Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Uses the distinctions Max Weber draws between means and ends of economics and politics in Economy and Society to explore why the discussion of ends may be neglected in current conversations on privatization and reinvention. Includes a discussion of possible relationships between public and private based on Weberian concepts of the life spheres of politics and economics and the contrasting types of status and purposive contracts. Suggests that to increase emphasis on ends, as well as means, public dialogue should focus on giving an account as well as on holding organizations to account. For public management to focus on giving an account, more attention needs to be given to appreciating a public law framework, understanding the relationships in different types of contract, and creating conditions favourable to communicative rationality.
Journal of Management History (Archive) – Emerald Publishing
Published: Mar 1, 1996
Keywords: Contracts; Economics; Politics; Private sector; Public administration; Public sector
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.