It’s Time to Move Forward

The People Have Spoken

Adamthinks.com

The Founding Fathers were hunters and gatherers in a new world, embracing a dream of living off the land, and destined to create communities mutually supporting the citizenry while maintaining a free society. Since the time the colonists were threatened by the British, the need to form mutually supported groups were needed to preserve liberty. The Magna Carta was inspiration during the American Revolution and foundation for the 5^th Amendment of the United States (US) Constitution. Mutually supported communities continued to be formed and the free market society was established. It took years for the US Constitution to be completed ratified, yet the lessons then apply in the world today. It’s time to move forward.

Formal education and years as a public administrator have provided an appreciation of the principles of the US Constitution. Application of the principles of administration is essential to ensure equality, liberty, and justice to those in the country. Public administrators and elected officials respond and work for the citizenry – those put in a position of responsibility can and are replaced at the time of election. Programs and services to the citizens of the country are to be mutually supported as a community.

Prior to the election results this message was posted on a website:

It is amazing the venom coming from those displaying support for the country and the electoral process, yet only if you agree with the same view. Disagreement, dialogue, and decisions made this country…with unity.

Pointing fingers at what did not happen is a focus on the past, not the future. Hopefully, regardless of the election result, there can be a return to the values and principal with unity. There were many responses about crying all night, upset at a state or the country for voting in a certain manner. There was a lack of response on the responsibility to vote and elect the representative to govern the country. There seems to currently be a lack of support for those elected and a lack of support of the U.S. Constitution.

The people have spoken!

The founding fathers were truly transitional – aware of the need for discourse, disagreement, and decision. The founding fathers found a way to move forward and let the people vote; those elected would represent their people, and mutually support the best interest of a majority of the citizens of the United States.

The basic principles of a collaborative orientation apply to the founding fathers and for the country to move forward today.

1. Purpose – The elected officials have a purpose; service to others and to represent their constituents. The constituents are whom an elected official is responsible.
2. Decision Making – Action is required to move the country forward. Decision making in a partisan party lines is inaction. Discourse, disagreement and compromise are needed for decision making.
3. Openness – The US is a representative republic – the power resides with those entitled to vote and those representatives responsible to the voters. Openness in information is needed across the board for effective decision making.

It is time to think of unity as a nation. Michael Wolfe on Oct 22, 2012 related in USA Today that the super PAC’s and candidates spent

wingeyes.wordpress.com

over 4 billion dollars on advertising. Arguably the advertising accomplished nothing except polarizing the nation. Polarization has resulted in anger and finger pointing with a focus on the past. Nothing can be done about the past or present, we can only look at the future. Unifying and applying the founding fathers initial principles to move the country forward may bring many people closer to appreciation of the constitutional principles and values of the republic.

It’s OK to Feel

In a box buried somewhere in my closet rests a legal pad containing the notes I took during my introductory MPA class – “Public Affairs Concepts and Theory.”  Inscribed in large capital letters on the pad’s front page is a three-word statement – “THINK, NOT FEEL.”

My professor, the late Dr. Jerzy Hauptmann, a towering figure at Park University, delivered that message to my classmates and me on an August evening in 1991.  A survivor of a Nazi POW camp, he believed that each of us should speak and write with the courage of our convictions.

To him, using a phrase such as “I feel that ‘reinventing government ’ oversimplifies the challenges of 1990s public administration” made a less persuasive argument because, from his perspective, feeling was and is amorphous.

Dr. Hauptmann wanted to believe in the rational model, yet he admitted that most of us frequently make less-than-rational decisions. I recall in that introductory class his lecture on Herbert Simon and the concept of satisficing, a bounded rationality perspective.

In the years following my graduation, I aimed to exemplify intellect and analytical thinking.  I am convinced that my MPA student experience facilitated me burying my emotions long after my graduation.

“THINK, NOT FEEL” is a hard lesson to unlearn.

As I embarked and continued upon my journey as an ASPA officer, a different voice – one decidedly non-rational and very emotional – began to call out from a space deep within me.  While I knew I needed to focus on strategic planning, budgets and the like, I felt like speaking about fairness, respect and human decency.

This voice expressed itself at recent ASPA conferences, sometimes without me actually uttering words.

At the 2010, 2011 and 2012 ASPA Annual Conferences, I participated on panels discussing to what extent professional public administration associations “walk their talk” in terms of social equity.

For my 2010 and 2011 PowerPoint presentations, I juxtaposed audio from Martin Luther King, Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech with slides addressing the somewhat slow evolution of social equity within ASPA.

