about. But this solution has limits: finding
practitioner students with such knowledge and
access is much easier in Ankara, the capital,
than elsewhere. A related issue concerns the
distribution of roles and responsibilities in the
courses under investigation: the instructors
are mostly responsible for the theoretical
explanations and for organizing discussions;
the students are usually responsible for the
presentation of cases and e-government projects
as well as for participation in discussions.
The third problem identified in the instructor
surveys is the (increasing but still) limited
number of expert academicians who are able to
teach e-government courses effectively. This
weak
ens the sustainability of e-government
courses in the long run. In addition, especially
in small universities in the periphery, where the
instructor to student ratio is much lower,
instructors are already struggling under heavy
teaching loads.
The fourth problem instructors face is the everchanging nature of information and com
munication technologies and their applications
in government. The fast pace of change in tech
nology in general and in e-government projects
in particular, together with the emergence of
buzzwords and trends every few years, necessi
tates constant vigilance on the part of instruc
tors to keep course content fresh and up-to-date.
This is a heavy and sometimes unwelcome bur
den on the instructors, especially when they are
not enthusiastic experts on the subject.
In addition to the problems of teaching, we
found at least three emerging trends in graduate
e-government courses taught in public
administration departments in Turkey. First,
there is an emerging comparative analysis of
e-government applications and policies across
nations, which enables both instructors and
students to compare and contrast relative
successes and failures under different political,
social, and economic systems and conditions.
The outcomes of such analyses, which represent
the interaction of e-government and public
policy topics, have the potential to affect
e-government policy making, change, and
policy termination.
A second trend, closely related to the first, is
the adoption of a policy-oriented approach to
analyzing e-government developments, in
which the impacts of policy cycles, policy
networks, relations among different policy
actors, and so on are taken into account in
evaluating the processes and outcomes of
e-government policies and projects.
A related third trend is that graduate students
with civil service careers have an increasing
interest in and appreciation of e-government
topics that include a policy perspective. Such
students witness not only the increasing
presence of various technologies in their daily
tasks but also the critical role these technologies
play in their organizations. Thus, these
practitioner students perceive e-governmentrelated skills and competencies as useful for not
only their daily tasks but also their long-term
careers as tech-savvy middle (and hopefully
high-level) managers.
Partly due to these trends, the importance of
e-government courses seems to be appreciated
even in departments that do not possess an ex
TABLE 2.
Factors that Affect the Emergence of Graduate E-Government Courses
Instructors’ early
academic or
professional exposure
Academic interest
of the instructor
+
+
Hacettepe University
+
+
Hitit University
+
University
Atilim University
Cumhuriyet University
+
+
Nevşehir Haci Bektaş University
Pamukkale University
+
+
+
Public Administration Institute
for Turkey and the Middle East
Selçuk University
Postdoctoral
research
+
+
+
+
Uludağ University
+
Yeditepe University
+
Note. Includes only the instructors that answered the survey questions (N = 10).
pert academician to teach them. This is evident
from the inclusion of e-government courses in
the curricula of universities such as Aksaray,
Dicle, and Karamanoğlu Mehmet Bey, where
such courses are listed but remain inactive.
Table 2 shows the reasons for the emergence of
e-government courses in Turkish universities.
The main factors affecting inclusion of such cour
ses in a program’s curriculum were (1) whether
the instructor had early exposure to the subject
(whether he/she took an e-government class as
a graduate student), (2) the academic interest
of the instructor and his/her resulting efforts to
add these courses to the curriculum (which is
related to the first factor), and (3) the effects of
postdoctoral research trips to other countries that
enabled the instructor to be immersed in and/or
focus on e-government studies. Con
trary to
our expectations, the curriculum standardiza
tion efforts of the European Union through the
Bologna Process had no effect whatsoever in
the creation of graduate e-government classes,
though the Bologna Process had some effect in
the standardization of content long after the
courses were established.
296
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
This article examines and explains the historical
development and current status of graduate
e-government courses in Turkish public ad
ministration programs by analyzing the content
of e-government course syllabi and archival
documents and by asking in-depth, structured
survey questions of the instructors of these
courses. This is one of the few studies that
evaluates and analyzes e-government courses in
Turkey in detail.
In a similar study with a different focus on
under
graduate public policy courses, Yildiz,
Demircioğlu, and Babaoğlu (2011) found that
the increasing academic popularity of public
policy research has resulted in an increasing
number of public policy courses in Turkey.
Likewise, the present study shows that the
expansion of academic e-government research
has increased e-government teaching in Turkey,
but not the other way around. Our survey
findings indicate that instructors who have
already been researching e-government topics
are the ones who offer e-government courses,
mainly because they are prepared for and
interested in the topics. This considerable effect
of instructors’ personal academic interest on the
existence and spread of e-government courses
raises questions about the long-term sustain
ability of such courses in the event that these
expert instructors change jobs, take sabbatical
leaves, retire from academia, or pass away.
However, we also found different factors at work
in the transfer of public policy and e-government
courses to Turkey than Yildiz et al. (2011)
found concerning the spread of public policy
courses. Yildiz et al. identified external actors
and forces as an influence, such as the Erasmus
Process (student and faculty exchange among
EU higher education institutions); but we found
little evidence of a standardization influence
from EU programs, whether aimed at student
and faculty exchange (Erasmus) or curriculum
standardization (Bologna).
Another difference is that both Yildiz et al.
(2011) and Babaoğlu and Demircioğlu (2012)
found that “policy transfer” (e.g., mimetic
isomorphism, such as adoption of a course
from well-established universities’ curricula)
and/or instructors bringing a course with them
to a new department influenced the spread of
certain courses; but our study shows little
evidence of such channels of transfer. Instead,
we found the main reasons for the diffusion of
graduate e-government courses to be an
instructor’s academic interest in ICTs and his/
her early exposure to the subject matter in
graduate studies, which also affect each other.
These differences may be explained as follows.
While undergraduate e-government education
in Turkey is standardized by the Higher Educa
tion Council of Turkey (YOK) and influenced
by the Bologna Process, graduate education is
unstandardized and has not been affected by
the Bologna Process. Graduate depart
ments
and instructors have relatively higher levels of
power and autonomy in deter
mining the
courses and curricula. Addi
tionally, under
graduate e-government courses are typi
cally
introductory, while grad
uate e-government
courses are more advanced and more practiceoriented. Moreover, as mentioned earlier, grad-
uate education in Turkey is very different than
undergraduate education. Universities, schools,
departments, and instructors have very limited
power and incentives for choosing their own
students at the undergraduate level. Graduate
education, however, is decentralized and each
department can educate its own students based
on different standards. At the graduate level,
YOK also delegates the power to make most of
the decisions to the departments, so policy
transfer is relatively limited.
While the instructors we surveyed did not
mention policy transfer (mimetic isomorphism)
as a factor affecting e-government instruction,
all of the instructors did mention their academic
interest as the main reason they offer e-govern
ment courses at the graduate level. Thus, owing
to structural differences and a combination of
external factors, the current states of e-govern
ment courses at the undergraduate and graduate
levels in Turkey are very different.
Based on our findings, we can make a few points
about the state of e-government education in
Turkey and elsewhere as well as future prospects
for such instruction.
First, e-government projects are typically pop
ular application platforms that involve new
public management ideas, such as being or
becoming more customer- or citizen-oriented,
more effective, and more efficient. Analyzing
such projects in e-government classes provides
graduate students of public administration—a
considerable number of whom are practitioners
in Turkey and elsewhere—valuable opportun
ities to observe and evaluate public management
ideas in action.
Second, public administration classes with both
theoretical and practical dimensions, such as
e-government, increase the awareness of not
only public administration students but also
practitioners and the general public about the
technological transformation that society in
general and government in particular are ex
periencing. For example, the question of what
the policy for social media use should be for
public managers is part of a much bigger
discussion about regulating citizen social media
use, in general, and that of managers in both
public and private sectors, in particular. Analy
sis of such issues by current and future public
managers, in public administration programs,
has the potential to increase public awareness
and discussion about e-government-related topics.
When the first (application of public manage
ment ideas) and second (awareness) points are
taken together, one can argue that better expo
sure of current and future public managers to
the theory and practice of e-government may
improve the analysis and management of future
government IT expenditures, in general, and
e-government projects, in particular. In other
words, the public value of such projects may be
maximized while the associated political,
economic, and social risks may be minimized.
Third, an important finding of this study is the
lack of qualified e-government instructors in
Turkish universities. This problem can be partly
solved by sending Turkish instructors to both
European and U.S. universities as visiting pro
fessors or postdoctoral researchers; this would
enable the professors to increase their compe
tency in e-government-related subjects. Like
wise, Turkish universities could invite visiting
professors to facilitate an exchange of e-govern
ment scholarship and instruction. Another solu
tion would be to increase the number of dis
tance education opportunities on this subject.
