Florika Kolaci


The following paper focuses on the importance of the inherited administrative culture which is believed to define the character of the administration system in the years to come. Moreover, administrative culture strongly influences the way organizations operate, including the acceptance or rejection of new policies and directives. This study highlights the power of the hegemonic cultural paradigm and the resistance it shows toward possible changes. The countries of Greece, Italy, and Spain are used as case studies, since they follow the Napoleonic administrative tradition. Additionally, these countries continue to present vivid features of the respective tradition, despite the numerous changes that have been imposed during the reform period from 1980 until 2000. The aim of this study is to put the New Public Management doctrine into a new perspective, by questioning its ability to be successfully implemented to national administrative systems and deliver positive results.


South Europe, administrative reform, New Public Management, administrative culture, civil service

Full Text:



Adler, N. J. (1993). Do cultures vary? In T. D. Weinschall, (Ed.). Societal culture and management, (pp. 23-46) New York: Walter de Gruyter & Co.

Alba, C. R., & Navarro, C. (2011). Administrative tradition and reforms in Spain: Adaptation versus innovation. Public Administration, 89(3), 783-800.

Bassanini, F. (2000). Overview of administrative reform and implementation in Italy: Organization, personnel, procedures and delivery of public services. International Journal of Public Administration, 23(2), 229-252.

Bassanini, F. (2003, November 3-7). Good governance strategies: A prospect for integration. Reflections from the Italian Experience. Paper presented at the Fifth Global Forum on Reinventing Government, Good Government Strategies for the 21st Century, Mexico.

Baumgartner, F. R. (1989). Conflict and rhetoric in French policymaking. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1989.

Bouckaert, G. (2007). Cultural characteristics from public management reform worldwide, In K. Schedler & I. Proeller (Eds.). Cultural aspects of public management reform (Research in Public Policy Analysis and Management Vol. 16). (pp. 29-64) Oxford: Elsevier.

Brown, A. D., & Humphreys, M. (1995). International differences in public sector management: Lessons from a survey of British and Egyptian technical education managers. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 8(3), 5-23.

Brunetta, R. (2009). Reforming the public administration to make Italy grow. Review of Economic Conditions in Italy, 3, 339-367.

Caiden, G. E. (1998). Are administrative cultures that different? In O. P. Dwivedi, R. B. Jain, K. Dhirendra & K. Vajpeyi. (Eds.). Governing India: Issues Concerning Public Policy, Institutions and Administration. (pp. 377-389) Delhi, India: B.R. Publishing Corporation.

Capano, G. (2003). Administrative traditions and policy change: When policy paradigms matter. the case of Italian administrative reform during the 1990s. Public Administration, 81, 781-801.

Cassese, S. (1993). Hypotheses on the Italian administrative system. West European Politics, 16, 316-327.

Diamandouros, P. N. (1994). Cultural dualism and political change in post-authoritarian Greece. Working Paper, Institute of Studies and Research Juan March, Centre of Advanced Studies in Social Sciences.

Diez, P. S. (2000). The development and current features of the Spanish civil service system in civil service systems in Western Europe. In H. A. G. M. Bekke & F. M. van der Meer (Eds.). Civil service systems in Western Europe (pp. 247-276). United Kingdom: Edward Elgar.

Dwivedi, O. P., & Gow, J. (1999). From bureaucracy to public management: The administrative culture of the government of Canada. Peterborough, Canada: Broadview Press.

Gallego, R. (2003). Public management policy making in Spain, 1982-1996, International Public Management Journal, 6(3), 283-307.

Gow, J. I., & Dufour, C. (2000). Is the new public management a new paradigm? Does it matter?’ International Review of Administrative Science, 66, 573-597.

Gruening, G. (2001). Origin and theoretical basis of new public management. International Public Management Journal, 4, 1-25.

Hall P. A. (1993). Policy paradigm, social learning and the state: The case of economic policymaking in Britain. Comparative Politics, 25, 275-296.

Hofstede, G., & Hofstede, G. J. (2005). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill.

Howlett, M., & Ramesh, M. (1998). Policy subsystem configurations and policy change: Operationalizing the postpositivist analysis of the politics of the policy process. Policy Studies Journal, 26, 466-481.

Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Ladi, S. (2012). The Eurozone crisis and austerity politics: A trigger for administrative reform in Greece? Hellenic Observatory Papers on Greece and Southeast Europe. Available:

Lyritzis, C. (2007). The changing party system: Stable democracy, contested modernization. Journal of West European Politics, 28, 242-259.

Mele, V., & Ongaro, E. (2014). Public sector reform in a context of political instability: Italy 1992-2007. International Public Management Journal, 71, 110-142.

OECD. Modernizing the public administration. A study on Italy, 2010.

Ongaro E. (2009). Public management reform and modernization: Trajectories of administration change in Italy, France, Greece, Portugal and Spain. United Kingdom: Edward Elgar.

Osborn, D., & Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing government: How the entrepreneurial spirit is transforming the public sector. Readings, MA: Addisson-Wesley.

Peters, B. Guy. (2008). The Napoleonic tradition. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 21, 118-132.

Pierson P. (2000). Increasing returns, path dependence and the study of politics. The American Political Science Review, 94, 251-267.

Pintus, E. (2002). Government reform in Italy: The case of the Italian government reform. Models, approaches and human resources management tools. Working Papers for the European Union and the Inter-American Institute for Social Development. Inter-American Development Bank, 2002.

Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2004). Public Management reform: A comparative analysis: New public management, governance and the neo-Weberian state. United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2004.

Schedler, K., & Proeller, I. (2007). Cultural aspects of public management reform: Research in public policy analysis and management-vol.16. Elsevier Ltd.

Sotiropoulos, D. A. (2007). Southern European public bureaucracies in comparative perspective. Journal of West European Politics, 27, 405-422.

Sotiropoulos, D. A. (2004). Formal weakness and informal strength in contemporary Greece. Discussion paper No.16. The Hellenic Observatory of European Institute, London School of Economics.

Spanou, C., & Sotiropoulos, D. A., the odyssey of administrative reforms in Greece, 1981-2009: A tale of two reform paths. Journal of Public Administration, 89, 723-737.

Spanou, C. (1996). Penelope’s suitors: Administrative modernization and party competition in Greece. Journal of West European Politics, 19, 97-124.

Spanou, C. (2008). State reform in Greece: Responding to old and new challenges. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 21, 150-173.

Subirats, J. (1990). Modernizing the Spanish public administration or reform in disguise. Working Paper n.20, Barcelona, 1990. Last modified 9.12.2016 at

Villoria, M. (2016). The modernization of the Spanish public administration: The role of bureaucracy. Intitutio Ortega y Gasset/ University of Juan Carlos. Paper presented at the IPSA Word Congress 2000, Quebec. RC 32 Public Policy Panel. Last modified on 25.01.2016



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2016 Journal of Media Critiques [JMC]

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.