At the 2012 ASPA Annual Conference in Las Vegas, my PowerPoint presentation featured photos of socioeconomically challenged neighborhoods of conference host cities with John Lennon’s “Imagine” playing in the background.

To view, the PowerPoint, click here.

By touching attendees’ emotions, I delivered more effective and powerful presentations than anything I might have orated myself.

Speaking of touching people, several of my ASPA National Colleagues concluded their terms of service during the past conference, and I wanted to send them off with more than a handshake.  I trolled their Facebook pages for family photos, compiled a list of their accomplishments, inserted an appropriate audio clip (“So Long, Farewell” from The Sound of Music) and secretly unveiled a PowerPoint tribute at the end of the meeting.  Witnessing their reactions was priceless!

Sometimes in professional organizations we often attempt to be so unemotional and formal that we miss opportunities to celebrate the real friendships and real connections which develop between members.

Likewise, when we define public administration as a science, we overlook the power of public service and its ability to express our collective desire to make a meaningful difference in our communities, our nations and our world (hat tip to Bob and Janet Denhardt).

As I stood behind the podium at the opening of the 2012 Annual Conference in Las Vegas, I attempted to look presidential.  Inside, however, I felt a range of emotions, not the least of which was gratitude.  I remain grateful for my friends in the audience that day, grateful for my family’s love throughout my ASPA tenure, grateful for my University’s patience and support; and grateful for my professor and mentor, Dr. Hauptmann, even though I had to unlearn the first lesson he taught me.

When I served as a pallbearer at Dr. Hauptmann’s funeral, I remained so stoic that I neither shed a tear during nor after the service.  Today, my eyes well up when I recall him.

If I was teaching Park University’s introductory MPA course, the one Dr. Hauptmann himself created, I would begin the first class with the following statement – “It’s OK to feel.”

After all, we’re human.

Photo Credits: Park.edu; copp.utsa.edu; 

Fear and Ego

By Erik Bergrud, ASPA Past President

More than 1,200 individuals from throughout the world descended upon Las Vegas in March to attend what ASPA billed as the most comprehensive public administration professional development conference of the year.

In preparing to travel to Las Vegas, I finalized my daily schedule, resigning myself to the reality that I would not be able to garner many pearls of wisdom in conference sessions since I was obliged as then ASPA President to attend meeting after meeting, sometimes simultaneously.

Little did I know at the time that I would learn two powerful life lessons before I left Las Vegas.

In the lead up to and throughout the first days of the conference, much was made about my planned 855-foot jump off the Stratosphere Tower to raise donations for an endowed ASPA student scholarship.

I actually recorded the event and my employer, Park University, was gracious enough to post the video on its YouTube channel – ASPA Past President Takes Plunge.

When you watch the video, you’ll likely conclude that I remained calm, cool and collected throughout the experience.   The camera failed to record the inner conflict I felt at the time.   Even though I was secured by two well-trained staff members, I still harbored fears about my safety.

As I stood on the platform unwilling to look directly downward but gazing at the Las Vegas lights in the distance, I willed myself to take the first step.

The camera did accurately capture the euphoria I felt as I soared through the sky, a combination of the experience itself as well as the realization that I was safe.  What a rush!

The following morning, some conference attendees seemed a bit relieved to see me alive. It’s nice to be loved!

Lesson #1 – Move beyond your fears, take the first step, and you can make an extraordinary accomplishment!

One of the joys of the ASPA presidency during the conference is taking photos with students and international attendees.  Let me be clear – I enjoyed this very much, perhaps too much.

As the conference neared its end, I felt some sadness and emptiness inside.  My tenure as ASPA president had run its course.  This brings me to the “ego” dimension in the title.

In reviewing the title, one might conclude that I should pay tribute to the late Hunter S. Thompson for his inspiration.  I actually need to acknowledge a trusted friend and former ASPA National Council colleague who made possible my Las Vegas learning experiences.

Randy Robinson dared me, on Facebook of all places, to take the literal plunge off the Stratosphere.  When I returned home to Kansas City, I reflected on Randy and my Las Vegas experience, and I suddenly recalled a conversation which took place more than a decade ago while I served on the ASPA staff.

He told me that, by the time the annual conference rolls around, other ASPA leaders are more interested in connecting with the president-elect than with the president, who is a lame duck at that point.

After being continually sought after for more than two years, I did feel like a lame duck on the conference’s final afternoon and, in retrospect, even though I successfully avoided using the term “my conference” to refer to the Las Vegas Conference, my ego defined my conference experience.