Still another option would be to hire qualified
domestic and foreign practitioners to fill the
gap, such as current or retired city IT managers
with reasonable levels of theoretical knowledge.
A challenge related to the lack of qualified
e-government instructors concerns the stability
and institutionalization of e-government courses.
When qualified instructors are in short supply,
if an instructor leaves a university for another
one or cannot teach the e-government course
due to health problems or other reasons, the
university is unable to find a replacement. This
is not the situation with more traditional public
administration courses, such as bureaucracy
and organization theory, and thus e-government
courses are less stable.
298
Our fourth point is that Turkey’s experience in
graduate e-government education may benefit
countries in the Middle East, the Caucasus,
and central and southern (or southeastern)
Europe, some of which have cultural and
historical traditions and conditions similar to
Turkey; some experience similar limitations,
such as lack of qualified teaching personnel and
native-language textbooks. While the EU
Bologna Process of educational harmonization
does not seem to be very influential in the
Turkish case, the cause-and-effect relationships
regarding the development of e-government
education may be similar enough in these
countries to learn from the Turkish case. One
important such similarity may be the impact
of U.S.- or western European–educated in
structors on the creation of e-government
courses. Specifically, we believe that developing
countries that lack qualified instructors and
experts in e-government as well as high-quality
native-language textbooks about the topic can
learn and benefit from the Turkish case.
Instructors with master’s and doctoral degrees
from universities in the United States and other
developed countries (stated as “early academic
exposure” in surveys) seem to be a driving force
behind the emergence and spread of graduate
e-government teaching in Turkey. As a result,
this study may increase the awareness of
foreign-national graduate students and their
advisors in these universities about the potential
far-reaching impact of their choice of disserta
tion topic. These findings may also help the
governments of developing countries, which
sponsor these foreign graduate students, to ask
these students to strategically choose disserta
tion topics, because these decisions seem to be
affecting future teaching and research agendas
in the students’ home countries.
Our findings also point toward areas for further
study. For example, future research may further
analyze the differences between graduate and
undergraduate e-government courses and the
reasons for (and implications of ) such differ
ences. Future studies may also conduct surveys
of both undergraduate and graduate students
who have taken e-government courses, seeking
to evaluate outcomes and impacts (i.e., the
effectiveness of e-government courses) from a
student perspective. Although students, parti
cularly graduate students, who are government
employees may be eager to take e-government
courses because of the potential practical appli
cations, no study has been done in Turkey to
assess whether taking e-government courses act
ually proved helpful for practitioners’ careers.
2 The Bologna Process is a set of actions to build and
strengthen the European Higher Education Area
(EHEA) (www.ehea.info). Since its beginnings
in 1999, the Bologna Process has aimed to create
and sustain comparable, compatible, and coherent
systems of higher education in Europe. Turkey
became a part of this process in 2001.
As explained earlier, several universities seem in
the process of offering e-government courses
but, probably due to the lack of qualified in
structors, are unable to offer them in practice.
Turkish universities need more qualified instruc
tors who can effectively teach e-government
courses. One solution would be to hire expert
public servants who are already knowledgeable
about e-government projects. This would bring
qualified instructors and enrich e-government
course content with discussions of real-world
applications. Future studies may want to eval
uate the advantages and disadvantages of em
ploying expert public servants as instructors of
e-government courses.
REFERENCES
Last but not least, because there are only a few
Turkish-language textbooks on e-government,
instructors need more textbooks or academic
texts on e-government in their native tongue.
This problem can be solved either by publishing
more Turkish-language books that cover both
the theory and practice of e-government, as
well as its multidisciplinary and multisectoral
aspects; or by translating well-rounded inter
national textbooks on e-government into
Turkish (e.g., Heeks, 2006).
Babaoğlu, C., & Demircioğlu, M. A. (2012). Türkiye’de
kamu yönetimi bölümleri müfredatında e-devlet
derslerinin durumu [E-government courses in
the curricula of Turkish public administration
departments]. In M. Z. Sobaci & M. Yildiz (Eds.),
E-devlet [E-government] (pp. 129–152). Ankara,
Turkey: Nobel.
NOTES
1 For example, the University of Maryland master’s
program began offering a concentration in
e-government in 2006 (Jaeger, Bertot, Shuler, &
McGilvray, 2011, p. 227).
Akilli, S., Babaoğlu, C., & Demircioğlu, M. A. (2013).
Araştırmacıların ve lisans öğrencilerinin görüşleri
işığında e-devlet eğitiminde güncel gelişmeler
[Current developments of e-government education
for the insights of researchers and undergraduate
students]. Journal of Akdeniz University IIBF, 26,
120–144.
Babaoğlu, C., Akilli, S., & Demircioğlu, M.A.
(2012). E-government education in the public
administration departments in Turkey. In J. R. GilGarcia, N. Helbig, & A. Ojo (Eds.), Proceedings
of the 6th International Conference on Theory and
Practice of Electronic Governance (pp.71–74). New
York, NY: ACM.
Basu, S. (2004). E-government and developing coun
tries: An overview. International Review of Law, Com
puters and Technology, 18(1), 109–132.
Biasiotti, M. A., & Nannucci, R. (2004). Teaching
e-gov
ernment in Italy. In R. Traunmüller (Ed.),
Electronic government (pp. 460–463). Berlin, Ger
many: Springer.
Bonser, C. F. (2015, May). Institutionalizing a discipline:
The evolution of public administration education in
the United States. Paper prepared for the 2015 TPC
conference, National University of Public Service,
Budapest, Hungary.
Chiu, S. (2007). Understanding the adoption and diffu
sion of information technology related curricula: Mul
tiple theoretical perspectives. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington.
Cordella, A., & Tempini, N. (2015). E-government and
organizational change: Reappraising the role of ICT
and bureaucracy in public service delivery. Govern
ment Information Quarterly, 32(3), 278–286.
Dawes, S. S. (2004). Training the IT-savvy public man
ager: Priorities and strategies for public management
education. Journal of Public Affairs Education,10(1),
5–17.
European Higher Education Area (EHEA). (n.d.)
Retrieved from http://www.ehea.info.
Grimmelikhuijsen, S. G., & Meijer, A. J. (2015). Does
Twitter increase perceived police legitimacy? Public
Administration Review, 75(4), 598–607.
Hamiduzzaman, M. (2012). E-governance in management of education system in Bangladesh: Innova
tions for next generation level. Universal Journal of
Education and General Studies, 1(7), 195–209.
Heeks, R. (2006). Implementing and managing eGovern
ment: An international text. London, United King
dom: SAGE.
Hunnius, S., Paulowitsch, B., & Schuppan, T. (2015).
Does e-government education meet competency re
quirements? An analysis of the German university
system from international perspective. In Proceedings
of the 48th Hawaii International Conference on
System Sciences (pp. 2116–2123). Retrieved from
doi:10.1109/HICSS.2015.255.
Jaeger, P., & Bertot, J. C. (2009). E-government edu
cation in public libraries: New service roles and
expanding social responsibilities. Journal of Educa
tion for Library and Information Science, 50(1), 39–49.
Jaeger, P. T., Bertot, J. C., Shuler, J. A., & McGilvray, J.
(2011). Case study in e-government education pro
grams: Preparing future government information
professionals. In Proceedings of the 12th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research:
Digital government society in challenging times
(pp. 225–228). College Park, MD: ACM.
Janowski, T. (2012). Conceptualizing electronic gov
ernance education. In Proceedings of 45th Hawaii
International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 2269–
2278). doi:10.1109/HICSS.2012.173.
Jennings, E., Jr. (2002). E-government and public affairs
education. Chinese Public Administration Re
view,
1(3/4), 230–238.
300
Jreisat, J. E. (2005). Comparative public administration
is back in, prudently. Public Administration Review,
65(2), 231–242.
Koliba, C., & Zia, A. (2015). Educating public man
agers and policy analysts in an era of informatics.
In M. Janssen, M. A. Wimmer, & A. Deljoo (Eds.),
Policy practice and digital science integrating complex
systems, social simulation and public administration
in policy research (pp. 15–25). Cham, Switzerland:
Springer International.
Lee, J., & Reed, B. J. (2015). From paper to cloud.
In M. E. Guy & M. M. Rubin (Eds.), Public
administration evolving: From foundations to the
future. New York, NY: Routledge.
Mao, G. (2004, January 9–11). Building e-government
in Japan. Paper presented at the International Acad
emic Symposium on Public Management in the
21st Century: Opportunities and Challenges, coorganized by the Center for Public Administration
of Zhongshan University and Macau Foundation,
Macau, China.
