Interviews with a number of City and County officials and staff identified a variety of concerns about
ASD/privatization including:oversimplified views and misperceptions concerning ASD/privatization within
government itself (e.g., presumption of private-sector inadequacy); political impediments (e.g., employee
opposition); market problems (e.g., lack of suppliers); legal/regulatory restrictions; administrative/bureaucratic
obstacles; and organized opposition.
Most of these concerns can be addressed through education, strong leadership, and creative policy
making. In order to overcome oversimplified views and misperceptions, some reluctant government managers
and policy makers, for instance, must be educated about ASD/privatization and encouraged to adopt a more
balanced, realistic, view of the private sector and its capabilities. Knowledgeable managers and policy makers
can then develop creative approaches to reducing political impediments. They can, for example, help overcome
employee opposition by fostering the formation of employee-owned firms to continue providing public
services.
Informed public managers and policy makers can also improve the suppliers market by developing
creative ways to nurture competition and the availability of private providers of public services. They can, for
example, divide their jurisdictions into smaller (but economically viable) service districts before contracting out
certain services, thus encouraging both small business and competition at the same time.
Creative measures may also be used to help challenge legal restrictions. One such measure would be to
publish estimates of the additional cost of delivering services resulting from state or federal restrictions on
contracting out.
Perceptive managers and policy makers can overcome administrative/bureaucratic obstacles by making a
“commitment to ASD/privatization” a major criterion for the promotion and selection of high-level
administrators. And these managers and policy makers can help to reduce organized political opposition by
recognizing the legitimate concerns of unions and service beneficiaries and, to the extent possible, taking their
concerns into account in applying ASD/privatization.
