Why an MPA? (Part I)

“You’ll never convince me this is the only route to the city manager’s chair. I’d strongly encourage other degrees and alternative work experiences. It’s a dynamic and changing world – the profession must change with it.”
Troy Body—City Administrator

Why indeed? My answer is simple. True, it is not the only route to the city manager’s chair, but it should be the main route. A Master of Public Administration degree, an MPA if you will, should lay out all the working parts, the required areas of knowledge, and the specific skill sets needed to be an effective local government CEO. No other field of study is theoretically, or specifically, geared to do so. On the surface, some graduate programs of public administration are better at this preparation than others. Regardless, the blunt LinkedIn post above drew plenty of support, mostly from current or aspiring chief executives. Those without an MPA tended to endorse the idea that there are many routes to the corner office. Those with the degree generally defended the traditional public administration path, while one commenter insisted that no college education at all is necessary to manage a local government agency. Whether one agrees or disagrees about the value of an MPA in city management, all three positions—including the anti-meritocratic one—reflect different ideas about the educational foundation needed to manage the complexities of city, county, and regional government.

The Generalists
Over the past few decades, generalists and specialists have reached the executive desk, primarily from the inside of local government. They walked through the front door, especially the generalists with minimal experience, sporting a recently minted MPA. They gained entry as interns or first year administrative analysts. Placement was either in a department or the office of the CEO. For years, these individuals have been the target audience for the majority of MPA programs with a focus on local government management.

The Specialists
With all due respect for the generalists, most of local government’s professional white-collar workforce consists of specialists who entered the field with only undergraduate degrees. This group includes urban planners, civil engineers, accountants, human resources analysts, housing managers, grants coordinators, economic development specialists, social workers, utility supervisors, transportation experts, public relations officers, health and human services staff, city clerks, building officials, police lieutenants, fire captains, IT managers, street superintendents, librarians, and parks and recreation coordinators. For them, an MPA was usually not required for entry, though it often became important later for competitive promotion. With an MPA—and sometimes an MBA—many advanced to department director roles or even the executive office. They are the ones that brought varied degrees and professional experience, and their success depended in part on keeping pace with a changing environment. That is the value of coming up through the ranks.

The Outsiders
Still, there is a cadre from outside government. Seemingly more prevalent in smaller municipalities, they come with professional backgrounds in business, non-profits, association management, and of course, the military. Except for the latter, many come with little or no knowledge of the workings of government. They are poster boards for running government like a business. After all, it is the foundational causation for the very creation of the city management profession in the first place. It is a basic and understandable premise, one that has been bolstered by the private sector applications of entrepreneurialism, efficiency, and improved customer service. Ironically, it has been the age of the “New Public Management” where business like applications and methods have been at the very center of MPA curricula.

The “Why Wait” Generation
From this academic approach, there is an increasing number from the latest generations of public servants that believe their graduate degrees alone provide sufficient evidence of their ability to directly manage small town America. It’s reflective of a growing and popular trend of “Why wait?” Why spend years climbing the ladder in a larger agency when one can begin at the top? This idea has been promoted by more than one self-appointed social media influencer who encourage candidates to pursue senior-level roles in the nation’s smallest governmental agencies. From this point of view, experience holds almost no value.

The Big and the Small
For the newer entrant, this logic seems plausible since more than 16,000 of the nation’s 19,000-plus incorporated communities have populations under 10,000. For would be local government CEOs, it’s where the jobs are. It’s a career seeking migration that is not new. What is new, is an attitude of almost entitled impatience. It is magnified by the notion that there is no real difference in managing the small and the big. It’s just a matter of how many zeros comprise the budget with little variation in the expectations and attitudes of the elected bodies regardless of size. It’s all relative, right? Besides, as the CEO of a smaller organization one must wear multiple hats, be hands-on, and be a visible face in the community. Much of this is true. However, this belief fails to appreciate the heterogeneity, complexities, diversities, and the multiple networks interwoven into the larger urban fabric. Of these, success can be equally dependent upon process as well as product. It requires an advanced set of skills that may or not be basic to smaller organizations. Just the sheer number of players in the decision-making process makes a difference.