Medeni, T., Mustafa, S., Medeni, T., Balci, A., & Merih,
T. (2009). Developing an e-government education
programme curriculum based on knowledge man
agement paradigms to support institutional trans
formation. International Journal of eBusiness and
eGovernment Studies, 1(2), 35–47.
Mergel, I. (2012). Social media in the public sector: A
guide to participation, collaboration and transparency
in the networked world. San Francisco, CA: John
Wiley and Sons.
Mickoleit, A. (2014). Social media use by governments:
A policy primer to discuss trends, identify policy op
portunities and guide decision makers. Paris, France:
OECD Publishing.
Administration (NASPAA). (1986). Curriculum re
commendations for public management education
in computing: The final report of the NASPAA Ad
Hoc Committee on Computers in Public Manage
ment Education. Public Administration Review,
46(6), 595–602.
Park, H. M., & Park, H. (2006). Diffusing information
technology education in Korean undergraduate
public affairs and administration programs: Driving
forces and challenging issues. Journal of Public
Parycek, P., & Pircher, R. (2003). Teaching e-govern
ment and knowledge management. In F. Galindo
& R. Traunmuller (Eds.), E-government: Legal, tech
nological and pedagogical aspects (pp. 213–228).
Zaragoza, Spain: Publicaciones del Seminario de
Informática y Derecho, Filosofía del Derecho,
Universidad de Zaragoza.
Pavlichev, A. (2004). The e-government challenge for
public administration education. In A. Pavlichev
& D. Garson (Eds.), Digital government: Principles
and best practices (pp. 276–289). Hershey, PA: Idea
Group Publishing.
Perry, J. L. (2001). A symposium on transformations in
public affairs education: Challenges, progress, and
strategies. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 7(4),
209–211.
Yazici, A. (2010, March 11–12). Teaching and
research on e-government. Paper presented at the
International Conference on eGovernment and
eGovernance, Antalya, Turkey.
Yildiz, M. (2007). E-government research: Reviewing
the literature, limitations and ways forward. Gov
ernment Information Quarterly, 24(3), 646–665.
Yildiz, M., Demircioğlu, M. A., & Babaoğlu, C. (2011).
Teaching public policy to undergraduate students:
Issues, experiences, and lessons in Turkey. Journal of
YOK (Higher Education Council of Turkey). (2015).
Listing of universities. Retrieved from http://www.
yok.gov.tr/web/guest/universitelerimiz.
Picazo-Vela, S., Gutierrez-Martinez, I., & Luna-Reyes,
L. F. (2012). Understanding risks, benefits, and
strategic alternatives of social media applications in
the public sector. Government Information Quart
erly, 29(4), 504–511.
Ronaghan, S. A. (2002). Benchmarking e-government:
A global perspective; Assessing the progress of the UN
member states. Retrieved from United Nations Public
Economics and Public Administration website:
http://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/
Portals/egovkb/Documents/un/English.pdf.
Seddiky, A., & Ara, E. (2015). Application of e-governance in education sector to enhance the quality of
education and human resource development in Bang
ladesh. European Scientific Journal, 11(4), 386–404.
Sobaci, M. Z., & Karkin, N. (2013). The use of Twitter
by mayors in Turkey: Tweets for better public ser
vices? Government Information Quarterly, 30(4),
417–425.
Tat-Kei Ho, A. (2002). Reinventing local governments
and the e-government initiative. Public Administra
tion Review, 62(4), 434–444.
Terzi, M. (2006). Information-based economy and e-government: Transformation in the public administration
Unpublished Master of Science thesis, Middle East
Technical University, Graduate School of Social
Sciences. Political Science and Public Administra
tion, Ankara, Turkey.
World Bank. (2016). Data for Turkey. Retrieved from
http://data.worldbank.org/country/turkey.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
is professor of public administration
and policy in the Department of Political
Science and Public Administration at Hacettepe University, Turkey. He received his PhD
from Indiana University, Bloomington’s School
of Public and Environmental Affairs in 2004.
Among his research topics are government re
form, e-government, public policy, comparative
public administration, and govern-ance issues.
Mete Yildiz
Cenay Babaoğlu
received his PhD from Hacet
tepe University in the field of public admini
stration. Turkish administrative history, public
policy, and ICT use in public administration
are his main research topics.
Mehmet Akif Demircioğlu is a doctoral candidate
and associate instructor (lecturer) at Indiana
University, Bloomington’s School of Public and
Environmental Affairs. His empirical research
focuses on public sector innovation, employee
attitudes, social media, and e-government;
his conceptual research focuses on public
sector reform, governance, and comparative
public administration.
APPENDIX
Survey Questions for Instructors
1. How long has this course been taught?
2. Are you the first instructor of this course?
3. Have you taken a course on e-government as a student during your graduate studies?
4. What is the reason for your interest in this subject matter?
5. How was this course added to the curriculum? Did you have any role in it?
Did the Bologna process have any effect?
6. Is e-government a mandatory or an elective course?
7. What is the level of interest in this course? Has it changed over the years?
8. How would you rate the content of the course regarding the use of theory and practice
of e-government?
9. What are the main topics included in the syllabus?
10. Are you using case studies in the class? If yes, which ones?
11. What does the reading list of the course contain? Do you prefer Turkish-language or
foreign-language readings? If applicable, which languages? What are the shortcomings
regarding readings?
12. What are the roles and responsibilities of the teacher and the students
(attendance, exams, assignments, etc.)?
13. Is the effect of the course different on students who are and are not public administrators?
Do the practitioner students have any effect on the course?
14. How can the e-government courses be better? What can be done to increase the level
of student interest in these courses?
15. Do you have any suggestions regarding the future of e-government in general
and e-government courses in particular in Turkey?
302
On NASPAA Accreditation:
Fred Was Right…But for
the Wrong Reason
Mary E. Guy
University of Colorado, Denver
Richard Stillman
University of Colorado, Denver
ABSTRACT
The debate over accreditation is far from over. Forty years ago, Fred Thayer feared that complying
with the standards of the Network of Schools of Public Policy, Affairs, and Administration
(NASPAA) would rigidify and stultify academic training. Today the opposite threatens. Under
mission-based standards, Master of Public Administration (MPA) programs can teach whatever
they can justify, even if the content has little or no connection with public administration. The
MPA is in jeopardy of becoming little more than a Master of Arts that teaches students about
public service–minded values. We argue that standards for MPA programs should be sufficiently
content-based that the degree represents a common understanding of career preparation. One way
to expedite the return to the MPA’s roots is for NASPAA to link arms with the American Society
for Public Administration (ASPA) to ensure that public administration education remains focused
on advancing the enterprise of public administration.
KEYWORDS
MPA accreditation, NASPAA standards
The pages of JPAE are filled with excellent
suggestions for how to improve public affairs
education, how to embrace the diversity that
comes with globalization, and how to accom
modate the needs of programs that specialize
in public administration, public policy, and/or
nonprofit management. In an attempt to offer
one set of standards for all, however, the heart
of public administration has been eroded.1 Lin
guistics matter, as Lewis Carroll (1871) implied:
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty
said in rather a scornful tone, “it means
just what I choose it to mean—neither
more nor less.” “The question is,” said
JPAE 22 (2), 303–312
Alice, “whether you can make words
mean so many different things.” … “Sir,”
said Alice, “Would you kindly tell me the
meaning of the poem called ‘Jabberwocky’?”
“Let’s hear it,” said Humpty Dumpty, “I
can explain all the poems that were ever
invented.” … This sounded very hopeful,
so Alice repeated the first verse: “Twas
brillig, and the slithy toves did gyre and
gimble in the wabe.”… “That’s enough
to begin with,” Humpty Dumpty inter
rupted, “there are plenty of hard words
there. ‘Brillig’ means four o’clock in the
afternoon—the time when you begin
broiling things for dinner.”
M. E. Guy & R. Stillman
Humpty Dumpty’s insouciance with words has
found a modern-day home in the Network of
Schools of Public Policy, Affairs, and Admin
istration’s (NASPAA) mission-based standards
built to accommodate a polyglot (31 different
de
grees) of related perspectives on public
service. Here are five points that would cause
Humpty to reach for his thesaurus: (1) current
standards make it possible to avoid teaching
admini
stra
tion to public administration stu
dents; (2) because there is no requirement that
Master of Public Administration (MPA) pro
grams teach students to organize, staff, and
budget, employers cannot expect graduates to
have admini
strative skills; (3) those who
graduate without sufficient understanding of
constitutional premises, intersectoral relations,
and admini
stration amplify the mismatch
between what public service organi
za
tions
need and what they get; (4) without public
administration content in the MPA curri
culum, there is no unifying conception of what
it means to be a public official; and, finally,
(5) why bother to train future public servants if
the MPA can mean anything? More precisely, if
there is “no there there,” why go there? Before
elaborating on these points, we turn first to the
genesis for the accreditation of MPA programs.
