Public administration : past, present and future
Public Administration refers to two meanings: first, it is concerned with the
implementation of government policy; second, it
is an academic discipline that studies this
implementation and prepares civil servants for
working in the public service. As a "field of
inquiry with a diverse scope" its "fundamental
goal... is to advance management and policies so
that government can function." Some of the
various definitions which have been offered for
the term are: "the management of public
programs"; the "translation of politics into the
reality that citizens see every day"; and "the
study of government decision making, the
analysis of the policies themselves, the various
inputs that have produced them, and the inputs
necessary to produce alternative policies."
Public administration is "centrally concerned
with the organization of government policies and
programmes as well as the behavior of officials
(usually non-elected) formally responsible for
their conduct" Many unelected public servants
can be considered to be public administrators,
including heads of city, county, regional, state
and federal departments such as municipal budget
directors, human resources (H.R.)
administrators, city managers, census managers,
state mental health directors, and cabinet
secretaries. Public administrators are public
servants working in public departments and
agencies, at all levels of government.
Public administration is both an academic
discipline and a field of practice;
the latter is depicted in this picture of US
federal public servants at a meeting.
In
the US, civil servants and academics such as
Woodrow Wilson promoted American civil service
reform in the 1880s, moving public
administration into academia. However, "until
the mid-20th century and the dissemination of
the German sociologist Max Weber's theory of
bureaucracy" there was not "much interest in a
theory of public administration." The field is
multidisciplinary in character; one of the
various proposals for public administration's
sub-fields sets out six pillars, including human
resources, organizational theory, policy
analysis and statistics, budgeting, and ethics.
Definitions
In
1947 Paul H. Appleby defined public
administration as "public leadership of public
affairs directly responsible for executive
action". In a democracy, it has to do with such
leadership and executive action in terms that
respect and contribute to the dignity, the
worth, and the potentials of the citizen. One
year later, Gordon Clapp, then Chairman of the
Tennessee Valley Authority defined public
administration "as a public instrument whereby
democratic society may be more completely
realized." This implies that it must "relate
itself to concepts of justice, liberty, and
fuller economic opportunity for human beings"
and is thus "concerned with "people, with ideas,
and with things."
Even in the digital age, public servants tend to
work with both paper documents
and computer files (pictured here is Stephen C.
Dunn, Deputy Comptroller for the US Navy)
Drawing on the democracy theme and discarding
the link to the executive branch, Patricia M.
Shields asserts that public administration
"deals with the stewardship and implementation
of the products of a living democracy." The key
term "product" refers to "those items that are
constructed or produced" such as prisons, roads,
laws, schools, and security. "As implementors,
public managers engage these products." They
participate in the doing and making of the
"living" democracy. A living democracy is "an
environment that is changing, organic",
imperfect, inconsistent and teaming with values.
"Stewardship is emphasized because public
administration is concerned "with accountability
and effective use of scarce resources and
ultimately making the connection between the
doing, the making and democratic values."
More
recently scholars claim that "public
administration has no generally accepted
definition", because the "scope of the subject
is so great and so debatable that it is easier
to explain than define". Public administration
is a field of study (i.e., a discipline) and an
occupation. There is much disagreement about
whether the study of public administration can
properly be called a discipline, largely because
of the debate over whether public administration
is a subfield of political science or a subfield
of administrative science". Scholar Donald Kettl
is among those who view public administration
"as a subfield within political science".
The
North American Industry Classification System
definition of the Public Administration (NAICS
91) sector states that public administration
"... comprises establishments primarily engaged
in activities of a governmental nature, that is,
the enactment and judicial interpretation of
laws and their pursuant regulations, and the
administration of programs based on them". This
includes "Legislative activities, taxation,
national defense, public order and safety,
immigration services, foreign affairs and
international assistance, and the administration
of government programs are activities that are
purely governmental in nature".
From
the academic perspective, the National Center
for Education Statistics (NCES) in the United
States defines the study of public
administration as "A program that prepares
individuals to serve as managers in the
executive arm of local, state, and federal
government and that focuses on the systematic
study of executive organization and management.
Includes instruction in the roles, development,
and principles of public administration; the
management of public policy;
executive-legislative relations; public
budgetary processes and financial management;
administrative law; public personnel management;
professional ethics; and research methods."
