New Public Management and the Thatcher Healthcare Legacy: Enough of the Theory, What about the Implementation?
- 1 October 2002
- journal article
- Published by SAGE Publications in The British Journal of Politics and International Relations
- Vol. 4 (3) , 375-398
- https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-856x.00085
Abstract
Initial evaluations of Thatcherism suggest that it represented a policy formulation success but implementation failure (Marsh and Rhodes 1992), with healthcare reforms particularly unsuccessful because they did not challenge the autonomy of the medical profession (Wistow 1992a and 1992b). More extensive analyses of the implementation of new public management (NPM) within health care take this challenge more seriously. According to Ferlie et al. (1996), doctors were gainers and losers, since the rise of the management function coincided with a rise in medical involvement in management decisions. However, this article argues that the rise of the purchasing function of health authorities undermined this ‘gain’ to the medical profession. Further, the significance of the case study—AIDS policy in Scotland—is that profound change has occurred in a policy area in which one would least expect this to happen.Keywords
This publication has 17 references indexed in Scilit:
- Professionals: Back to the Future?Human Relations, 2000
- Health Policy in BritainPublished by Springer Nature ,1999
- The New Public Management in ActionPublished by Oxford University Press (OUP) ,1996
- AIDS in the UKPublished by Oxford University Press (OUP) ,1996
- Six years' experience of sharing the care of Edinburgh's drug usersPsychiatric Bulletin, 1996
- Pressure Groups, Politics and Democracy in BritainPublished by Springer Nature ,1995
- Where now for the NHS reforms?BMJ, 1994
- Constitutional and Distributional Conflict in British Medical Politics: The Case of General Practice, 1911–1991Political Studies, 1992
- Just ManagingPublished by Springer Nature ,1992
- Creating a new drug service in Edinburgh.BMJ, 1990