THE DEBATE ABOUT STANDARDS
When he was editor of Public Administration
Review (PAR), Dwight Waldo kept a file labeled
“Fruits and Nuts,” filled mostly with corres
pondence from one person, Fred Thayer, who
wrote lengthy, largely incomprehensible critiques
of each PAR issue. Fred was the field’s resident
gadfly, and he held forth with opinions on every
thing, whether requested or not, mostly nega
tive and, after a while, mostly ignored. One
missive, however, caught many scholars’ atten
tion: “The NASPAA Threat,” a 1976 essay that
argued that the self-study approach NASPAA
was developing would impose rigid, uniform
teaching standards on MPA programs and
therefore posed a dangerous threat to academic
freedom and creative innovation.
At the time, most pooh-poohed the notion and
joked that the essay, described as “Fred’s Threat,”
304
was merely a figment of his overheated imagi
nation. At the time, the Association to Advance
Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB), the
accrediting body for business schools, was ag
gressively moving toward encompassing public
administration programs under its official power
to accredit. An intrusion into “our turf” was the
last thing the public administration field want
ed, especially in terms of business schools’ being
in charge of accreditation. AACSB’s rigidly uni
form standards were a threat because the organi
zation brooked little compromise on what it
regarded as “the one best way” to teach admini
stration, whether in business, government, or
nonprofit settings. AACSB’s membership was
over three times as large as NASPAA’s and
AACSB had considerably more resources and in
fluence, so the group was a threat to the growing
autonomy of the field of public administration.
In 1977, despite Fred’s reservations, NASPAA’s
member institutions voted to adopt a program
of voluntary peer review as well as standards
for professional master’s degree programs in
public affairs, policy, and administration. Six
years later, in 1983, the membership voted to
graduate from the peer review process and for
NASPAA to become an accreditor of programs.
The accreditation process combines self-study,
review by the Commission on Peer Review and
Accreditation (COPRA), and a 2- to 3-day
campus visit by a COPRA-appointed site-visit
team (NASPAA, n.d.). The accreditation
standards have been periodically revised since
their early days, and recent iterations allow
more latitude for accreditation of programs in
other nations and for accreditation of nonad
ministrative programs, such as Master of Public
Policy (MPP) programs. The strength of
mission-based standards is that they allow each
program to state its purpose and then describe
how it achieves its goals. The downside is that
it is easier and cheaper to mount nonadmin
istrative programs; and, without a firm standard
requiring MPA programs to teach basic ad
ministrative skills, curricula can drift away and
come to resemble public policy programs more
than public administration programs.
On NASPAA Accreditation
NASPAA Standard 5.1 stipulates these univer
sal required competencies for graduates of all
public administration programs:
•to lead and manage in public governance;
•to participate in and contribute to the
public policy process;
•to analyze, synthesize, think critically,
solve problems, and make decisions;
•to articulate and apply a public service
perspective; and
•to communicate and interact pro
ductively with a diverse and changing
workforce and citizenry. (NASPAA,
Commission on Peer Review and
Accreditation, 2014)
Clever wordsmithing and outcomes measures
designed to ensure positive findings can qualify
most social science programs in these compe
tencies, even those beyond the bounds of public
service education.2 How did we get to this
erosion of the MPA degree? To answer this, a
look at the accreditation industry is instructive.
In the accreditation hierarchy, the Council on
Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) has
oversight over academic accrediting bodies, of
which NASPAA is one. As CHEA changes its
standards to keep up with the changing higher
education environment, so must NASPAA.3
Those who finance tuition costs want to make
sure that degrees are worth the investment. To
that end, outcomes measures became important
for all institutions and for the accrediting
bodies that review them. But outcomes are only
meaningful in the context of purpose, so an
articulation of mission is the first step in setting
goals and shaping their consequences. To
comply, NASPAA moved from a process-based
to mission-based approach with its 2009
standards. They emphasize the connection
between mission, competencies, and outcomes.
The broad wording that NASPAA adopted has
the added advantage for NASPAA of making
non-MPA programs easily accreditable, along
with MPA programs in foreign countries whose
curricula and resources may be substantively
different from those of U.S. programs.
Mission-based standards allow maximum flexi
bility because programs can emphasize unique
strengths, or overcome limitations, of their de
sign, faculty, location, student market, resources,
and/or employer needs. With the net cast so
broadly, the advantage for NASPAA is that
such standards accommodate the inclusion of a
broad range of programs, because more can
meet the requirements. With requests coming
to NASPAA for accreditation of foreign pro
grams, and with the desire of MPP programs to
gain an accreditation imprimatur, loosening the
standards and expectations expanded NASPAA’s
market reach, protected it from competition
with other accrediting bodies, built its number
of accredited programs, increased its revenue
stream, and raised its stature within the accred
itation industry. But look at the cost.
The weakness of NASPAA’s content-neutral
standards is that they are so broad that there is
no differentiation between MPA, MPP, and Mas
ter of Public Affairs degrees. Standard 1.1 states,
The Program will have a statement of
mission that guides performance expect
ations and their evaluation, including its
purpose and public service values, given
the program’s particular emphasis on
public affairs, administration, and policy;
the population of students, employers,
and professionals the Program intends to
serve; and, the contributions it intends
to produce to advance the knowledge,
research and practice of public affairs,
administration, and policy. (NASPAA,
Commission on Peer Review and Accred
itation, 2014)
Touting itself as “the global standard in public
service education,” NASPAA now grants accred
itation to anything that resembles public service
mindedness. The terms public service programs
and public service education are frequently syn
onyms in NASPAA documents, merging their
meaning, content, purpose, and outcomes (see,
e.g., www.naspaa.org or Camacho, 2014). Ap
parently, the name of the degree is irrelevant.
The identity of the MPA is thus obliterated.
In its annual summary, NASPAA presents
TABLE 1.
NASPAA Data, 2012–2013
Enrollment by Degree
Number
MPA
12,498
MPP
2,516
Master of Public Affairs
1,614
Other (28 different degree names)
1,514
Employment of Graduates
Percentage
Government
51
Nonprofits
28
Private
21
Note. A list of accredited programs is available at
NASPAA (2014a). Source. NASPAA (2014b)
data about the number of students applying to
NASPAA member programs, number of faculty,
graduates’ employment, and so forth but gives
no information about the degrees that are ac
credited and their numbers (Camacho, 2014).
A bit of sleuthing is required to find data spec
ific to different degrees. It is available, however,
as summarized in Table 1.
Table 1 shows enrollment by degree and em
ployment of graduates by sector, based on data
from the 2012–2013 academic year. To read
NASPAA’s literature, one would not be aware
that there are five times as many MPA graduates
as there are MPP graduates. Whether there is a
purposeful intent to exaggerate the prevalence
of degrees other than the MPA is not the issue
of this argument, but that possibility should
raise eyebrows.
The amalgamation of all public service degree
programs accredited by NASPAA obfuscates the
major role of the MPA and confuses issues that
do not need to be confused. From an employer’s
perspective, public service organi
za
tions are
not well served when graduates assume that
by studying policy, they know how to plan,
organize, staff, and budget. As Table 1 shows,
79% of graduates are employed in public service
organizations and of these, two-thirds work in
government and one-third in nonprofits. Admin
306
istration is important. Raffel (2009) argues that
the current NASPAA standards “will accentuate
the unique commitment to public service that
our diverse set of master’s programs has dev
eloped. It will position NASPAA schools, in the
increasingly crowded landscape of professional
graduate programs, as distinctive institutions
committed to public policy and administration”
(p. 143). Claiming ownership over all public
service programs has the consequence of blur
ring if not obliterating the differences between
MPA, MPP, and Master of Public Affairs degrees.
It is time to give the MPA the preeminence it
deserves. MPP programs are more variable,
and so the current “anything goes” standards
embrace them well. For the MPA, however,
where there is a clearer expectation for the skills
a degree holder has, mission-based standards
will work but the competencies should be spec
ific to the expectations for the degree. NASPAA’s
Standard 5 lists the competencies required of
all graduates of public service programs: leading and managing in public governance; part
icipating in and contributing to the policy pro
cess; analyzing, synthesizing, thinking critically,
solving problems, and making decisions; arti
culating and applying a public service perspec
tive; and communicating and interacting pro
ductively with a diverse citizenry (NASPAA,
Commission on Peer Review and Accreditation,
2014). There is nothing wrong with these gen
eral competencies. The question is whether or
not they are sufficient to ensure that a student
is prepared and that an employer is well served.