History
Antiquity to the
19th
century
Dating back to Antiquity, Pharaohs, kings and
emperors have required pages, treasurers, and
tax collectors to administer the practical
business of government. Prior to the 19th
century, staffing of most public administrations
was rife with nepotism, favoritism, and
political patronage, which was often referred to
as a "spoils system". Public administrators have
been the "eyes and ears" of rulers until
relatively recently. In medieval times, the
abilitzies to read and write, add and subtract
were as dominated by the educated elite as
public employment. Consequently, the need for
expert civil servants whose ability to read and
write formed the basis for developing expertise
in such necessary activities as legal
record-keeping, paying and feeding armies and
levying taxes. As the European Imperialist age
progressed and the militarily powers extended
their hold over other continents and people, the
need for a sophisticated public administration
grew.
The
eighteenth-century noble, King Frederick William
I of Prussia, created professorates in
Cameralism in an effort to train a new class of
public administrators. The universities of
Frankfurt an der Oder and University of Halle
were Prussian institutions emphasizing economic
and social disciplines, with the goal of
societal reform. Johann Heinrich Gottlob Justi
was the most well-known professor of Cameralism.
Thus, from a Western European perspective,
Classic, Medieval, and Enlightenment-era
scholars formed the foundation of the discipline
that has come to be called public
administration.
Lorenz von Stein, an 1855 German professor from
Vienna, is considered the founder of the science
of public administration in many parts of the
world. In the time of Von Stein, public
administration was considered a form of
administrative law, but Von Stein believed this
concept too restrictive. Von Stein taught that
public administration relies on many
prestablished disciplines such as sociology,
political science, administrative law and public
finance. He called public administration an
integrating science, and stated that public
administrators should be concerned with both
theory and practice. He argued that public
administration is a science because knowledge is
generated and evaluated according to the
scientific method.
Modern American public administration is an
extension of democratic governance, justified by
classic and liberal philosophers of the western
world ranging from Aristotle to John Locke to
Thomas Jefferson.
Woodrow Wilson
In
the United States of America, Woodrow Wilson is
considered the father of public administration.
He first formally recognized public
administration in an 1887 article entitled "The
Study of Administration." The future president
wrote that "it is the object of administrative
study to discover, first, what government can
properly and successfully do, and, secondly, how
it can do these proper things with the utmost
possible efficiency and at the least possible
cost either of money or of energy." Wilson was
more influential to the science of public
administration than Von Stein, primarily due to
an article Wilson wrote in 1887 in which he
advocated four concepts:
-
Separation of politics and administration
-
Comparative analysis of political and
private organizations
-
Improving efficiency with business-like
practices and attitudes toward daily
operations
-
Improving the effectiveness of public
service through management and by training
civil servants, merit-based assessment
The
separation of politics and administration has
been the subject of lasting debate. The
different perspectives regarding this dichotomy
contribute to differentiating characteristics of
the suggested generations of public
administration.
By
the 1920s, scholars of public administration had
responded to Wilson's solicitation and thus
textbooks in this field were introduced. A few
distinguished scholars of that period were,
Luther Gulick, Lyndall Urwick, Henri Fayol,
Frederick Taylor, and others. Frederick Taylor
(1856-1915), another prominent scholar in the
field of administration and management also
published a book entitled
‘The
Principles of Scientific Management’
(1911). He believed that scientific analysis
would lead to the discovery of the
‘one
best way’
to do things and /or carrying out an operation.
This, according to him could help save cost and
time. Taylor’s
technique was later introduced to private
industrialists, and later into the various
government organizations (Jeong, 2007).
Taylor's approach is often referred to as
Taylor's Principles, and/or Taylorism. Taylor's
scientific management consisted of main four
principles (Frederick W. Taylor, 1911):
-
Replace rule-of-thumb work methods with
methods based on a scientific study of the
tasks.
-
Scientifically select, train, and develop
each employee rather than passively leaving
them to train themselves.
-
Provide
‘Detailed
instruction and supervision of each worker
in the performance of that worker's discrete
task’
(Montgomery 1997: 250).
-
Divide work nearly equally between managers
and workers, so that the managers apply
scientific management principles to planning
the work and the workers actually perform
the tasks.