If my jump reflected a battle between reason and fear, my tenure as ASPA president involved a struggle between good intentions and ego.

Lesson #2 – When taking on any assignment, check your ego at the door, then recheck it again and again!

My former boss and mentor, the late Dr. Jerzy Hauptmann, told me on many occasions that there has to be more to life than serving yourself.  As I approach post-presidential opportunities to serve my community, nonprofit organizations and ASPA, I will do so by first facing my fears and acknowledging my ego.   In the end, service exists for the greater good.

Nonprofit Sustainable Competitive Advantage

In both the for profit and nonprofit business environment, the keys to sustainable competitive advantage are a firm’s resources, including assets, organizational core competencies, knowledge, and processes. Professor Michael Porter (Harvard) theorizes that in order for these resources to create a competitive advantage they must have four characteristics:

The resources must be valuable. The value of an organizational resource is the degree to which it contributes to efficiency and effectiveness.

The resources must be rare. If many organizations have the same valuable resources, they can replicate your advantage.

The resources must be imperfectly imitable.  They must be impossible to duplicate. This may be due to sheer difficulty, actual impossibility, or because it would be cost prohibitive.

The resources must be nonsubstitutable.  This means that your resources cannot be replaced, and the use of other resources would not produce the same value.

It isn’t easy for a nonprofit to create a sustainable competitive advantage. Society expects nonprofits to avoid competition of any sort. Our history speaks of collaboration, scarce resources and community, a combination that is the antithesis of competition. However in this economic climate charitable, educational, artistic and other types of not-for-profit organizations are struggling with declining fee and grant revenue, decreasing charitable contributions, increased operational and program costs, and increased struggle for limited new funding. In order to remain viable, nonprofits must compete. But competition doesn’t have to be aggressive, as is sometimes seen in the for profit environment. A nonprofit can compete by demonstrating value to its clients/customers in ways that distinguish it from other, similar organizations.

But if we are all performing meaningful and collaborative service in the spirit of our missions, how does one organization set itself apart from the pack?

No matter what your mission is or the types of programming you offer, I suggest there are five steps that can help a nonprofit gain a sustainable competitive advantage: 1. Hire competent employees and developing them into superstars. 2. Use organizational knowledge and skilled analysis to accurately determine what stakeholders want or need. 3. Meet emerging needs by creating innovative systems and programs. 4. Develop organizational competencies in areas that increase efficiencies. 5. Identify target outcomes and meet them to prove you are effective.

Nonprofits must compete to remain viable. It does not diminish our mission to create rare, imperfectly imitable, nonsubstitutable and valuable resources.  In fact it creates value by demonstrating our worth to the community. This form of competition is not a necessary evil; it is simply necessary.

Need for a Meatier Message

By Elaine Orr

I lived for many years in an Iowa town that had a large pork meatpacking plant (Cargill Meat Solutions), a good employer and active participant in the community.  I toured it once and took note of the cleanliness — and the cold workplace temperature.  In a later conversation about the visit, a couple employees joked that being taken through the sections that made bacon and cut large slabs of meat was one thing.  Had I gone to an area that puts together sausage, I’d have a better sense of how many diverse pieces of a hog could be put together and packed into a casing.

Communication in government is kind of like sausage.  You have a final product, but the components are incredibly diverse and you might not be impressed with all of them.

Often it’s not how to get the word out that is complicated or contentious, it’s reaching the decisions that will be crafted in a message.  Who you bring into the process, perhaps even the alliances you form in so doing, affects what you decide and how you convey it.

I just finished In the Garden of Beasts by Erik Larson, which is a well researched account of the life of U.S. Ambassador William E. Dodd and his family when he served in Berlin from 1933-37.  It seems incredible today that the U.S. and other nations took such great pains to placate Hitler and his Nazi Party.  As Larson brings various diaries, memoirs and State Department correspondence into focus, you get a clearer picture.  There is the “surely he will be ousted” component, and the “don’t do anything to imperil getting repayment on the German debt from World War I” element.  There is also a clear depiction of prejudice against Jews within the U.S., and you are left to wonder if the U.S. government would have acted faster if Hitler had continually limited the freedoms of, for example, Germans who worked in the Dresden glass industry.

All that aside — and it is incredibly important — what stands out in reading the book is how ineffectual Ambassador Dodd was in communicating with others in the Department of State and elsewhere.  Initially, he did not want to believe Hitler capable of the atrocities to follow (probably could not have contemplated them), so he talked to Hitler about the need for peace and thought they had might have similar broad goals.  However, long before others at State were willing to see the evil for what it was, Dodd became convinced.  After Roosevelt fired Dodd in 1937, he dedicated the rest of his life to conveying the truth about Nazi Germany.

