The failure of  competence-based management education in the public sector – A problem of generic transfer or implementation?

doi:10.1108/00483480110380136

Login

Welcome:
Guest

Search for:

Browse:

Resources:

Personnel Review

ISSN: 0048-3486

Online from: 1971

Subject Area: Human Resource Management

Content: Latest Issue | Latest Issue RSS | Previous Issues

Options: To add Favourites and Table of Contents Alerts please take a Emerald profile

The failure of competence-based management education in the public sector – A problem of generic transfer or implementation?

Document Information:
Title:	The failure of competence-based management education in the public sector – A problem of generic transfer or implementation?
Author(s):	Inger Boyett, (The Business School, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK), Graeme Currie, (The Business School, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK)
Citation:	Inger Boyett, Graeme Currie, (2001) "The failure of competence-based management education in the public sector – A problem of generic transfer or implementation?", Personnel Review, Vol. 30 Iss: 1, pp.42 - 60
Keywords:	Competences, Further education, Management education, Management styles, Public sector
Article type:	Case study
DOI:	10.1108/00483480110380136 (Permanent URL)
Publisher:	MCB UP Ltd
Abstract:	This paper presents a case study of a management development programme, which adopts a competence-based approach aimed at middle managers in a further education college. The programme takes place in a context that promotes the concept of general management. However, the programme, in which the general management approach is embedded, is resisted by the participating middle managers, to the extent that the programme “collapses” half way through and is never revived. As the paper suggests, there may be two reasons for this. First, in considering any potential relationship between public and private sectors, a key question is whether generic transfer of managerial ideas and practices from private to the public sector is appropriate. Second, it may be a question of the way in which the programme was implemented and delivered.