The obfuscation of the MPA was foretold in the
debates leading up to the adoption of the 2009
standards. One report noted that “changes have
worked to diminish both the understanding and
appreciation of a public administration career’s
unique importance as the grounding for public
service—regardless of the sector where that
service is performed” (Henry, Goodsell, Lynn,
Stivers, & Wamsley, 2009, p. 120). The authors
argued that glossing over the dif
fer
ences
between the MPA and the MPP re
flected
con
fusion about “public service degrees,” as
NASPAA had begun calling them. Henry et al.
(2009) also argued that
students should have the opportunity to
develop an understanding of the political
and economic context in which govern
ance is practiced, and of public admin
istration’s place in society. They should
engage in extended reflection on the
ethical dimensions of governance. This
extended and in-depth consideration of
core values, the context and dynamics of
governance generally, and of public ad
ministration specifically, is the founda
tion upon which students should build
the development of specific technical
skills. (p. 124)
In defense of the 2009 standards, and in re
sponse to Henry et al. (2009), Raffel (2009)
offered this appeasement: “The foundation of
NASPAA is the professional master’s degree,
and the MPA is the dominant NASPAA mas
ter’s program” (p. 136). The centrality of the
MPA is not obvious on NASPAA’s website,
however. Alumni of NASPAA programs are
promoted as recipients of an MPA/MPP, as if
the two degrees are interchangeable (see www.
naspaa.org/alumni/index.asp). This is a dramatic
distortion of the purpose of, and difference
between, the two degrees.
THE TRIUMPH OF TECHNIQUES OVER PURPOSE
Fast-forward to 2015: Fred was right but for the
wrong reason. Today, NASPAA is a threat to
public administration, not because of imposing
rigid, uniform standards, but pre
cisely the
reverse—requiring too few. To borrow from
Paul Volcker’s (2014) prescient remarks, “vision
without execution is hallucination” (p. 440).
Citing numerous management failures, Volcker
chides graduate public affairs programs for
focusing too much on “vision” skills and not
enough on “how to do it” skills. NASPAA
standards have become so flexible that programs
can focus on leadership, visioning, collabora
tion, and so forth without first teaching the
administrative skills upon which such important processes rest.
Definitive standards now enter the picture not
at the input stage but at the outcomes stage,
where competencies logically derived from a
program’s mission statement are identified,
described, and measured. The cart is before the
horse because what is taught does not matter,
but how it is defined and measured does matter.
The link between mission, curriculum, and out
comes is an exercise in linguistics. Freyss (2015)
argues that the operationalization of missionbased standards is too constraining for the
careers that MPA graduates will have, but we
argue that the constraint is at the wrong end of
the equation. Instead of requiring that specific
subjects be taught, specific measurements should
be taken of whatever competencies a public
administration program claims to teach. The
mission-based approach has shown itself to be a
promising idea whose intended consequences
do not match its real consequences. The current
NASPAA standards leave too much room for
divergence in curricula, too little room for how
to assess outcomes that matter, and too much
latitude in terms of who teaches the courses.
Too much like Humpty Dumpty’s accommo
dation, making words mean what he chooses
them to mean, programs wordsmith competen
cies and pat themselves on the back when grad
uates, who are too green to know the difference,
score the program highly on their exit surveys.
The outcomes measures make Humpty proud,
although they perplex Alice. The following
points elaborate on the shortcomings that result.
1. Current standards make it possible to avoid
teaching administration to public admini
stration students. To Volcker’s point, the loose
ness of the NASPAA standards bring many MPA
programs close to product mis
label
ing. The
knowledge and skills necessary to maneuver the
labyrinth of politics, management, and law do
not have to be taught. When content matters
little, the real outcome—contrasted with elo
quently described but superficial statements of
competencies—is that graduates find themselves
at a competitive disadvantage in the job market
vis-à-vis those who possess such expertise.
2. From a prospective employer’s viewpoint,
producing MPA graduates without admini
strative skills leads to confusion about what
the degree stands for. Without at least some
consistency in educational content, how can
those who hire MPA graduates be sure what
talents they are purchasing? Employers should
be able to expect that when they hire an MPA
graduate, they are hiring someone who has at
least passing familiarity with organizing, staffing,
and budgeting. But unfortunately, MPA programs
are being accredited that do not equip students
with the skills that many employers expect them
to have: the ability to craft a budget, familiarity
with administrative law and human resource
processes, an awareness of organizational strat
e
gies, the tapestry created by inter
s
ectoral
relations, the importance of engaging citizens
in decision making, the knowledge to build
and manage large databases, an awareness of
constitutional constraints—in other words, to
“do” public administration, whether working
in government or a non-profit organization.
3. MPA graduates without sufficient under
standing of constitutional premises, intersec
toral relations, and administration amplify the
mismatch between what public service org
an
i
zations need and what they get when
they hire such graduates. All levels of govern
ment, along with the nonprofits that deliver
public services, are brimming with specialized
expertise in every conceivable field, from health
care, economics, and military affairs to policy
analysis. But what is most needed, as Paul
Appleby (1962, p. 177) pointed out long ago,
are men and women who can make a “mesh”
of things, or in other words, who can see the
big picture, coordinate the specialized parts,
and integrate them into a whole in order to
move ini
tiatives forward. Publicized government breakdowns in recent years range from
the response to Hurri
cane Katrina, to the
regulatory failures that brought the near
collapse of the banking system, to the faulty
implementation of the Affordable Care Act.
Such failings can often be traced to ignoring
Appleby’s prescription to have experts on tap
but not on top—meaning that generalists
should be in charge, not experts, whose narrow
focus obscures their view of the larger context.
4. Without public administration in the MPA
curriculum, there is no unifying conception of
what it means to be a public administrator.
Generalist administrative skills are necessary for
308
MPA graduates’ careers and public service organ
izations’ needs. Without MPA programs’ regularly scheduling courses that teach such skills,
students graduate with an illogical hodge-podge
of classes on their transcripts instead of with a
coherent education for public service. Nor does
the hodge-podge connect students with the
professional identity of their future calling or
its demands for ethical responsibility to the
public interest. The pages of Public Admini
stration Review and other leading journals are
filled with a wealth of first-rate administrative
knowledge that can be applied to solving urgent
public affairs problems. Connecting with this
impressive literature is a must for any up-todate, well-educated public service professional.
5. An MPA minus the PA (public administration)
destroys the MPA’s fundamental rationale for
existence. Why bother to train future public
servants if the MPA can mean anything, or more
precisely, its content can include anything? If
there is “no there there,” then why go there?
Why ask students to pay tuition for two years in
order to earn the degree? As the English mon
arch James I saw the inescapable and inseparable
link between church and state when he cried,
“No bishop, no king!” so too NASPAA should
acknowledge, “No public administration, no
MPA!” In other words, without content there is
no legitimate rationale to sustain the degree or
the institutions that teach and accredit it.
MPAs Without PA
To summarize these points, misrepresenting the
MPA matters for students, public service organ
izations, the public interest, research/applica
tion connections, and indeed, for sustaining
the raison d’etre of the educational enterprise.
And here is why the NASPAA standards are
critical: if accreditation is merely a pro forma
exercise, without teeth or substance, it grants
only illusory “by the book” credibility and re
spectability. To be sure, “by the book” is how
the accreditation process appears on the surface.
It requires a solid year of preparation and results
in the voluminous presentation of data and
prose about the applicant program, students,
teachers, classes, curriculum, compe
ten
cies,
outcomes, and more. The exercise culminates
in a site visit by a team of two academics and
one practitioner, who meet with administrators,
faculty, students, staff, and others to confirm
the self-study findings and prepare their report
for COPRA.
The goal is to accomplish an objective, thorough,
effective programmatic review. The reality is
that very few programs are denied accreditation,
so there is little threat of rejection and hence,
little incentive to change a program’s status quo,
no matter how poor the educational content
may be or how limited the faculty resources.
The heart of the problem is that defining
competencies and identifying how they are
taught and evaluated more often resembles an
exercise in tautological reasoning inside an
empty box. “Skills” can mean almost anything
as long as they connect to the program’s
mission. The resulting output measures, then,
are outcomes of nothing at all.