Dodd marginalized his message through his reticent nature, inability to employ traditional practices within the diplomatic environment, and his constant correspondence to Washington about the need for frugality in embassy expenditures and others’ lack of interest in this important (to him) issue.  He found his voice after he left office, and you could postulate that the firing by his friend Franklin Roosevelt may have stimulated courage in a way nothing else could.

Had Dodd conveyed his opinions more forcefully, maybe he would have been fired in 1935.  We’ll never know.  However, the impression I took from the book was that if he had been able to work within the State Department mechanisms more effectively he would have been taken more seriously, and so might his message.

As public managers in 2012, most of us outside the military or law enforcement aren’t called upon to convey information that has life or death implications.  We may not even feel able to say what we think, certainly we cannot talk to the media unless directed by a very senior official.

Even so, what we say and how we say it can make a difference.  If we focus on minor points or simply spend too much time getting to the point, we risk making sausage with lots of pieces, not so much meat.  And a lot of people are turned off by it.

Teachings from a Bag of Potato Chips

While on a brief respite from our everyday world, my partner and I spent a couple of afternoons sitting outside a café drinking coffee, talking, writing, and enjoying the scenery. On the second day, I sipped strong coffee while watching an interesting scene unfold.

After throwing away her trash and gathering her belongings, a young woman left her unopened bag of potato chips on the table. I do not know if this was intentional or unintentional, but it started a pattern that was obviously purposeful. People began depositing their unopened bags of potato chips! Soon the table was nearly covered. I began to wonder if this was a local ritual of some sort, or if everyone knew something about those potato chips that I didn’t know.

As the lunch crowd thinned, I noticed an older man with a knapsack on his shoulder eyeing the bags of chips from several feet away. Slowly, with very careful steps, he approached the table and sat down. He leaned back in the chair, in a relaxed, “devil may care” position, and looked to his left and right.

Systematically, over the next 15 minutes, the chips vanished. Every time I looked up from my writing, there were fewer bags on the table. My curious eyes managed to actually see the final two bags disappear into the knapsack. With his bounty captured, the gentleman got up and brushed himself off, looked again from left to right, and continued his stroll.

Because this moving scene has stayed with me over the last few days, I have concluded that it has valuable lessons in leadership to offer:

• One individual, sharing his or her riches, initiates a call to action.
• When each person makes even the smallest gesture, a group can start a movement that positively impact someones life.
• Opportunities surround us.

And finally…

• When an unexpected opportunity presents itself proceed cautiously, but proceed.

Managing New Year’s Resolutions

This time of year is a time of reflection and rebirth. We look critically at the year we are leaving behind, and face the upcoming one with an abundance of hope and a pinch of trepidation. Some of us make resolutions, intending to change some aspect of who we are, what we do, or what we have in the year to come.

I haven’t made a resolution in 20 years. I grew tired of making promises I didn’t or couldn’t keep, and even more tired of feeling like a failure every December 31. I recognize this is not a unique phenomenon. In fact, I’ve never known anyone—not one person—to make, declare, and keep a resolution. This year, I asked a group of senior managers, “What will be your professional or organizational resolutions for the upcoming year?” In their answers were varying degrees of pessimism, resignation, and despondency. Many were afraid to commit to anything, in fear of being viewed a failure. As they shared stories of their disappointments, the truth dawned on me:  The problem isn’t that we haven’t kept our resolutions. The problem is we haven’t set goals or created viable plans.

Resolution is defined (www.dictionary.com) as the act of determining an action or course of action, a firmness of purpose; a determination. The moment we state our intention and share it with the universe we are successful. “I’m going to build a strong, cohesive team of staff members.” Done!

Having a strong cohesive team is a wonderful vision. Unfortunately, it is hard to define and even more difficult to measure. You could work diligently all year and not know when—or if!—you have succeeded. In order to have any chance of making your resolution come to life, it must be accompanied by a goal that is specific and measurable. It should also outline an action plan that helps you to stay the course. From the resolution “build a strong cohesive team”, we can develop any of several worthy goals. “The team will accomplish 90% of all assigned tasks on time.” “My team will demonstrate cooperative behavior 100% of the time.” “The team will develop at least 3 innovative ventures this year.” The action plan might include training, opportunities to build cohesion (like team meetings and lunches). Your options abound. The more detailed and realistic your action plan, the more likely you will be to achieve your goal.