Taylor had very precise ideas about how to
introduce his system (approach):
‘It
is only through enforced standardization of
methods, enforced adoption of the best
implements and working conditions, and enforced
cooperation that this faster work can be
assured. And the duty of enforcing the adoption
of standards and enforcing this cooperation
rests with management alone.’
The
American Society for Public Administration
(ASPA) the leading professional group for public
administration was founded in 1939. ASPA
sponsors the journal Public Administration
Review, which was founded in 1940.
US in the
1940s
The
separation of politics and administration
advocated by Wilson continues to play a
significant role in public administration today.
However, the dominance of this dichotomy was
challenged by second generation scholars,
beginning in the 1940s. Luther Gulick's
fact-value dichotomy was a key contender for
Wilson's proposed politics-administration
dichotomy. In place of Wilson's first generation
split, Gulick advocated a "seamless web of
discretion and interaction".
Luther Gulick and Lyndall Urwick are two
second-generation scholars. Gulick, Urwick, and
the new generation of administrators built on
the work of contemporary behavioral,
administrative, and organizational scholars
including Henri Fayol, Fredrick Winslow Taylor,
Paul Appleby, Frank Goodnow, and Willam
Willoughby. The new generation of organizational
theories no longer relied upon logical
assumptions and generalizations about human
nature like classical and enlightened theorists.
Gulick developed a comprehensive, generic theory
of organization that emphasized the scientific
method, efficiency, professionalism, structural
reform, and executive control. Gulick summarized
the duties of administrators with an acronym;
POSDCORB, which stands for planning, organizing,
staffing, directing, coordinating, reporting,
and budgeting.
Luther Gulick (1892–1993)
was an expert on public administration.
Fayol developed a systematic, 14-point,
treatment of private management.
Second-generation theorists drew upon private
management practices for administrative
sciences. A single, generic management theory
bleeding the borders between the private and the
public sector was thought to be possible. With
the general theory, the administrative theory
could be focused on governmental
organizations.The mid-1940s theorists challenged
Wilson and Gulick. The politics-administration
dichotomy remained the center of criticism.
1950s
to the
1970s
During the 1950s, the United States experienced
prolonged prosperity and solidified its place as
a world leader. Public Administration
experienced a kind of hey-day due to the
successful war effort and successful post war
reconstruction in Western Europe and Japan.
Government was popular as was President
Eisenhower. In the 1960s and 1970s, government
itself came under fire as ineffective,
inefficient, and largely a wasted effort. The
costly American intervention in Vietnam along
with domestic scandals including the bugging of
Democratic party headquarters (the 1974
Watergate scandal) are two examples of
self-destructive government behavior that
alienated citizens.
There
was a call by citizens for efficient
administration to replace ineffective, wasteful
bureaucracy. Public administration would have to
distance itself from politics to answer this
call and remain effective. Elected officials
supported these reforms. The Hoover Commission,
chaired by University of Chicago professor Louis
Brownlow, to examine reorganization of
government. Brownlow subsequently founded the
Public Administration Service (PAS) at the
university, an organization which has provided
consulting services to all levels of government
until the 1970s.
Concurrently, after World War II, the whole
concept of public administration expanded to
include policy-making and analysis, thus the
study of ‘administrative
policy making and analysis’
was introduced and enhanced into the government
decision-making bodies. Later on, the human
factor became a predominant concern and emphasis
in the study of Public Administration. This
period witnessed the development and inclusion
of other social sciences knowledge,
predominantly, psychology, anthropology, and
sociology, into the study of public
administration (Jeong, 2007). Henceforth, the
emergence of scholars such as, Fritz Morstein
Marx with his book ‘The
Elements of Public Administration’
(1946), Paul H. Appleby
‘Policy
and Administration’
(1952), Frank Marini ‘Towards
a New Public Administration’
(1971), and others that have contributed
positively in these endeavors.
The costly Vietnam War alienated US citizens
from their government
(pictured is Operation Arc Light, a US bombing
operation)
1980s–1990s
In
the late 1980s, yet another generation of public
administration theorists began to displace the
last. The new theory, which came to be called
New Public Management, was proposed by David
Osborne and Ted Gaebler in their book
Reinventing Government. The new model
advocated the use of private sector-style
models, organizational ideas and values to
improve the efficiency and service-orientation
of the public sector. During the Clinton
Administration (1993–2001),
Vice President Al Gore adopted and reformed
federal agencies using NPM approaches. In the
1990s, new public management became prevalent
throughout the bureaucracies of the US, the UK
and, to a lesser extent, in Canada.