For example, suppose that an MPA program
requires a core class called “Reading Tea Leaves
for Improving Public Policy Forecasting” (not
as far-fetched as it may seem). Faculty choose
from a lengthy list of optional skills to teach as
part of this class, such as quantitative analysis,
policy forecasting, conceptualizing program
options, and so forth. Next, faculty assign out
put measures to each skill in order to judge—
or justify?—how well students learn these skills,
including tests, quizzes, simulations, and the
like. Never mind that tea-leaf reading has noth
ing to do with the contemporary study or
practice of public administration. Never mind
that little attention is paid to how well or poorly
that activity fits with other required classes or
what value this course adds to the overall MPA
education. Nor is any thought given to whether
or not potential employers may urgently require
greater accuracy in tea-leaf counting; or to what
the present and future job market demands are;
or even to what the chief competition, such as
from MBA programs, may offer. Never mind
that any skill in the output matrix can be mold
ed to justify learning anything, including tea-leaf
reading. Never mind that almost any output
measure can be wordsmithed to validate results
in order to judge whether students properly
learned how to read tea leaves. If this entire
exercise sounds like methodological madness, it
is. To borrow Wallace Sayre’s (1948) apt phrase,
it is “the triumph of techniques over purpose.”
NASPAA collects hefty annual fees from mem
ber schools, accredited programs bask in their
glory, and this, in turn, helps to attract students
who pay substantial tuition, believing that they
are receiving an education that will prepare
them for a career in public service. Employers
then hire graduates, thinking them adequately
trained and honestly credentialed. The hitch is,
as Gresham’s Law tells us in economics, bad
money drives out the good. So, too, does bad
education drive out the good, or at least it
drives education downward to its lowest com
mon denominator—to its least challenging and
most irrelevant. This risks driving the MPA out
of existence entirely. Indeed, employers have
told us that they do not hire MPA graduates
because they lack admini
stra
tive skills. Too
often, this assessment is correct.
Today, the MPA can mean anything a program
wants it to mean: a policy degree; a degree about
leadership; a degree about management with
little, if any, appreciation for democratic values.
In effect, the MPA follows the Humpty Dump
ty rule: “When I use a word, it means just what
I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”
NASPAA ought to pay attention to Alice’s as
tute reply: “The question is whether you can
make words mean so many different things.”
HOW DID THIS HAPPEN?
What created this postmodern nightmare in
which the Master of Public Administration lost
its heart? And what can be done about it?
The four-decade-old story of NASPAA’s shift
from peer review as a defense strategy to its cur
rent approach warrants a book-length treatment
to explain it comprehensively. But in a nutshell,
this remarkable yet silent transformation began
in the mid-1960s with the proliferation of pol
icy schools. Flushed with the hubris of the
1960s infatuation with technocratic and quanti
tative policy making, public administration pro
grams flourished on the premise that the best
elite training was that which instructed students
in the analytic policy skills used to define public
problems, identify policy options, and recom
mend optimal solutions. This view saw public
affairs education, much like scientific manage
ment long ago saw public administration, as a
simple bundle of neutral, objective, nonpolitical
techniques that could be learned and applied to
promote the public good. The policy schools’
approach reintroduced the politics/administra
tion dicho
tomy under a popular new label
of “policy studies,” which was swiftly adopted
by schools from Berkeley to Princeton in the
1960s and 1970s. Public administration was
deemed to be beneath what top-level policy
mandarins should be bothered with.
lofty ideal of educating policy makers, instead
deigning to teach about the peasant work of
administration. Thus, a troublesome compro
mise was struck: omit the bothersome men
tions of public administration in the NASPAA
standards and adopt a nonspecific, outcomesoriented model that would accommodate any
public service–minded program that wished
to come under the NASPAA umbrella. What
could be more win-win? NASPAA gained insti
tutional members while policy programs gained
legitimacy with the NASPAA seal of approval.
Thus we arrive at our present predicament:
accrediting public administration programs
minus public administration.
Thus was reborn an ancient Platonic dream of
putting elite intellects in charge, much like
Plato’s philosopher kings, who would think and
decide but leave to others the mundane tasks of
doing. Ironically, these very same policy gurus
by the mid- to late 1970s discovered imple
mentation as “the missing link” that explained
why their idealism failed to work in practice.
Surprisingly, they were shocked that defining
and analyzing issues, laying out options, and
deciding on optimal solutions did not auto
matically translate into actually solving the
problem at hand. Hence, the fascination with
“implementation theory” began. This turned
out to be little more than recycling public ad
ministration under a new label, but for several
status and symbolic reasons, policy analysts
could never admit nor see the con
nection
between policy and administration.
Some argue that mission-based standards with
out curriculum prescriptions accommodate a
postmodern era; but in fact metamodernism is
knocking at the door (Vermeulen & van den
Akker 2010). Accompanying it is the larger
frame of reference within which public admini
strators must act: the public context is changing, flattening, interconnecting, and globalizing.
Just as modernism and its reliance on reason
gave way to postmodernism and its distrust of
big narratives, metamodernism is marked by
optimism and an acceptance of, if not bound
aries, at least streetlights that illuminate the way
forward. We believe that NASPAA standards
for MPA programs should provide streetlights.
Next, fast-forward to 2007, which saw declining enrollments at policy schools, requests from
foreign public administration programs for
accreditation, and an economic recession that
made it difficult for programs to afford the
requisite number of tenure-track faculty. The
pesky problem of standards that required
“unfashionable” course requirements about
organizing, budgeting, staffing, and so forth,
coupled with the NASPAA requirement for
tenure-track faculty actively engaged in
research, made it difficult for programs to meet
requirements for accreditation. Moreover,
administrative subject matter challenges the
310
THE URGENT NECESSITY TO RETURN TO ROOTS
NASPAA’s attempt to embrace all public serviceminded programs under one set of missionbased standards deserved a chance to prove it
self, but the time has come to call the question.
The resulting weakened public administration
education is too large a price to pay. NASPAA’s
standards for MPA programs do a disservice to
public service. Two alternatives come immed
iately to mind: On the on hand, NASPAA could
design standards specifically for MPA programs,
and the current one-size-fits-all standards could
be left to the 30 other degrees offered by
NASPAA-member schools. On the other hand,
NASPAA could return to its roots, found in
its early days as an ASPA section on public
administration education; in other words,
NASPAA could rely on ASPA to assume the
accreditation responsibility for MPA programs.
This would reassert the primary value and worth
of public administration research and training
for public service and would build commun
ication between the academy and employers
who rely on MPA graduates to staff their
agencies. No longer would the policy science
paradigm direct the accreditation process and
allow for the “anything goes” approach. MPA
programs would be encouraged to connect more
closely with administrative science research, as
well as with public service leaders from all walks
of life and all facets of society.
is a golden mean where standards stand for some
thing yet still provide enough flexibility so that
programs can meet accreditation requirements.
Fred was prescient about the NASPAA threat
almost forty years ago. We only regret that he is
not around today to react to our proposal. But
we have a hunch what his thoughts would be.
When newly minted graduates express public
service values but do not know the basics—how
to manage people, finances, or information—
their degrees have little more worth than a
generic Master of Arts. MPA students assume
they are gaining meaningful preparation for
their careers when, in fact, that is not the case.
And the ultimate, untoward outcome is that
offices staffed with MPA graduates lack the
expertise to tackle the thorny administrative
issues that confront them. This, despite the fact
that what President Kennedy said in 1962 is
still true: most of the problems that come to
government are administrative problems requir
ing sophisticated judgments on questions that
are beyond the ken of most people.
1 The interpretation of the standards can be accessed
at https://naspaaaccreditation.files.wordpress.com/
2014/05/ssi-instructions-2014-update-final.pdf.
More fundamental, integrating NASPAA’s work
with the ASPA community would present a
stronger, more united front for defending
modern public service. Such a unified, larger
association could speak with a louder, more per
suasive voice against the constant assaults on
the worth and value of public service. In short,
reintegrating public administration accreditation
with ASPA would reap many rewards: enhanced
professional expertise through re
connecting
administrative education to administrative
research, promotion of a greater sense of corpor
ate identity via linking administrative education
with practice, and ultimately the advancement
of sound standards of ethical responsibility and
administrative skills so urgently needed.
Too many MPA graduates know too little about
the basics of public administration. Surely, there
NOTES
2 We agree with an anonymous reviewer’s comment
that “nothing in the standards prohibit the accred
itation of programs in large animal veterinary care
or automobile manufacturing. Programs can be
govern
ed by five professionally qualified faculty
with no scholarship in public administration who
teach no public administration courses.”
3 For a summary of how the model for higher
education has changed, see Schultz (2013). For an
exploration of the increased reliance on non-tenuretrack faculty, see Institute for Research and Study
of Accreditation and Quality Assurance (2014).
For an explanation of how the accreditation industry developed, see Council for Higher Education
Accreditation (1998).
REFERENCES
Appleby, P. (1962). Making sense out of things in general.
Camacho, C. (2014, September). 2012–2013 NASPAA
annual accreditation data report. Retrieved from
https://naspaaaccreditation.files.wordpress.com/
2014/04/2014-data-report.pdf.