So go ahead. Make those resolutions for your life and your work. The intention, in and of itself, is an achievement. Then take the time to set a goal and make a plan. By December 2012 you will be excited to wave goodbye to a fruitful year and greet the new one. Happy New Year!

Robyn-Jay Bage is the CEO of a nonprofit human service organization, and an Assistant Professor at a community college.

When Government Can’t Get Along

By Lisa Beutler

This week the California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) moved to join federal litigation challenging an Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) policy on the removal of vegetation on flood control levees.

Streams and river banks are riparian areas.  Riparian vegetation serves many functions including bank stabilization and water quality protection, food chain support, thermal cover, flood control, fish habitat, and wildlife habitat.

DFG will join plaintiffs in a pending case including Friends of the River, Defenders of Wildlife and the Center for Biological Diversity who have loudly questioned the facts leading to the Corps decision.  The Corps vegetation policy is also unpopular with California farmers and other water users.

The case challenges the Corps adoption of a national policy that requires removing virtually all trees and shrubs on federal levees.  The dispute has been brewing for several years.  DFG, along with many other local, state and federal agencies, has been in facilitated dialogue to find a resolution without success.  When asked about the move to litigation, DFG Director Charlton H. Bonham explained. “It’s unfortunate that the discussions haven’t led to a more agreeable outcome, but if adhered to, the policy will do incredible damage to California’s remaining riparian and adjacent riverine ecosystem, especially in the Central Valley.”

The breakdown highlights some classic public administration dilemmas.  Public managers are increasingly being asked to address issues in complex and stressed systems.  Agencies that were elegantly designed to be experts in delivering specific services must now consider the missions of other agencies in their decision process.  Even so, they remain directly accountable for delivering their own mission.

A second dilemma relates to a desire for standardization in policies.  In general, standardization leads to better quality control and service delivery.  From the perspective of decision makers and their publics, standardization creates fairness and predictability.  Yet, in increasingly complex systems, one size often does not fit all.   The process of managing exceptions and variances can be an administrator’s slippery slope.

In this case the Corps has previously collaborated with state and federal agencies in developing levee design approaches intended to benefit federal- and state-listed threatened and endangered species.  The new edict is not fully consistent with those past actions.

This shift is understandable.  In the aftermath of recent Midwest flooding, the Corps has been publically challenged to focus on delivery of a fail proof flood control system.  If flooding happens and the Corps has not been diligent about moving water as quickly as possible from one place to another safer place, they are equally likely to be sued by someone that has experienced flooding.

Adding to the dispute are mixed findings related to the impact of vegetation on levees and in waterways.  In general, vegetation can create maintenance problems for levees and clog waterways.  However, some studies of California levees show there are benefits or at least few or no concerns with properly managed vegetation.  One study showed that some trees assisted in strengthening the levees.   These facts, along with the benefits of vegetation to the ecosystem are what have led California to stand its ground in fighting the policy.

We do know that fixing one problem can lead to many more.  The California agencies in dispute with the Corps’ estimate the new federal policy could cost up to $7.5 billion and divert funds away from more significant levee deficiencies like seepage and erosion.

Legally, the most likely way to resolve the dispute will be through the court system.  Until public administrators are able to find ways to resolve the dilemmas of single mission agencies managing complex issues and ways to balance standardization with the need for exceptions, the courts will be the referee of last resort.  We need to find a better way.

Winter is Coming

By Robyn Bage

In the wake of the East Coast’s Hurricane Irene, nonprofit administrators are faced with many dilemmas to resolve:  Managing building and equipment damage, maintaining normal operations, and addressing a surge of new client and community needs, to name a few. The ethical dilemmas that have arisen are among the most difficult to sort out. One in particular reminds me of a similar dilemma brought about by a more common (and upcoming!) occurrence in the North East—snow storms: Balancing the needs of our clients with the needs of the staff who serve them.

Snow storms in the northeast can behave in unpredictable ways.  You  may end up shoveling feet when inches were predicted. Similarly, you might expect a blizzard and celebrate just a dusting in the driveway.  The hype is contagious. “It’s going to be a big one!” echoes through the hallways. Employees speculate, often days in advance, if we are going to close. Or open late. Or end the business day early. You can almost hear them whisper in agitation, “Isn’t SOMETHING going to happen?”