Some
modern authors define NPM as a combination of
splitting large bureaucracies into smaller, more
fragmented agencies, encouraging competition
between different public agencies, and
encouraging competition between public agencies
and private firms and using economic incentives
lines (e.g., performance pay for senior
executives or user-pay models). NPM treats
individuals as "customers" or "clients" (in the
private sector sense), rather than as citizens.
Some
critics argue that the New Public Management
concept of treating people as "customers" rather
than "citizens" is an inappropriate borrowing
from the private sector model, because
businesses see customers as a means to an end
(profit), rather than as the proprietors of
government (the owners), opposed to merely the
customers of a business (the patrons). In New
Public Management, people are viewed as economic
units not democratic participants. Nevertheless,
the model is still widely accepted at all levels
of government and in many OECD nations.
Late
1990s–2000
In
the late 1990s, Janet and Robert Denhardt
proposed a new public services model in response
to the dominance of NPM. A successor to NPM is
digital era governance, focusing on themes of
reintegrating government responsibilities,
needs-based holism (executing duties in cursive
ways), and digitalization (exploiting the
transformational capabilities of modern IT and
digital storage).One example of this is
openforum.com.au, an Australian non-for-profit
eDemocracy project which invites politicians,
senior public servants, academics, business
people and other key stakeholders to engage in
high-level policy debate.
Another new public service model is what has
been called New Public Governance, an approach
which includes a centralization of power; an
increased number, role and influence of
partisan-political staff;
personal-politicization of appointments to the
senior public service; and, the assumption that
the public service is promiscuously partisan for
the government of the day.
Increasingly, public policy academics and
practitioners have utilized the theoretical
concepts of political economy to explain policy
outcomes such as the success or failure of
reform efforts and/or the persistence of
sub-optimal outcomes.
Approaches
-
Behavioural approach
-
Systems approach
-
Ecological approach
-
Public choice approach
-
Contingency approach
Core branches
In
academia, the field of public administration
consists of a number of sub-fields. Scholars
have proposed a number of different sets of
sub-fields. One of the proposed models uses five
"pillars":
-
Human resource management is an in-house
structure that ensures that public service
staffing is done in an unbiased, ethical and
values-based manner. The basic functions of
the HR system are employee benefits,
employee health care, compensation, and many
more.
-
Organizational Theory in Public
Administration is the study of the structure
of governmental entities and the many
particulars inculcated in them.
-
Ethics in public administration serves as a
normative approach to decision making.
-
Policy analysis serves as an empirical
approach to decision making.
-
Public budgeting is the activity within a
government that seeks to allocate scarce
resources among unlimited demands.
Decision-making
models
Given
the array of duties public administrators find
themselves performing, the professional
administrator might refer to a theoretical
framework from which he or she might work.
Indeed, many public and private administrative
scholars have devised and modified
decision-making models.
Niskanen's
budget-maximizing
In
1971, Professor William Niskanen proposed a
rational choice variation which he called the
"budget-maximizing model". He claimed that
rational bureaucrats will universally seek to
increase the budgets of their units (to enhance
their stature), thereby contributing to state
growth and increased public expenditure.
Niskanen served on President Reagan's Council of
Economic Advisors; his model underpinned what
has been touted as curtailed public spending and
increased privatization. However, budgeted
expenditures and the growing deficit during the
Reagan administration is evidence of a different
reality. A range of pluralist authors have
critiqued Niskanen's universalist approach.
These scholars have argued that officials tend
also to be motivated by considerations of the
public interest.
Dunleavy's
bureau-shaping
The
bureau-shaping model, a modification of
Niskanen, holds that rational bureaucrats only
maximize the part of their budget that they
spend on their own agency's operations or give
to contractors and interest groups. Groups that
are able to organize a "flowback" of benefits to
senior officials would, according to this
theory, receive increased budgetary attention.
