Unlike most other writing work done thus far, this article will provide brief summaries of several essays on issues related to the study of public management. Although it is possible to argue that the ideas and theories presented in these texts are true or false, the aim of this article will be to take a simple approach and focus on the thoughts presented that are still relevant in the modern practice of psychology. public management. However, it is first important to emphasize that, even today, there is no global vision to evaluate or measure the success of public managers. This is partly due to the different ways in which agencies manage themselves, such as whether or not they choose to follow the National Performance Review (NRP) response or a total quality management method ( TQM). Another problem is that it is often the case today that a management policy that has been implemented and successfully tested for the private sector is either grafted on or imposed on the management policies of a public enterprise. The problem this raises is that, according to the agency, there is no clear idea of ​​who the “customers” are, nor what “product” the public agency is trying to appease. Meanwhile, the management theories imposed on them are based on quantifiable scrutiny as to whether they are successful or not. Simply put, there is no simple or standard way for researchers in the field of public administration to clearly differentiate successful management styles from one public administrator to another. In fact, research into this problem is precisely what our first author calls for in his essay. Graham T. Allison attempts this with his article......middle of the article......which proves useful as a guide. measured against private sector values. Instead, Moore suggests that research into a cost-effectiveness approach could be a solution to this problem (1995, p 553). All of these essays lead to the same major question regarding the measurement of successful public management style, based on an unsuccessful style. In one form or another, Moore and Moe both called for research aimed at finding a standard for public sector analysis. By any standard of analysis, the effects of politics on its creation cannot be ignored. If, as Woodrow Wilson asserts, this is true, and the goal of these public administrators is to find the most cost-effective and efficient method of implementing policies of a political nature; so why not come up with a measure of effectiveness and profitability that would be used to pass judgment on them?