A veteran of nonprofit operations, I firmly believe we have an obligation to remain open. Our clients and our communities rely on us to be there for them. It is a sacred trust. We also have contractual and legal commitments to uphold. On the other hand, I also firmly believe we have an obligation to our employees.  Asking them to get to work in bad weather conditions seems uncaring and perhaps imprudent. Hence the ethical dilemma:  In the face of bad weather do we close and ask folks to brave the weather and come to work, or do we remain open to serve clients?

Typical decision-making perspectives, as usual, do not provide easy ways to resolve this quandary.  F or example, from a legal/justice perspective, as long as we meet our contractual obligations it’s a coin toss. The utilitarian perspective (“the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few”) leaves someone in jeopardy. The “every man for himself” standpoint of the individualism approach is no way to successfully run a business. (Imagine the difficulty operating if you have no idea who will come to work—or if anyone will come!) It can also leave employees without guidance or support.

In the final analysis it comes down to making sound, defendable decisions that you can live with, decisions that don’t make you queasy in hindsight. For me, it means that when the roads are impassable and the danger is clear and pervasive for staff and clients, the business is closed. Otherwise, I put my faith in my employees. If individual employees believe they cannot make it safely to work, they can choose to stay home and use their benefit time. (We offer generous benefit time for this and other reasons.) I find that this trust empowers employees to make decisions in their best interest while assuring that clients are served— even in 24-hr programs.

I wonder, what guides your inclement weather decisions?

My wish for you is that you and yours weathered the recent storm in good spirits and good health, or better yet, avoided Irene altogether.  Let us take this opportunity to  plan for events that we will all face in upcoming seasons of inclement weather. After all, with due respect to George R.R. Martin, “winter is coming.”

Ms. Bage is a nonprofit CEO and Assistant Professor in a Community College.

SECoPA in New Orleans

New Orleans is a city rich with history and tradition. In recent years, its history has also been comingled with tragedy and disaster.  Yet, even these challenges in the story of New Orleans have not reduced the city’s magnificence. From its experience with Hurricane Katrina to the response to the BP oil spill, New Orleans provides an interesting case study for public management.

It’s the reason why New Orleans is the site for the Southeastern Conference on Public Management (SECoPA) in September. The city and surrounding area has seen its fair share of public management challenges, from federal and local response to Hurricane Katrina to the BP oil spill. The weeklong conference will focus on the various areas of public administration and management under the theme “Building Trust and Confidence in the Profession of Public Administration.”

Both those who watched via television the horror Hurricane Katrina wreaked on New Orleans and those who experienced its impact personally – like many ASPA members in the southeast- the importance of skilled public administrators and effective public management skills and structures during disaster rings loud and clear.

As Isaac Lozado pointed out, following Katrina, New Orleans followed a top-down government system that placed the federal government with the most control. A system that he contends is ‘suitable’ and common.

As an American city, New Orleans is equally subject to the top-down, federal, state, and local government hierarchy that typifies all other cities in the US. Hence, as proven by example from a plethora of other cities, such a chain-of-order is completely suitable for the city and will be more than sufficient to address the needs of a city-wide rehabilitation.

However, New Orleans is different.

John Keifer, SECoPA conference chair and professor at University of New Orleans noted in his article ‘Learning from Katrina: Transboundary Disasters and Intergovernmental Challenges’ that New Orleans has historically struggled with inter and intra governmental relationships.

Intergovernmental failures were attributed to a wide range of causes, from misunderstanding and misinterpretation of roles, responsibilities and plans to a long history of mistrust among local, state andfederal governments. … It is these two conditions, intergovernmental (and intragovernmental) misunderstanding and misinterpretation of roles and responsibilities, and lack of multiple opportunities to practice and refine response and recovery, that will most seriously impact an effective response to transboundary crisis, particularly a biological event.

And with New Orleans’ public administration history and experience, it seems only appropriate that SECoPA is returning to New Orleans since 1987. The city is in the midst of rebuilding and some stages of recovery still.

At this stage, the city is ripe with examples for observation in the PA petri dish. ASPA members heard the real-life experience of Admiral Thad W. Allen, former Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard, who was selected by President Obama to head recovery after Katrina and the federal response to the oil spill.

Hear what Admiral Allen told ASPA members at the 2011 Annual Conference.

Now, SECoPA will take it further. The SECoPA conference is bringing together practitioners, scholars, and students to examine and learn best practices related to public administration. The goal: to build a stronger and improved network of public managers, both on the theoretical and practical side.

Join SECoPA in New Orleans and learn more about strengthening the public image of public administration. And if you are an administrator, learn how you can improve your skills to better serve the public.