For
instance, rational officials will get no benefit
from paying out larger welfare checks to
millions of low-income citizens because this
does not serve a bureaucrats' goals.
Accordingly, one might instead expect a
jurisdiction to seek budget increases for
defense and security purposes in place
programming.
If we
refer back to Reagan once again, Dunleavy's
bureau shaping model accounts for the alleged
decrease in the "size" of government while
spending did not, in fact, decrease. Domestic
entitlement programming was financially
de-emphasized for military research and
personnel.
Comparative public
administration
Comparative public administration is defined as
the study of administrative systems in a
comparative fashion or the study of public
administration in other countries. Another
definition for "comparative public
administration" is the "quest for patterns and
regularities in administrative action and
behavior". There have been several issues which
have hampered the development of comparative
public administration, including: the major
differences between Western countries and
developing countries; the lack of curriculum on
this subfield in public administration programs;
and the lack of success in developing
theoretical models which can be scientifically
tested. the Comparative Administration group has
defined CPA as, "the of publicadministration
applied to diverse cultures and national setting
and the body of factual data, by which it can be
examined and tested." Accordingly to Jong S.
Jun, "CPA has been predominantly cross-cultural
and cross-national in orientation."
Notable scholars
Notable scholars of public administration have
come from a range of fields. In the period
before public administration existed as its own
independent discipline, scholars contributing to
the field came from economics, sociology,
management, political science, administrative
law, and, other related fields. More recently,
scholars from public administration and public
policy have contributed important studies and
theories.
International
public administration
There
are several organizations that are active. The
Commonwealth Association of Public
Administration and Management (CAPAM) is perhaps
the most diverse, covering the 54 member states
of the Commonwealth from India to Nauru. Its
biennial conference brings together ministers of
public service, top officials and leading
scholars in the field.
The
oldest is the International Institute of
Administrative Sciences. Based in Brussels,
Belgium, the IIAS is a worldwide platform
providing a space for exchanges that promote
knowledge and practices to improve the
organization and operation of Public
Administration and to ensure that public
agencies will be in a position to better respond
to the current and future expectations and needs
of society. The IIAS has set up four entities:
the International Association of Schools and
Institutes of Administration (IASIA), the
European Group for Public Administration (EGPA),
The Latin American Group for Public
Administration (LAGPA) and the Asian Group for
Public Administration (AGPA).
IASIA
is an association of organizations and
individuals whose activities and interests focus
on public administration and management. The
activities of its members include education and
training of administrators and managers. It is
the only worldwide scholarly association in the
field of public management. EGPA, LAGPA and AGPA
are the regional sub-entities of the IIAS.
Also
the International Committee of the US-based
Network of Schools of Public Policy, Affairs,
and Administration (NASPAA) has developed a
number of relationships around the world. They
include sub regional and National forums like
CLAD, INPAE and NISPAcee, APSA, ASPA.
The
Center for Latin American Administration for
Development (CLAD), based in Caracas, Venezuela,
this regional network of schools of public
administration set up by the governments in
Latin America is the oldest in the region. The
Institute is a founding member and played a
central role in organizing the Inter-American
Network of Public Administration Education (INPAE).
Created in 2000, this regional network of
schools is unique in that it is the only
organization to be composed of institutions from
North and Latin America and the Caribbean
working in public administration and policy
analysis. It has more than 49 members from top
research schools in various countries throughout
the hemisphere.
NISPAcee is a network of experts, scholars and
practitioners who work in the field of public
administration in Central and Eastern Europe,
including the Russian Federation and the
Caucasus and Central Asia. The US public
administration and political science
associations like NASPAA, American Political
Science Association (APSA) and American Society
of Public Administration (ASPA). These
organizations have helped to create the
fundamental establishment of modern public
administration.
what is Bureaucracy ?
A
Bureaucracy is "a body of nonelective government
officials" and/or "an administrative
policy-making group." Historically, bureaucracy
referred to government administration managed by
departments staffed with nonelected officials.
In modern parlance, bureaucracy refers to the
administrative system governing any large
institution.
Since
being coined, the word "bureaucracy" has
developed negative connotations for some.
Bureaucracies are criticized when they become
too complex, inefficient, or too inflexible. The
dehumanizing effects of excessive bureaucracy
were a major theme in the work of Franz Kafka,
and were central to his masterpiece The Trial.