Carroll, L. (1871). Through the looking glass and what
Alice found there. London: Macmillan. Excerpt
retrieved from http://www76.pair.com/keithlim/
jabberwocky/poem/humptydumpty.html.
Council for Higher Education Accreditation. (1998,
January). Recognition of accreditation organizations:
A comparison of policy and practice of voluntary accreditation and the United States. Department of Edu
cation. Retrieved from http://www.chea.org/pdf.
RecognitionWellman_Jan1998.pdf
Freyss, S. F. (2015, January 6). Column 11: Toward a more
inclusive graduate education in public administration. PA Times. Retrieved from http://patimes.org/
paradigm-shifts-public-administration-benchmarkspractices-9.
Henry, N., Goodsell, C. T., Lynn, L. E., Jr., Stivers,
C., & Wamsley, G. L. (2009). Understanding excel
lence in public administration: The report of the
task force on educating for excellence in the master
of public administration degree of the American
Society for Public Administration. Journal of Public
Institute for Research and Study of Accreditation and
Quality Assurance. (2014, January). An examination
of the changing faculty: Ensuring institutional quality
and achieving desired student learning outcomes.
Retrieved from Council for Higher Education
Accreditation website: http://www.chea.org/pdf/
Examination_Changing_Faculty_2013.pdf.
Kennedy, J. F. (1962, May 21). Yale commencement
address. Retrieved from Center for Programs in
Contemporary Writing website: http://www.
writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/50s/jfk-end-of-i.html.
Administration (NASPAA). (2014a, September 1).
2014–2015 roster of accredited programs. Retrieved
from Scribd website: http://www.scribd.com/doc/
238107671/2014-15-NASPAA-Roster-of-Accredited-Programs.
Network of Schools of Public Policy, Affairs, and Ad
ministration (NASPAA). (2014b, November 5–7).
APS 12-13 conference slides updated 10/31; slides 8,
11, and 27. Presented at NASPAA Annual Conference, Albuquerque, NM. Retrieved from http://
www.naspaa.org/DataCenter/index.asp; click this
link: AY 2012-2013 Annual Program Survey Results.
Administration (NASPAA). (n.d.). Overview and
timeline. Retrieved from http://accreditation.
naspaa.org/considering-accreditation/overviewand-timeline.
Network of Schools of Public Policy, Affairs, and Ad
ministration (NASPAA), Commission on Peer Review and Accreditation. (2014). NASPAA standards:
312
Accreditation standards for master’s degree programs.
Retrieved from https://naspaaaccreditation.files.
wordpress.com/2015/02/naspaa-accreditationstandards.pdf.
Raffel, J. A. (2009). Looking forward: A response to the
ASPA task force report on educating for excellence
in the MPA. Journal of Public Affairs Education,
15(2), 135–144.
Sayre, W. S. (1948). The triumph of techniques over
purpose. Public Administration Review, 8(2), 134–137.
Schultz, D. (2013). Public affairs education and the
failed business model of higher education. Journal
of Public Affairs Education, 19(2), ii–vii.
Thayer, F. (1976). The NASPAA threat. Public Admin
istration Review, 36(1), 85–90.
Vermeulen, T., & van den Akker, R. (2010). Notes on
metamodernism. Journal of Aesthetics and Culture,
2, 1–14. doi:10.3402/jac.v2i0.5677.
Volcker, P. A. (2014). Vision without execution is halluci
nation. Public Administration Review, 74(4), 439–441.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Mary E. Guy is a professor at the University of
Colorado, Denver, and is past president of the
American Society for Public Administration, a
fellow of the National Academy of Public Ad
ministration, past chair of the Commission on
Peer Review and Accreditation, and past depart
ment head. Her research focuses on the human
processes involved in public service delivery as
well as on public administration in general.
Richard Stillman is professor of public admini
stration at the University of Colorado, Denver,
and from 2006 through 2011 served as editor
in chief of Public Administration Review. His
text Public Administration: Concepts and Cases
(9th ed.) is adopted for teaching at over 400
universities and colleges, and his book Preface
to Public Administration was recently ranked as
the third most influential book in the field
published since 1990.
Book Review
The Art of the Watchdog:
Fighting Fraud, Waste, Abuse
and Corruption in Government
by Daniel L. Feldman and David R. Eichenthal
Paperback: 571 pages
Independence, KY
Jossey-Bass (2014)
paperback ISBN: 978–1–118–58371–5
e-book ISBN: 978–1–118–58449–1
REVIEW AUTHOR
Robin J. Kempf
John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York
KEYWORDS
Government accountability, democratic oversight, political control, checks and balances
Who monitors government in America, and
how do they perform their work? Daniel L.
Feldman and David R. Eichenthal tackle this
topic in their recent book, The Art of the Watch
dog: Fighting Fraud, Waste, Abuse and Corruption in Government, which comes from a very
personal place for both men. Based on their
extensive professional experience in both elected
and appointed roles in government, they provide a near-encyclopedic description of types of
governmental oversight entities, coupled with an
exhortation to citizens of all political stripes to
recognize the importance of monitoring in pre
serving and promoting the integrity of govern
ment. Although more anecdotal than empirical,
the book provides public affairs professors and
students rich material to explore.
The authors’ primary thesis is unapologetically
in favor of governmental oversight. Oversight,
and lots of it, is necessary in the fight against
fraud, waste, abuse, and corruption in govern
ment. Effective watchdogs must have a “low
‘boiling point’—an intolerance for abuse and
injustice” (p. 2). Further, meaningful oversight
requires ongoing effort and persistence. The
most successful watchdogs are dedicated to
JPAE 22 (2), 313–314
pursuing systemic reform rather than simply
addressing the single case in front of them.
Feldman and Eichenthal developed this thesis
through professional experience. Feldman is an
attorney and former New York state legislator,
with prior experience as both a congressional
and state legislative staffer. He also worked for
the New York State Attorney General and con
tinues to work for the Office of the New York
State Comptroller. He currently teaches public
management at the John Jay College of Cri
minal Justice, City University of New York.
Eichenthal is likewise an attorney. He has exten
sive experience in New York City government,
including tenures with the City Comptroller’s
Office, the Department of Investigation, and
the Public Advocate’s Office; and he headed
Chattanooga, Tennessee’s Office of Performance
Review. Currently, he is a director of Public Fin
ancial Management Inc. and a senior research
fellow at the New York University School of
Law, Center for Research in Crime and Justice.
The Art of the Watchdog is essentially divided
into three sections. The first section introduces
the topic and describes the authors’ opinions on
Review by R. J. Kempf
the importance of the watchdog role. It also de
fines fraud, waste, abuse, and corruption and a
gives a detailed overview of the audit and inves
tigation processes. The second section covers the
many types of governmental watchdogs on the
federal, state, and local levels of American
government. The final section addresses non
governmental watchdogs such as the press, notfor-profit organizations, citizens, and private
attorneys. All sections are peppered with realworld tales of governmental oversight.
A major asset of this book is its broad definition
of watchdog as any entity that may play a role in
monitoring and reforming government to reduce
fraud, waste, abuse, and corruption. A vast array
of entities meet this description, and having all
such types collected in one source gives students
a broad introduction to the topic. Specific en
tities and functions might be covered in a more
theoretical way elsewhere; for example, congres
sional oversight of bureaucracies has received
attention in a rich literature on political control.
ButThe Art of the Watchdog provides an expansive and thus pedagogically useful introduction
to government accountability. Of particular use
is that in every case, the authors assess the struc
tural or other limitations of an entity’s ability to
perform its watchdog role.
The most valuable chapters are those addressing
watchdogs that have not received much scholar
ly attention from social scientists in the context
of oversight. For example, the chapters examining
the extent to which state comptrollers, treasurers,
and attorneys general have a role in monitoring
other state agencies for fraud, waste, and abuse
are enlightening, especially to those unfamiliar
with state governments. Additionally, the chap
ter on the role of nongovernmental watchdogs
is fascinating. The authors describe both liberal
and conservative entities, for-profit qui tam
attorneys, and not-for-profit advocacy groups.
Despite the authors’ comprehensiveness, read
ers should be aware that this is not a traditional
theory-based academic book. It is more descrip
tive, relying on the authors’ personal observa
tions or other anecdotes to support broad
claims. For example, the authors assert that the
existence, or lack thereof, of an audit function
in a city government may be attributable to
314
political or cultural reasons (p. 185). This
assertion is an empirical question that merits a
scholarly response, which is not found here.
Neither will readers find a unified theory of the
role of watchdogs, if such a thing is possible.
Thus, this book may not be rigorous enough
for a doctoral-level class unless augmented with
other theory-based work, though it does raise a
number of ideas that merit further research.
