Trying to Make Sense of the Current Era

The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ASPA as an organization.

By Michael R. Ford
April 10, 2026

How will the current era in public administration (PA) be taught to future students? What lessons will future PA leaders take from current events? I think about this often when reviewing the history of our field with new MPA students. There are several, probably infinite, ways to interpret the current era, each with its strengths and weaknesses.

Will the current era be defined by the shock of a global pandemic? For both practitioners and academics, the legacy of COVID cannot be escaped. The need for a coordinated global response to a health crisis tested our institutions at all levels of government. It exposed critical communication gaps, produced successes like the rapid development of vaccines and brought growing distrust in governing institutions to the surface in a way that will linger for years. As a mentor of mine put it, everything about governance is different after COVID.

However, defining the current era through the lens of COVID and its aftermath ignores the fact that many of the issues exposed during the pandemic were already building. Most prominently, the backsliding of democratic institutions and norms in the United States and elsewhere began prior to the pandemic. COVID brought many underlying issues to the surface. Perhaps our current era is better understood through the lens of declining public trust in institutions and in one another. Each global shock, whether COVID, war or economic crises, highlights the consequences of this growing distrust.

Another perspective ties this era of distrust to changes in the public square, specifically the rise of social media and the decline of legacy media. A field built on fact and expertise is undermined when there is little agreement on what is true and when individuals consume highly tailored media shaped by cultural biases and policy preferences. Bluntly, how does our field pursue the common good when there is no shared foundation of truth? Many longstanding values of PA appear increasingly incompatible with a post-truth environment.

One could also view the current moment through the lens of federalism. The era of cooperation feels distant as federal authority, often exercised through executive action, shifts power away from state and local governments. A notable example is the deployment of federal immigration officers to localities without the cooperation of state and local authorities. Accountability, a core tenet of PA, becomes difficult to operationalize when it is unclear who holds authority. The coming years will be crucial in determining whether these shifts are temporary or represent a new normal.

No doubt readers could identify many other lenses through which to view this moment. My preferred interpretation is the triumph of political values over administrative values. In previous columns, I described politics as a way of translating the values of a community into governing strategy. Ideally, politics improves the guidance provided to public employees carrying out the work of government. Political values like winning, representation and power have always mattered, but traditionally supported administrative values such as efficiency, equity and effectiveness. While not as rigid as the politics-administration dichotomy, this distinction underscores that politics and administration serve different purposes.

However, politics has increasingly become an end in itself. Political considerations now dominate federal positions long considered independent. Even the basic task of keeping the federal government open is subject to political posturing. At the local level, political parties are more active in nonpartisan elections, advancing ideological goals over operational priorities. At a time when politics is particularly dysfunctional, it is also minimizing the role of public administrators.

This framing is admittedly negative, but it also points toward a path forward. In sports, a winning team cures many problems. In PA, winning means competence and improved public performance. Those training the next generation of public sector leaders must prepare them to operate effectively within this environment and place them in positions where they can make a positive impact. Demonstrating a commitment to the core values of administration can serve as a counterbalance to a dominant and often dysfunctional political environment.

---

Author: Michael R. Ford is a professor of public administration at the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh, where he teaches graduate courses in budgeting and research methods. He frequently publishes on the topics of public and nonprofit board governance. He also serves as the Director for the Whitburn Center for Governance and Policy Research, and as an elected member of the Oshkosh Area School District Board.  

 

(5 votes, average: 4.80 out of 5)
Loading...