The elimination of unnecessary bureaucracy is a
key concept in modern managerial theory, and has
been a central issue in numerous political
campaigns.
Others have defended the necessity of
bureaucracies. The German sociologist Max Weber
argued that bureaucracy constitutes the most
efficient and rational way in which human
activity can be organized, and that systematic
processes and organized hierarchies were
necessary to maintain order, maximize efficiency
and eliminate favoritism. But even Weber saw
unfettered bureaucracy as a threat to individual
freedom, in which an increase in the
bureaucratization of human life can trap
individuals in an "iron cage" of rule-based,
rational control.
Etymology and
usage
The
term "bureaucracy" is French in origin, and
combines the French word bureau
–
desk or office –
with the Greek word κράτος kratos –
rule or political power. It was coined sometime
in the mid-1700s by the French economist Jacques
Claude Marie Vincent de Gournay, and was a
satirical pejorative from the outset. Gournay
never wrote the term down, but was later quoted
at length in a letter from a contemporary:
The
late M. de Gournay...sometimes used to say: "We
have an illness in France which bids fair to
play havoc with us; this illness is called
bureaumania." Sometimes he used to invent a
fourth or fifth form of government under the
heading of "bureaucracy."
—
Baron von Grimm
The
first known English-language use was in 1818.
The 19th-century definition referred to a system
of governance in which offices were held by
unelected career officials, and in this sense
"bureaucracy" was seen as a distinct form of
government, often subservient to a monarchy. In
the 1920s, the definition was expanded by the
German sociologist Max Weber to include any
system of administration conducted by trained
professionals according to fixed rules. Weber
saw the bureaucracy as a relatively positive
development; however by 1944, the Austrian
economist Ludwig von Mises noted that the term
bureaucracy was "always applied with an
opprobrious connotation," and by 1957 the
American sociologist Robert Merton noted that
the term "bureaucrat" had become an epithet.
History
Ancient
Bureaucracy
Although the term "bureaucracy" was not coined
until the mid-1700s, the idea of organized and
consistent administrative systems is much older.
The development of writing (ca. 3500 BCE) and
the use of documents was critical to the
administration of this system, and the first
definitive emergence of bureaucracy is in
ancient Sumer, where an emergent class of
scribes used clay tablets to administer the
harvest and allocate its spoils. Ancient Egypt
also had a hereditary class of scribes that
administered the civil service bureaucracy. Much
of what is known today of these cultures comes
from the writing of the scribes.
Students competed in imperial examinations to
receive
a position in the bureaucracy of ancient China.
Ancient Rome was administered by a hierarchy of
regional proconsuls and their deputies. The
reforms of Diocletian doubled the number of
administrative districts and led to a
large-scale expansion in Roman bureaucracy. The
early Christian author Lactantius claimed that
Diocletian's reforms led to widespread economic
stagnation, since "the provinces were divided
into minute portions, and many presidents and a
multitude of inferior officers lay heavy on each
territory." After the Empire split, the
Byzantine Empire developed a notoriously
complicated administrative hierarchy, and in
time the term "byzantine" came to refer to any
complex bureaucratic structure.
In
Ancient China, the scholar Confucius established
a complex system of rigorous procedures
governing relationships in family, religion and
politics. Confucius sought to construct an
organized state free from corruption. In
Imperial China, the bureaucracy was headed by a
Chief Counselor. Within the bureaucracy, the
positions were of a "graded civil service" and
competitive exams were held to determine who
held positions. The upper levels of the system
held nine grades, and the officials wore
distinctive clothing. The Confucian Classics
codified a set of values held by the officials.
Modern bureaucracy
A
modern form of bureaucracy evolved in the
expanding Department of Excise in the United
Kingdom, during the 18th century. The relative
efficiency and professionalism in this state-run
authority allowed the government to impose a
very large tax burden on the population and
raise great sums of money for war expenditure.
According to Niall Ferguson, the bureaucracy was
based on "recruitment by examination, training,
promotion on merit, regular salaries and
pensions, and standardized procedures". The
system was subject to a strict hierarchy and
emphasis was placed on technical and efficient
methods for tax collection.