Some readers may also be put off by the book’s
focus on New York. Examples of oversight are
not exclusively drawn from the State or City of
New York, but the vast majority are, and the
authors readily acknowledge this. The geographic emphasis may be one reason this book
made its way onto a New York Times’ list of
suggested reading for then newly elected Mayor
Bill de Blasio (Roberts, 2013).
Overall, The Art of the Watchdog makes a strong
contribution to public affairs education by pro
viding professors with a reference book they
can use to expose students to the concepts of
government accountability and monitoring. It
clearly presents the challenges that watchdogs
face when exposing corruption or advocating for
change. It would be a useful text to incorporate
into a policy, ethics, or accountability class on
either the undergraduate or master’s level.
REFERENCES
Feldman, D. L., & Eichenthal, D. R. (2014). The art
of the watchdog: Fighting fraud, waste, abuse and
corruption in government. Albany: State University
of New York Press.
Roberts, S. (2013, December 13). Suggested reading for
de Blasio. New York Times, p. MB8. Retrieved from
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/15/nyregion/
suggested-reading-for-de-blasio.html?_r=0.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Robin J. Kempf is assistant professor of public
management at the John Jay College of Crim
inal Justice, City University of New York. Her
research focuses on issues of government account
ability, institutions, and public management.
NASPAA
The Global Standard in Public Service Education
C. Michelle Piskulich, President
David Birdsell, Vice President
J. Edward Kellough, Immediate Past President
Laurel McFarland, Executive Director
JPAE Oversight Committee
Ed Jennings, Paul Teske
David Schultz Co-Editor, Hamline University Marieka Klawitter Co-Editor, University of Washington
Ashley Sonoff Editorial Assistant, University of Washington
COPY EDITOR Julie Van Pelt
PUBLICATION LAYOUT AND DESIGN Val Escher, Freestyle Communications
EDITORS’ COUNCIL
H. George Frederickson Founding Editor, University of Kansas
Danny L. Balfour Grand Valley State University
Marc Holzer Rutgers University-Newark
Edward T. Jennings University of Kentucky
James L. Perry Indiana University, Bloomington
Mario A. Rivera University of New Mexico
Heather E. Campbell Claremont Graduate University
BOARD OF EDITORS
Archil Abashidze Ilia State University, Georgia
Muhittin Acar Hacettepe University, Turkey
Mohamad Alkadry Florida International University
Burt Barnow George Washington University
Peter J. Bergerson Florida Gulf Coast University
Rajade Berry-James North Carolina State University
John Bohte University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
Espiridion Borrego University of Texas Pan American
Lysa Burnier Ohio University
Douglas Carr Oakland University
Beverly Cigler Pennsylvania State University
Barbara Crosby University of Minnesota
Robert B. Cunningham University of Tennessee, Knoxville
Susan Gooden Virginia Commonwealth University
Peter Hoontis Rutgers University-Newark
Donna Lind Infeld The George Washington University
Cynthia Jackson-Elmoore Michigan State University
Timothy Johnson Willamette University
Richard Greggory Johnson III University of San Francisco
Meagan Jordan Old Dominion University
J. Edward Kellough University of Georgia
Don Kettl University of Maryland, College Park
John Kiefer The University of New Orleans
William Earle Klay Florida State University
Chris Koliba University of Vermont
Kristina Lambright Binghamton University SUNY
Laura Langbein American University
Scott Lazenby City of Sandy, Oregon
Ya Li Beijing Institute of Technology
Steven R. Maxwell Florida Southwestern State College
Barbara McCabe University of Texas-San Antonio
Lorenda A. Naylor University of Baltimore
Ashley Nickels Rutgers University-Camden
Michael Popejoy Florida International University
Dahlia Remler Baruch College CUNY
Nadia Rubaii Binghamton University SUNY
Meghna Sabharwal University of Texas at Dallas
Jodi Sandfort University of Minnesota
Robert A. Schuhmann University of Wyoming
Charles Scurr Florida International University,
Citizens Independent Transportation Trust
Patricia M. Shields Texas State University
Jessica Sowa University of Baltimore
Kendra Stewart College of Charleston
Karel Van der Molen Stellenbosch University, South Africa
Danielle Varda University of Colorado Denver
Blue Wooldridge Virginia Commonwealth University
Firuz Demir Yasamıs American University in the Emirates
CORRESPONDENTS
Edgar Ramirez Delacruz Center for Research and
Teaching in Economics (CIDE), Mexico
Charlene M. L. Roach University of the West Indies
St. Augustine Campus
INFORMATION FOR ARTICLE SUBMISSIONS
The Journal of Public Affairs Education (JPAE ) is the journal of the Network of Schools of Public
Policy, Affairs, and Administration (NASPAA). JPAE is dedicated to advancing teaching and learning
in public affairs, policy analysis, public administration, public management, public policy, and nonprofit
administration. We work to improve teaching methods and individual courses as well as public affairs
program design, management, and assessment.
The goal of JPAE is to publish articles that are useful to those participating in public affairs education
throughout the world. Articles should be clear, accessible, and useful to those in the public affairs fields
and subfields. The editors are particularly interested in articles that (1) use rigorous methods to analyze
the relative effectiveness of teaching methods, and (2) have international or comparative components.
Articles submitted for publication in JPAE must not already be submitted or published elsewhere. Articles
that have been presented at conferences are welcome.
Submissions should be made online at www.edmgr.com/jpae. At the site, you will be instructed to create
an account if you have not already done so or to log in under your existing account.
Submitted manuscripts should conform to the following JPAE guidelines:
• Not include author(s) names either on title page or in body of the manuscript in order
to allow for anonymous peer review.
• Not exceed 30 pages in length, including notes, references, and tables.
• Be typed in a standard 12-point serif font (such as Times New Roman), double spaced,
with margins of no less than one inch on all sides.
• Use APA-style in-text citations and references. More information on APA style can be
found at www.apastyle.org/.
Submitting authors will be asked for contact information, names of any additional authors, up to three
subject classifications to which the manuscript relates, and an abstract of approximately 150 words.
Additional instructions for registration in this system and submission of manuscripts can be found at www.
edmgr.com/jpae or the JPAE website at www.naspaa.org/jpae. Authors will receive acknowledgement of
receipt of the manuscript and can follow its progress through the review process at www.edmgr.com/jpae.
All articles are given an initial review by the editorial team. Articles must meet basic criteria including
writing quality, reasonable conformity with these guidelines, and interest to JPAE readers before they
undergo external, double-blind peer review. If accepted for publication, manuscripts cannot be published
until they conform to APA style and all of the authors have provided copyright transfer authority, full
contact information, and short biographies (of about 5 lines).
Questions about the manuscript submission, review, and publication process may be addressed to the
editorial team at [email protected].
The Journal of Public Affairs Education is published quarterly by NASPAA, the Network of Schools of Public Policy, Affairs, and Administration.
Claims for missing numbers should be made within the month following the regular month of publication. The publishers expect to supply
missing numbers free only when losses have been sustained in transit and when the reserve stock will permit.
Institution, $125; Individual, $50; Student, $40; Non-U.S., add $20 to applicable rate. JPAE articles can be accessed at
www.naspaa.org/JPAEMessenger. CHANGE OF ADDRESS: Please notify us and your local postmaster immediately of both old and new addresses.
Please allow four weeks for the change. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to JPAE, c/o NASPAA, 1029 Vermont Ave. NW, Suite 1100,
Washington, D.C., 20005-3517. EDUCATORS AND COPY CENTERS: Copyright 2015. NASPAA. All rights reserved. Educators may reproduce
any material for classroom use only, without fee, and authors may reproduce their articles without written permission. Written permission
is required to reproduce JPAE in all other instances. Please contact JPAE, c/o NASPAA, 1029 Vermont Ave. NW, Suite 1100, Washington,
D.C., 20005-3517, 202-628-8965, [email protected]. The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American
National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984. JPAE is abstracted or
indexed in JSTOR, EBSCO, Google Scholar, and Education Full Text Index. ISSN 1523-6803 (formerly 1087–7789).
SUBSCRIPTION RATES:
Because of its mission, the Journal of Public Affairs Education allows educators to reproduce any
JPAE material for classroom use, and authors may reproduce their own articles without written
permission. Written permission is required to reproduce any part of JPAE in all other instances.
4/15/16 7:32 PM
JPAE
J OURNAL
VOLUME 22
NUMBER 2
OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS EDUCATION
VOLUME 22 NO. 2
1029 Vermont Avenue NW, Suite 1100, Washington, DC 20005-3517
[email protected] • www.naspaa.org
SPRING 2016
NASPAA – The Global Standard in Public Service Education
The journal of NASPAA — The Global Standard in Public Service Education
SPRING 2016
4/15/16 7:32 PM