Educating Public Managers and Policy Analysts in an Era of Informatics

  • Christopher KolibaEmail author
  • Asim Zia
Part of the Public Administration and Information Technology book series (PAIT, volume 10)


In this chapter, two ideal types of practitioners who may use or create policy informatics projects, programs, or platforms are introduced: the policy informatics-savvy public manager and the policy informatics analyst. Drawing from our experiences in teaching an informatics-friendly graduate curriculum, we discuss the range of learning competencies needed for traditional public managers and policy informatics-oriented analysts to thrive in an era of informatics. The chapter begins by describing the two different types of students who are, or can be touched by, policy informatics-friendly competencies, skills, and attitudes. Competencies ranging from those who may be users of policy informatics and sponsors of policy informatics projects and programs to those analysts designing and executing policy informatics projects and programs will be addressed. The chapter concludes with an illustration of how one Master of Public Administration (MPA) program with a policy informatics-friendly mission, a core curriculum that touches on policy informatics applications, and a series of program electives that allows students to develop analysis and modeling skills, designates its informatics-oriented competencies.


Strategic Management Public Manager Core Curriculum Policy Analyst Governance Network 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Argyis C, Schön DA (1996) Organizational learning II: theory, method, and practice. Addison-Wesley, ReadingGoogle Scholar
  2. Bryson J (2011) Strategic planning for public and nonprofit organizations: a guide to strengthening and sustaining organizational achievement. Jossey-Bass, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  3. Caiden N (1981) Public budgeting and finance. Blackwell, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Castle J (2014) Visualizing natural gas industry contributions in Pennsylvania Government, PA 317 final class projectGoogle Scholar
  5. Desouza KC (2014) Realizing the promise of big data: implementing big data projects. IBM Center for the Business of Government, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  6. Endsley MR (1995) Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Hum Fact 37(1):32–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fernandez L (2013) An ESRD system dynamics population model for the United States. Final project for PA 308Google Scholar
  8. Hur Y, Hackbart M (2009) MPA vs. MPP: a distinction without a difference? J Public Aff Educ 15(4):397–424Google Scholar
  9. Katz D, Khan R (1978) The social psychology of organizations. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Kingdon J (1984) Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. Harper Collins, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Koliba C, Zia A (2013) Complex systems modeling in public administration and policy studies: challenges and opportunities for a meta-theoretical research program. In: Gerrits L, Marks PK (eds) COMPACT I: public administration in complexity. Emergent, Litchfield ParkGoogle Scholar
  12. Koliba C, Meek J, Zia A (2010) Governance networks in public administration and public policy. CRC, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  13. Koliba C, Zia A, Lee B (2011) Governance informatics: utilizing computer simulation models to manage complex governance networks. Innov J Innov Publ Sect 16(1):1–26 (Article 3). (
  14. Korton DC (2001) The management of social transformation. In: Stivers C (ed) Democracy, bureaucracy, and the study of administration. Westview, Boulder, pp 476–497Google Scholar
  15. Loorbach D (2007) Transition management: new modes of governance for sustainable development. International Books, UltrechtGoogle Scholar
  16. Mergel I (2013) Social media adoption and resulting tactics in the U.S. federal government. Gov Inf Quart 30(2):123–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Moynihan DP (2008) The dynamics of performance management: constructing information and reform. Georgetown University Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  18. O’Leary R, Bingham L (eds) (2009) The collaborative public manager: new ideas for the twenty-first century. Georgetown University Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  19. Patton M (2008) Utilization-focused evaluation. Sage, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. Schick A (1966) The road to PPB: the stages of budget reform. Public Admin Rev 26(4):243–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Senge PM (1990) The fifth discipline: the art and practice of the learning organization. Doubleday Currency, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. Stacey RD (2001) Complex responsive processes in organizations: learning and knowledge creation. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  23. Willoughby WF (1918) The movement of budgetary reform in the states. D. Appleton, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of VermontBurlingtonUSA
  2. 2.University of VermontBurlingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations