Computer Science, asked by monisanunting, 5 months ago

compare and contrast private sector and government

Answers

Answered by konasushanth
1

Explanation:

It’s become a cliché that government would be better if it were only run by private-sector managers using standard business practices. But Jan Mares, who has been in both environments, says it is not the same. Mares, who worked in the private sector in the chemical and manufacturing industries, and was the fossil energy chief in the Reagan administration’s Department of Energy, offers 25 reasons why government management and business management are either to earn significant amounts of money or to be trained such that the opportunity to earn significant amounts of money could occur in a later job. taking risks on policy or programs and being successful in achieving the goals more effectively. However there is potential for substantial criticism and other personal loss if the innovative attempt fails.

The key reality to the private sector is market-driven competition, whereas the same in the government is almost always a legislated monopoly.

Private sector managers worry about creating added value, i.e. a product or service that can be sold competitively to the public. This requires the ability and skill to change, evolve, adapt and improve constantly. Government is frequently quite different. Managers in the government often know what needs to be done and desire to do it but are facing restrictions of laws, regulations, policies, often made years earlier for other circumstances, that prevent prompt action.

Authority and responsibility in the government tends to be asymmetric while authority and responsibility in the private sector are more clearly balanced. Responsibility in the government can be enormous while authority is frequently quite limited.

Authority in government may be ambiguous and unclear in some circumstances. In other cases it is very clear and tightly restricted through laws, regulations, policies and directives that leave little, if any room for individual initiative.

In most outstanding private sector organizations there are clear, well-understood, job-by-job, top-to-bottom goals and objectives. In government, goals and objectives have been ill-formed, fuzzy and soft. The Government Performance Reform Act and individual departments are striving to change this. Goals in the government are often divergent which may lead to confusion.

The senior/political leadership in Departments and Agencies turns over more frequently and to a larger extent than occurs in the private sector. Cabinet Secretaries do not stay longer than three years on average; Assistant Secretary tenure is less than 24 months. New Cabinet Secretaries frequently replace significant numbers of senior leadership in their first year. This causes starts and stops in direction of Departments or Agencies. The only similar private sector situation is a hostile takeover.

The average years of experience either on the substantive matters for which they are responsible or in management generally for political leadership is much, much less than their counterparts in the private sector. This is particularly true for individuals below level of Cabinet Secretary.

The main goal of most political appointees is to promote the policies of the Administration and/or change the policies of the previous Administration. Few political appointees focus on organizational management issues because they have no experience; will not be in government long; and desire to focus on policy issues, not management issues. Political appointees receive little encouragement to focus on management issues.

The various forms of control on a government agency versus the few on the private sector are staggering. A government agency has at least three different leadership groups to which it is responsible. One has 100 CEOs (the Senate); one has 435 CEOs (the House) and one has one CEO (the President) and at least 435 assistants (the White House staff including OMB, CEA, OSTP, NSC, HSC [Homeland Security Council] and others). The result is that there is confusion and potential delay on most significant issues or decisions. Furthermore many of

Similar questions