The 18th century Department of Excise developed
a
sophisticated bureaucracy. Pictured, the Custom
House, London.
Instead of the inefficient and often corrupt
system of tax farming that prevailed in
absolutist states such as France, the Exchequer
was able to exert control over the entire system
of tax revenue and government expenditure. By
the late 18th century, the ratio of fiscal
bureaucracy to population in Britain was
approximately 1 in 1300, almost four times
larger than the second most heavily
bureaucratized nation, France. The
implementation of Her Majesty's Civil Service as
a systematic, meritocratic civil service
bureaucracy, followed the Northcote-Trevelyan
Report of 1854, which recommended that
recruitment should be on the basis of merit and
promotion should be won through achievement.
This system was influenced by the imperial
examinations system and bureaucracy of China
based on the suggestion of Northcote-Trevelyan
Report.
France also saw a rapid and dramatic expansion
of government in the 18th-century, accompanied
by the rise of the French civil service; a
phenomenon that became known as "bureaumania,"
in which complex systems of bureaucracy emerged.
In the early 19th century, Napoleon attempted to
reform the bureaucracies of France and other
territories under his control by the imposition
of the standardized Napoleonic Code. But
paradoxically, this led to even further growth
of the bureaucracy.
By
the mid-19th century, bureaucratic forms of
administration were firmly in place across the
industrialized world. Thinkers like John Stuart
Mill and Karl Marx began to theorize about the
economic functions and power-structures of
bureaucracy in contemporary life. Max Weber was
the first to endorse bureaucracy as a necessary
feature of modernity, and by the late 19th
century bureaucratic forms had begun their
spread from government to other large-scale
institutions.
The
trend toward increased bureaucratization
continued in the 20th century, with the public
sector employing over 5% of the workforce in
many Western countries. Within capitalist
systems, informal bureaucratic structures began
to appear in the form of corporate power
hierarchies, as detailed in mid-century works
like The Organization Man and The Man
in the Grey Flannel Suit. Meanwhile, in the
Soviet Union and Eastern Bloc, a powerful class
of bureaucratic administrators termed
nomenklatura governed nearly all aspects of
public life.
The
1980s brought a backlash against bureaucratic
forms of rule. Politicians like Margaret
Thatcher and Ronald Reagan gained power by
promising to eliminate government regulatory
bureaucracies, which they saw as overbearing,
and return economic production to a more purely
capitalistic mode, which they saw as more
efficient. In the business world, managers like
Jack Welch gained fortune and renown by
eliminating bureaucratic structures inside the
corporations themselves.
Still, in the modern world practically all
organized institutions rely on bureaucratic
systems to manage information, process and
manage records, and administer complex systems
and interrelationships in an increasingly
globalized world, although the decline of
paperwork and the widespread use of electronic
databases is transforming the way bureaucracies
function.
Theories of
bureaucracy
Karl Marx
Karl
Marx theorized about the role and function of
bureaucracy in his Critique of Hegel's
Philosophy of Right, published in 1843. In
his Philosophy of Right, Hegel had
supported the role of specialized officials in
the role of public administration, although he
never used the term "bureaucracy" himself. Marx
by contrast was opposed to the bureaucracy. He
saw the development of bureaucracy in government
as a natural counterpart to the development of
the corporation in private society. Marx posited
that while the corporation and government
bureaucracy existed in seeming opposition, in
actuality they mutually relied on one another to
exist. He wrote that "The Corporation is civil
society's attempt to become state; but the
bureaucracy is the state which has really made
itself into civil society."
John Stuart Mill
Writing in the early 1860s, political scientist
John Stuart Mill theorized that successful
monarchies were essentially bureaucracies, and
found evidence of their existence in Imperial
China, the Russian Empire, and the regimes of
Europe. Mill referred to bureaucracy as a
distinct form of government, separate from
representative democracy. He believed
bureaucracies had certain advantages, most
importantly the accumulation of experience in
those who actually conduct the affairs.
Nevertheless, he thought bureaucracy as a form
of governance compared poorly to representative
government, as it relied on appointment rather
than direct election. Mill wrote that ultimately
the bureaucracy stifles the mind, and that "A
bureaucracy always tends to become a
pedantocracy."
