Complexities of Productivity Policies in the Finnish Public Sector: Knowing How to Do More with Less?

• Author: Anna‐Aurora Kork,Jarmo Vakkuri,Pietu Mänttäri
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12062
• Published date: 01 November 2015
• Date: 01 November 2015

Financial Accountability & Management, 31(4), November 2015, 0267-4424

Complexities of Productivity Policies

in the Finnish Public Sector:

Knowing How to Do More with Less?

ANNA-AURORA KORK,PIETU M¨

ANTT¨

ARI AND JARMO VAKKURI∗

Abstract: This paper examines public sector productivity policies as complexities

between what is ‘known’ in policy principles and what is ‘done’ in everyday

policy practice. Such complexities are explored in two productivity policy cases

within Finnish local government: municipal amalgamations, and the low-threshold

concept of healthcare service. Utilising quantitative and qualitative data from

Finnish local government the paper demonstrates the tensions between productivity

policy principles, interpretations for productivity improvement (‘knowing’) and final

outcomes for actually applying (‘doing’) productivity policy. The paper argues in

favour of a new understanding for the research and practice of public policy and

management.

Keywords: productivity policy, complexity, knowing, doing, the public sector

INTRODUCTION

Productivity appears to be the panacea for dealing with difficult challenges

within the public service system in Finland. Demographic changes, evolving

needs of the social and healthcare services and problems of long-term financial

sustainability have all been addressed as major challenges. This development

is similar to that in many other European countries, although the problems

of long-term financial sustainability may vary. The perceived solution is ‘doing

more with less’, that is, economising the uses of public finances. While this

appears straightforward, it is a highly contested aim in practice.

Policy instruments have intended and unintended consequences. The re-

search tradition on public sector performance is still seeking to conceptualise

∗The first and second authors are Researchers and Ph.D. students at the School of

Management, University of Tampere. The third author is Professor in local public economics,

School of Management, University of Tampere.

Address for correspondence: Anna-Aurora Kork, University of Tampere, School of

Management, FI-33014 University of Tampere, Finland.

e-mail anna.kork@uta.fi

C

2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd 395

396 KORK, M¨

ANTT¨

ARI AND VAKKURI

complexities and ambiguities of public sector economising policies (cf. Moyni-

han, 2002; Noordegraaf and Abma, 2003; and Pollitt and Hupe, 2011). We

aim to enhance this understanding by discussing such complexities within the

conceptual framework of productivity policies. In terms of productivity policies,

the ‘knowing’ question is relevant: how do we identify the most efficient practices

or public organisations? Which conceptual assumptions guide policy choices?

Moreover, policymakers attempt to solve the ‘doing’ question by asking how

can productivity policies actually enact and enable high performance in public

administration (Vakkuri, 2010; Hood and Dixon 2013; Boltanski and Th´

evenot,

2006; and Pfeffer and Sutton, 2000).

We examine productivity policies in the Finnish public sector. These policies

are not only explored as solutions to the problems of knowing and doing

per se, but also as complexities between what is ‘known’ in policy principles

and what is ‘done’ in everyday policy practice. Understanding the tensions

therein is fundamental for the research and practice of public policy and

management.

More specifically, the paper asks:

1) How do productivity policies address the knowing problem? How can the

ambiguities of policy principles, conceptualisations and measurements

of performance be understood in the Finnish public sector?

2) How do policymakers aim to respond to the doing problem with

productivity policies? How are productivity policies justified in two

specific cases in the Finnish local government?

3) How can we understand productivity policies in the public sector as

complexities between knowing and doing problems?

We focus on two illustrative cases. On the one hand, we analyse the

assumption of scale economies in reforming local government whereby municipal

amalgamations are seen as an important solution (cf. Boyne, 1992; and Andrews

and Boyne, 2009). This constitutes an explicit starting point for the Finnish

local government reform policy, including ‘PARAS reform’ (political reform to

reorganise the local government structure and public services) which was started

in 2006, and the ‘new’ local government reform based on the Government

Programme of 2011 (Act 169/2007). On the other hand, we discuss the

attempts of the Finnish local governments to improve service quality. So-

called walk-in clinics have been introduced to facilitate access to healthcare

services.

These cases provide an interesting avenue to explore two different types

of productivity policies. However, they also incorporate common contradictory

elements which help us to more fully understand the complexities between

what Finnish policymakers know (or assume to know) and what they actually

do to improve productivity in the public sector. We use case analysis to create

a reflective synthesis of theoretical argumentations regarding the ambiguities

C

2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd