New Frontiers of Management Education in Public Administration. Leadership, Administrative Capacity, and Institutional Transformation RIPM – Vol. 9 – nos. 1 and 2 | 2026
RIPM – Vol. 9 – nos. 1 and 2 | 2026
Deadline for Submission: October 30, 2026
Special Focus Overview
The Special Focus is the traditional in-depth thematic section of the Rivista Italiana di Public Management (RIPM). The thematic focus has a fundamental place in the journal because it aims to determine the focus of attention on a current topic, necessary to promote reflection and capable of sparking debate among scholars on public management issues.
The Special Focus section of RIPM aims to confirm one of the journal’s founding principles: to create an arena for reflection to direct, on a specific area, the most innovative research and paradigmatic representation with a multidisciplinary approach. Indeed, one of RIPM’s distinctive features is its predictive perspective, aimed at identifying current and paradigmatic lines of research and analyzing them from a diverse perspective, through the convergence of a wide variety of scientific research and analytical approaches, including managerial, economic, legal, political, philosophical, sociological, and anthropological ones.
Special Focus Objectives
In recent years, management training has become a strategic component of public administration modernization policies. The digitalization of processes, the spread of artificial intelligence, the ecological and digital transitions, the growing complexity of policies, and the succession of systemic crises have redefined the context in which public managers and officials operate. In this scenario, the quality of administrative action depends not only on institutional structures and regulatory reforms, but also on the ability of public management to translate political directions, resources, technologies, and social expectations into decisions, services, and outcomes capable of generating public value.
Public managers are no longer solely responsible for ensuring the proper functioning of the administrative system and compliance with the principles of legality, impartiality, and transparency. They must interpret uncertain contexts, coordinate institutional networks, lead people and organizations, integrate legal, economic, organizational, and technological knowledge, use data in decision-making processes, and build relationships with multiple stakeholders. The exercise of managerial functions therefore requires the ability to envision, decide, collaborate, and implement, as well as a full awareness of the responsibilities inherent in public action.
The specific nature of the public sector makes this development particularly challenging. Managers operate within systems of multiple responsibilities and must reconcile efficiency, quality of services, equity, sustainability, and protection of the general interest. Their actions also take place within the context of political direction and managerial autonomy, in organizations where the legitimacy of decisions is as important as the ability to implement them. Management training must therefore support not only the effectiveness of action, but also the judgment needed to reconcile potentially divergent values, constraints, and interests.
This evolution has also changed the way public management interprets training. Alongside the traditional themes of efficiency, performance, and administrative organization, international debate increasingly emphasizes public leadership, organizational learning, administrative capacity, and the production of public value. Management training cannot therefore be reduced to professional development or the transfer of specialized knowledge. It constitutes one of the infrastructures through which public administrations develop strategic capabilities, support organizational adaptation, and prepare management to govern transformation processes.
The centrality of this topic is not yet fully reflected in research. A significant portion of the literature has focused on human resource management policies, professional skills, or digital transformation, while the design of management training policies, their effects on organizational behaviour, and their contribution to the quality of public decisions remain less explored. Furthermore, knowledge of the mechanisms through which individual training can translate into organizational learning, performance improvement, and strengthening institutional capacity remains limited.
Observing training as public policy therefore implies broadening the unit of analysis. It is not enough to consider the single training course or the system.
Participating individual: it is necessary to examine the governance of training systems, the selection of recipients, the relationship with the institution’s strategies, the support of top management, the opportunities to apply what has been learned, and the continuity of training programs. The quality of training depends on the coherence between these elements and their ability to produce effects that go beyond the individual level.
This raises important questions for the scientific community and for public administrations. What managerial skills will be needed in the next decade? How should training programs evolve to support more complex and interdependent decision-making processes? Which models are most effective in developing public leadership? How can we evaluate the effects of training not only on individual knowledge, but also on managerial behaviour, organizational performance, and public value?
Starting from these questions, the Special Focus “New Frontiers of Management Training in Public Administrations: Leadership, Administrative Capacity, and Institutional Transformation” aims to promote a scholarly reflection on management training as a lever for the development of public management. The goal is not to offer a survey of existing initiatives, but to foster theoretical, empirical, and comparative contributions capable of analyzing the purposes, models, methodologies, and impacts of training, connecting them to the transformations that are redefining the role of public administrations.
A new framework for management training: from international strategies to national policies
The growing focus on management training is not unique to Italy. In major administrative systems, the development of leadership and managerial skills is increasingly considered a prerequisite for institutional quality. International organizations emphasize that resilient, innovative, and citizen-focused administrations require systematic policies for lifelong learning, strategic skills management, and public management development.
This perspective is reflected in the Recommendation on public service leadership and capability of the Organization for economic cooperation and development (Oecd), which calls on states to build public services guided by capable, responsible, and future-oriented leadership. Government at a Glance reports also link the quality of policies to administrations’ ability to attract, develop, and retain adequate professional skills to address rapid and multidimensional transformations. Management training thus takes on a role that affects not only individual development but also the overall capacity of institutions to design and implement effective public policies.
A similar orientation emerges in European Union strategies. ComPAct – Enhancing the European administrative space identifies skills development, management training, professional mobility, and the sharing of practices as tools for strengthening member States’ administrative capacity. The european skills Agenda, the Digital decade program, and initiatives dedicated to the digital transformation of the public sector attribute an enabling role to training with respect to the digital, ecological, and administrative transitions.
In Italy, the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (Nrrp) has accelerated attention to administrative capacity and highlighted the need for planning, implementation, coordination, and control skills. The most recent directives from the Minister for public administration have further strengthened this approach, linking training to the development of human capital, performance, leadership, and the development of digital and managerial skills. Within this framework, the Syllabus portal constitutes a national infrastructure for lifelong learning, while organizational planning tools foster a closer connection between needs, training, performance, and professional development.
These guidelines also assign more explicit responsibility to public managers. Training planning tends to become part of the management cycle and not a separate activity, entrusted exclusively to personnel departments. This requires managers and supervisors to understand needs, choose priorities consistent with the organization’s objectives, create favorable conditions for learning, and verify the effective use of developed skills. In this sense, managerial training becomes both the object and the tool of managerial responsibility.
The new policy framework therefore marks the transition from episodic training, often predominantly regulated moves toward a more structural and integrated approach. However, the introduction of quantitative standards, digital platforms, and mandatory training does not, in itself, guarantee the development of managerial skills. What remains to be understood are the actual quality of the programs, their consistency with organizational needs, and their ability to produce observable changes in behaviours, decision-making processes, and administrative outcomes.
This Special Focus fits into this gap between policy developments and the availability of scientific evidence. The regulatory framework offers significant impetus, but requires analyses capable of assessing its implementation, effects, and effectiveness. It is therefore necessary to move beyond a purely prescriptive interpretation of management training and critically investigate its governance, content, methodologies, and impacts, including through comparisons across countries, levels of government, and public sectors.
Rethinking management training: A new agenda for public management
Transformations in public administrations require rethinking not only the content of training, but its very meaning. The issue is no longer simply defining what knowledge to transfer to public sector leadership, but rather understanding the public management skills institutions must develop to govern complex systems, coordinate interdependent actors, and make decisions under conditions of uncertainty.
For a long time, management training has been primarily focused on regulatory updates and the acquisition of technical and specialized knowledge. These dimensions remain essential, but they are not sufficient. The quality of public decisions increasingly depends on the ability to integrate different skills, understand the context, manage people and conflicts, transform strategic objectives into actionable programs, and evaluate the effects of choices. Training is therefore called upon to develop transversal managerial skills, without separating them from institutional specificities and the responsibilities inherent in the public sector.
The spread of collaborative governance, the use of interinstitutional networks, stakeholder engagement, and the management of complex programs are changing the profile required of public managers. The ability to manage hierarchical structures is accompanied by the ability to negotiate, coordinate, facilitate, and build trust. Public sector leadership must combine a results-oriented approach, institutional accountability, a focus on people, and the ability to drive change. Research is therefore called upon to determine which training programs are truly capable of producing such outcomes and in which organizational contexts.
The concept of managerial learning takes on particular importance in this context. Managerial learning is not simply the act of attending courses, but encompasses the set of experiences through which managers and leaders develop analytical, decision-making, collaboration, and innovation skills throughout the entire professional lifecycle. Formal programs, project work, mentoring, coaching, mobility, communities of practice, and peer learning can contribute to the same development process. The key question becomes how these tools are integrated with the organization’s needs, evaluation systems, career paths, and management’s strategic priorities.
This approach shifts the focus from the quantity of training to the quality of the learning experience. Standardized programs can ensure broad participation and accessibility, but they do not always address different issues, roles, and levels of responsibility. Personalization, however, must not result in fragmentation of offerings: it requires training architectures capable of combining a common foundation of values and skills with modules connected to organizational contexts and participants’ concrete challenges.
A first area of research concerns the relationship between managerial training and the quality of public decisions. Available evidence on the impact of training on decision-making processes, implementation capacity, and complexity management remains fragmented. It is necessary to understand whether and through what mechanisms training programs change the way managers define problems, use data and evidence, evaluate risks and alternatives, coordinate structures, and hold decisions accountable.
A second area concerns the development of public leadership. Administrations need leaders capable of balancing legality and results, continuity and innovation, individual responsibility and collaboration. Training can support this development only if it transcends exclusively transmission models and uses methodologies consistent with the situations managers are called upon to address.
Simulations, action learning, case studies, workshops, structured feedback, and on-the-job learning are therefore particularly important, but their effectiveness requires rigorous evaluation.
Crisis and uncertainty management make this need even more evident. Health emergencies, environmental risks, financial pressures, and technological disruptions require managers capable of making timely decisions with incomplete information, while maintaining accountability, proportionality, and transparency. Training can develop these skills through scenarios, simulations, and case studies, provided that the activities are integrated with risk management, business continuity, and post-crisis learning systems.
Digital transformation opens a third field of research. Ai, automation, platforms, and the widespread use of data are transforming administrative and decision-making processes. The training challenge lies not only in acquiring technical skills, but also in preparing managers capable of understanding the organizational, ethical, and institutional implications of technologies, communicating with specialists, overseeing data quality and security, and ensuring that innovation remains consistent with legality, transparency, accountability, and the protection of the public interest.
Digitalization is also transforming training tools and environments. Platforms, adaptive systems, and artificial intelligence applications can broaden access, personalize learning paths, and support learning monitoring. Their use, however, raises issues related to content quality, data protection, system transparency, and the risk of reducing managerial development to a sequence of individual modules. Research must therefore consider educational innovation, technological governance, and the relational dimension of learning.
A fourth area concerns the evaluation of the effects of training. Hours delivered, participation rates, and satisfaction describe the activity but do not demonstrate the change produced. Research must develop models capable of linking training to the evolution of managerial skills, organizational behaviour, process quality, and outcomes. This requires longitudinal designs, mixed methods, indicators consistent with program objectives, and attention to organizational factors that can facilitate or impede the transfer of learning to the workplace.
Evaluation should also distinguish between learning, transfer, and impact. Acquiring knowledge does not automatically imply behavioural change, just as individual change does not necessarily produce organizational results. Culture, incentives, autonomy, leadership quality, and availability of resources influence the ability to apply what has been learned. Analyzing these conditions is essential to avoid inappropriate attributions and to design evidence-based training policies.
Management training in public institutions also plays a key role in strategies for attracting and developing people. Credible growth opportunities, development paths, and leadership quality impact administrations’ ability to attract and retain qualified professionals. Training can contribute to engagement and organizational well-being, but its effectiveness depends on consistency with management practices, recognition systems, and opportunities for professional accountability.
A comparative perspective can help understand how institutions, administrative cultures, and career systems influence these relationships. Exchange programs, networks between administrative schools, and international programs can foster policy learning, but the transfer of models requires attention to the legal, organizational, and professional specificities of different contexts. The internationalization of education is therefore important not simply as exposure to foreign experiences, but as a critical ability to compare, adapt, and evaluate different practices.
Taken together, these themes highlight the need to move beyond an episodic conception of education and build managerial learning ecosystems. Within these ecosystems, training activities, professional experiences, learning networks, digital tools, assessment, and career development all contribute to strengthening management and the organization. This Special Focus aims to critically analyze this evolution, without proposing a single prescriptive model, but by promoting evidence and perspectives capable of explaining which policies and practices work, for whom, and under what conditions.
Special Focus research agenda
The Special Focus invites contributions that combine theoretical rigor, empirical evidence, and relevant implications for public policies and the management of public organizations.
Institutional verticalization
National and comparative analyses are encouraged, covering different levels of government, sectors, and administrative systems. The following list is not exhaustive, but identifies the areas in which RIPM intends to foster debate.
- Management education policies and institutional capacity
Evolution of national and international policies; governance of education systems; role of business schools, universities, and other institutions; integration of training, organizational needs, performance, and professional development; implementation and evaluation of public education reforms. - Public leadership and management development
Leadership models in contemporary administrations; senior and middle management development; managerial learning and learning throughout the career cycle; collaborative, ethical, and adaptive leadership; training for multilevel governance, network coordination, and crisis management. - Management education, data, and digital transformation
Managerial skills needed to manage data, platforms, automation, and artificial intelligence; digital leadership; organizational and ethical impacts of technologies; Designing training programs for responsible, transparent, and evidence-based public decision-making. - Training, performance, and public value
Evaluating the effects of training; the relationship between learning, managerial behaviour, organizational performance, and service quality; indicators and measurement models; conditions that foster the transfer of learning to the workplace; the contribution of training to the creation of public value. - Management learning methodologies and environments
Action learning, simulations, project work, coaching, mentoring, communities of practice, peer learning, and mobility; digital and blended learning; curriculum personalization; use of artificial intelligence in training processes; integration of formal, informal, and experiential learning. - Attraction, development, and the future of public management
Training as a lever for attractiveness, engagement, and retention; career and talent development; organizational well-being; curriculum internationalization; managerial capabilities for sustainability, uncertainty, and the institutional transformations of the next decade.
The Special Focus welcomes theoretical and conceptual articles, quantitative and qualitative empirical studies, comparative analyses, case studies, and methodological contributions. Papers that clearly explain their contribution to public management and their implications for the design, implementation, or evaluation of management training policies are particularly welcome.
RIPM thus aims to promote international scholarly discussion on a topic destined to increasingly impact the quality of administration. Rethinking management training means questioning how institutions develop the capacity to manage complexity, responsibly use emerging technologies, lead people and organizations, and transform learning into decisions and outcomes of public value.
How to submit a paper
Authors wishing to participate in the Call for Papers – Special Focus – must submit their paper, citing the code (RIPM – Vol. 9 – nos. 1 and 2 | 2026 Special Focus), according to the editorial guidelines, to the following email address: editors@rivistaitalianadipublicmanagement.it
The deadline for submission is October 30, 2026.
Papers must be 10,000 words, including tables and figures, but excluding references, using the attached template. For editorial guidelines, the template, and FAQs, please consult the dedicated section of the RIPM portal.