Knowing the Difference
Regardless, the jargon is the same. The laws are the same. The core standards of public service delivery may be the same. The environments are similar but, not the same. Neither are learned over night. Experience in one does not necessarily translate well in the other. Career failure going to and from either direction is not uncommon. Professionals from either venue truly need to understand the difference. An education of these realities needs to start in the MPA classroom. This knowledge is refined by experience. It could be argued that this is especially true in smaller agencies across the country, where many—and certainly not all—arrive with limited local government experience. Having served only briefly at the lower and middle levels of larger agencies, their direct managerial experience may be described as minimal at best. On the flip side, higher level professionals going from big to small may have their own vulnerabilities. Many value processes over product. They are reliant on a level of resources that smaller governmental entities may not possess. Even their relations with the public may be problematic coming from systems where the actual interface is filtered if not selective.

Moving from a larger community to a smaller one used to be about gaining experience—learning the ins-and-outs of where the buck stops. Yet, many a career master plan included a return flight to the urban environment. Some did. Others discovered an unexpected long-term home. As most of us come to realize, it’s about fit. That epiphany is not realized in the classroom.

The MPA and the Need for Executive Pathways
Most MPA programs are not designed as executive pathways. Their students are typically entry-level professionals or early-career public servants, and the curriculum generally reflects that audience. As a result, senior and executive management often receive limited attention. Usually, this education is left to the professional organizations. Many programs remain broad and general, grounded in traditional, if not aging core requirements, rather than the practical demands of executive leadership. Courses in research methods and statistics still play a role for the technical necessities of entry and mid-level personnel or for some programs, future academics. It is of questionable value later in one’s executive career. To be clear, I am not saying this is true of every MPA program. But as a rule, most are not built to serve as direct pipelines to executive leadership. That distinction matters.

Another Approach to Local Government Management
After a near 40-year career, all of this got me to thinking. If I were to create an MPA curriculum today, one that is specific to local government executive management, what would be its composition? I have reviewed several curriculums. I have participated in many a conversation with both practitioners and academics alike as to content, form, and structure. I have participated in NASPAA’s reaccreditation process of numerous programs and equally so, participated in debates as to the actual value of an MPA at the table of ICMA’s Advisory Board for Graduate Education. As such, I do have an outline. I’m still working on the supporting narrative, methods of delivery, and the actual course descriptions. Fortunately, there are components of existing programs that provide a strong foundation.

My Intent
Maybe my suggestions could convince Mr. Body, and those with similar backgrounds, that an MPA really should be the primary pathway to the top floor. How one views one’s role, responsibilities, and his/her relationship with the greater polity are the real determinants. However, and more importantly, what needs to change are the ego centric monologues that come from both our professional associations and academia itself. They need to be dialogs for true change to occur. The challenge is breaking down the vertical and horizontal silos of each. Is there really a willingness to do so? Probably not but I’m taking a stab at it anyway.

About the Author:
Stephen G. Harding, MPA, is an Instructor of Comparative Politics and Political History with the University of California Riverside, Osher Lifelong Learning Institute. He is a retired city manager and a former policy, financial, economic development, and management advisor to local and regional government. He is a former instructor of global metropolitan policies in the Master of Public Policy and Administration (MPPA) program at Northwestern University and in the Master of Public Affairs and Administration Programs (MPA) at the University of La Verne and California State University, Northridge.

He is a Distinguished Alum of the Graduate Center for Public Policy and Administration at California State University, Long Beach. He has served as a member of the International City/County Management Association (ICMA) Advisory Board for Graduate Education and the Network of Schools of Public Policy, Affairs, and Administration (NASPAA) in the accreditation and reaccreditation of graduate programs of public administration.

He is past Member of the Board of Directors of the Wolfgang Wolff Foundation, dedicated to preserving the art, textile designs, and life history of Wolfgang Wolff, an exile of Nazi Germany.