PARADIGM SHIFT IN INTEGRATED STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT THROUGH COLLABORATIVE NETWORK MECHANISMS FOR THE SUSTAINABILITY OF THAI LOCAL ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATIONS
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This academic article aims to analyze three key constraints in the management of Thai Local Administrative Organizations (LAOs) - organizational structures that lack integration, budgetary and resource limitations arising from heavy dependence on the central government, and an attachment to rules and regulations rather than to outcomes affecting citizens' quality of life - and to present an approach for shifting the management paradigm through collaborative network mechanisms, amid the volatile and fragile conditions of the BANI World, which have pushed the current vertical bureaucratic governance model and siloed working practices toward a dead end. The article employs documentary and conceptual synthesis, selecting textbooks, academic articles, and research related to new public management concepts, collaborative governance theory, and innovation partnership models, drawn from both domestic and international academic sources, and analyzing the content qualitatively to synthesize a conceptual framework for the strategic management of Thai LAOs. The analysis finds that Thai LAOs face three key constraints: organizational structures that lack integration, budgetary and resource limitations arising from heavy dependence on the central government, and an attachment to rules and regulations rather than to outcomes affecting citizens' quality of life. The article therefore proposes an approach of “Integrated Strategic Management through Collaborative Network Mechanisms,” shifting the role of LAOs from sole providers of public services to “facilitators and integrators” through five-helix partnership - the public sector, the private sector, academia, civil society, and citizens - coupled with the development of network leadership among local executives. The recommendations note that the success of this paradigm shift, which aims toward institutional, economic, and social sustainability at the local level, depends on unlocking legal constraints, developing the skills of a new generation of leaders in network management, and establishing an open-data ecosystem to support precise strategic decision-making.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
กรมส่งเสริมการปกครองท้องถิ่น. (2565). รายงานสถานะการเงินการคลังขององค์กรปกครองส่วนท้องถิ่น ประจำปีงบประมาณ พ.ศ. 2565. กรุงเทพมหานคร: กระทรวงมหาดไทย.
วุฒิสาร ตันไชย. (2562). การบริหารจัดการท้องถิ่นในยุคเปลี่ยนผ่าน: ความท้าทายและโอกาส. วารสารสถาบันพระปกเกล้า, 17(2), 5-28.
สถาบันวิจัยเพื่อการพัฒนาประเทศไทย. (2565). การศึกษาศักยภาพและข้อจำกัดขององค์กรปกครองส่วนท้องถิ่นไทยในการรับมือกับความท้าทายในศตวรรษที่ 21. กรุงเทพมหานคร: TDRI.
อรทัย ก๊กผล. (2561). การกระจายอำนาจและการปกครองท้องถิ่นไทย: ประสบการณ์และทิศทางในอนาคต. กรุงเทพมหานคร: สถาบันพระปกเกล้า.
Agranoff, R. (2007). Managing within networks: Adding value to public organizations. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Ansell, C. & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 543-571.
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press.
Bovaird, T. (2007). Beyond engagement and participation: User and community coproduction of public services. Public Administration Review, 67(5), 846-860.
Brown, M. & Doussard, M. (2021). Community wealth building and the Preston model. Local Economy, 36(4), 299-315.
Carayannis, E. G. & Campbell, D. F. J. (2010). Triple helix, quadruple helix and quintuple helix and how do knowledge, innovation and the environment relate to each other? International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development, 1(1), 41-69.
Christensen, T. & Laegreid, P. (2007). The whole-of-government approach to public sector reform. Public Administration Review, 67(6), 1059-1066.
Crosby, B. C. & Bryson, J. M. (2005). Leadership for the common good: Tackling public problems in a shared-power world. (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Emerson, K.et al. (2012). An integrative framework for collaborative governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22(1), 1-29.
Etzkowitz, H. & Leydesdorff, L. (1995). The Triple Helix - University-industry-government relations: A laboratory for knowledge-based economic development. EASST Review, 14(1), 14-19.
Fung, A. (2015). Putting the public back into governance: The challenges of citizen participation and its future. Public Administration Review, 75(4), 513-522.
Head, B. W. & Alford, J. (2015). Wicked problems: Implications for public policy and management. Administration & Society, 47(6), 711-739.
Koppenjan, J. & Klijn, E. H. (2004). Managing uncertainties in networks: A network approach to problem solving and decision making. London: Routledge.
Moore, M. H. (1995). Creating public value: Strategic management in government. Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA: Harvard University Press.
OECD. (2020). Digital government in Southeast Asia: Principles and practices. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Osborne, S. P. (2010). The new public governance? Emerging perspectives on the theory and practice of public governance. London: Routledge.
Peters, B. G. & Pierre, J. (2004). Politicization of the civil service in comparative perspective: The quest for control. London: Routledge.
Pollitt, C. & Bouckaert, G. (2011). Public management reform: A comparative analysis. (3rd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Provan, K. G. & Kenis, P. (2008). Modes of network governance: Structure, management, and effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(2), 229-252.
Rueda, S. et al. (2012). Barcelona superblock: An urban restructuring project for the injection of ecosystem services in the urban fabric of Barcelona. Barcelona: In Smart City Expo World Congress Proceedings. Spain: Barcelona City Council.
Setiawan, B. & Harahap, F. (2022). Collaborative governance in the implementation of smart city in Bandung. Jurnal Administrasi Publik, 9(1), 12-25.
Shah, A. (2006). A practitioner’s guide to intergovernmental fiscal transfers. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, 4039. https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-4039.
Smoke, P. (2001). Fiscal decentralization in developing countries: A review of current concepts and practice. Geneva: United Nations Research Institute for Social Development (UNRISD).
Stacey, R. D. . (2011). Strategic management and organisational dynamics: The challenge of complexity. (6th ed.). London: Pearson Education.
Teece, D. J. et al. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533.
United Nations Development Programme. (2022). Local governance and the sustainable development goals: Linking local action to global commitments. NewYork: UNDP.
Vangen, S.et al. (2015). Governing cross-sector, inter-organizational collaborations. Public Management Review, 17(9), 1237-1260.
Wongpreedee, A. & Mahakanjana, C. (2011). Decentralization and local governance. In Thailand. In E. M. Berman (Ed.), Public administration in Southeast Asia. Thailand, Philippines, Malaysia, Hong Kong, and Macao (pp. 53-78). Boca Raton: CRC Press.
