Transitioning to Tomorrow's Public Administration: Policies and Practices for PA 2000
ROBERT T. GOLEMBIEWSKI
PAM, Vol. 4 No. 2, (1999)
Periodically, my attention has turned to the wellsprings of public administration and management: broadly, what considerations should dominate in the design of graduate degree programs and associated activities? The first concentrated attention came in 1964-67, as we at Georgia -- primarily Bill Collins, Geoff Cornog, Frank Gibson, and myself -- were modeling one of the first of what became a string of second-generation MPA programs. Our burgeoning enrollments, and especially those off-site, highlighted the lack of convenient teaching materials, and this market force then led directly to about 25 editions of a family of readers (e.g., Golembiewski, Gibson, & Cornog, 1966, 1972, 1976...). Subsequently, in what was essentially a Lone Ranger sortie, the design of one of the early DPA programs came into focus. And then a bit later, the target was the broad design of PA as discipline (Golembiewski, 1977c). Later still, my objective was an overall sense of what there was to learn from the range of PA/PM graduate programs that I had either helped design or had observed, up-close and personal (e.g., Golembiewski, 1979, 1980).
Now is another one of those retrospective times for an integrative review of experience and insight that might yield directions as well as limits for PA 2000: The Future of the Profession. Specifically, three themes get targeted:
• a survey of today's conditions;
• a brief sense of PA's near-future markets; and
• ways of easing the here ---> there transition, beginning with short-run opportunities, and extending to longer time frames.