Max Weber
The
German sociologist Max Weber described many
ideal-typical forms of public administration,
government, and business in his 1922 work
Economy and Society. His critical study of
the bureaucratisation of society became one of
the most enduring parts of his work. It was
Weber who began the studies of bureaucracy and
whose works led to the popularization of this
term. Many aspects of modern public
administration go back to him, and a classic,
hierarchically organized civil service of the
Continental type is called "Weberian civil
service". As the most efficient and rational way
of organizing, bureaucratization for Weber was
the key part of the rational-legal authority,
and furthermore, he saw it as the key process in
the ongoing rationalization of the Western
society. Although he is not necessarily an
admirer of bureaucracy, Weber does argue that
bureaucracy constitutes the most efficient and
(formally) rational way in which human activity
can be organized, and that thus is indispensable
to the modern world.
Bureaucratic administration means fundamentally
domination through knowledge
—
Max Weber
Weber
listed several precondititions for the emergence
of bureaucracy. The growth in space and
population being administered, the growth in
complexity of the administrative tasks being
carried out, and the existence of a monetary
economy requiring a more efficient
administrative system. Development of
communication and transportation technologies
make more efficient administration possible but
also in popular demand, and democratization and
rationalization of culture resulted in demands
that the new system treats everybody equally.
Weber's ideal-typical bureaucracy is
characterized by hierarchical organization,
delineated lines of authority in a fixed area of
activity, action taken on the basis of and
recorded in written rules, bureaucratic
officials need expert training, rules are
implemented by neutral officials, career
advancement depends on technical qualifications
judged by organization, not individuals.
While
recognizing bureaucracy as the most efficient
form of organization, and even indispensable for
the modern state, Weber also saw it as a threat
to individual freedoms, and the ongoing
bureaucratization as leading to a "polar night
of icy darkness", in which increasing
rationalization of human life traps individuals
in a soulless "iron cage" of bureaucratic,
rule-based, rational control.
Woodrow Wilson
Writing as an academic while a professor at Bryn
Mawr College, his essay
“The
Study of Administration”
argued for a bureaucracy as a professional
cadre, devoid of allegiance to fleeting politics
of the day.
Wilson advocated a bureaucracy that "is a part
of political life only as the methods of the
counting house are a part of the life of
society; only as machinery is part of the
manufactured product. But it is, at the same
time, raised very far above the dull level of
mere technical detail by the fact that through
its greater principles it is directly connected
with the lasting maxims of political wisdom, the
permanent truths of political progress."
Wilson did not advocate a replacement of rule by
the governed, he simply advised "Administrative
questions are not political questions. Although
politics sets the tasks for administration, it
should not be suffered to manipulate its
offices." This essay became the foundation for
the study of public administration in America.
Ludwig von Mises
In
his 1944 work Bureaucracy, the Austrian
economist Ludwig von Mises was highly critical
of all bureaucratic systems. He believed that
bureaucracy should be the target of universal
opprobrium, and noticed that in the political
sphere it had few defenders, even among
progressives. Mises saw bureaucratic processes
at work in both the private and public spheres;
however he believed that bureaucratization in
the private sphere could only occur as a
consequence of government interference. He wrote
that "No private enterprise will ever fall prey
to bureaucratic methods of management if it is
operated with the sole aim of making profit."
Robert K. Merton
The
American sociologist Robert K. Merton expanded
on Weber's theories of bureaucracy in his work
Social Theory and Social Structure,
published in 1957. While Merton agreed with
certain aspects of Weber's analysis, he also
considered the dysfunctional aspects of
bureaucracy, which he attributed to a "trained
incapacity" resulting from "overconformity." He
saw bureaucrats as more likely to defend their
own entrenched interests than to act to benefit
the organization as a whole. He also believed
bureaucrats took pride in their craft, which led
them to resist changes in established routines.
Merton also noted that bureaucrats emphasized
formality over interpersonal relationships, and
had been trained to ignore the special
circumstances of particular cases, causing them
to come across as "arrogant" and "haughty."
what is Technocracy ?
The
concept of a technocracy remains mostly
hypothetical, though some nations have been
considered as such in the sense of being
governed primarily by technical experts in
various fields of governmental decision making.
A technocrat has come to mean either 'a
member of a powerful technical elite', or
'someone who advocates the supremacy of
technical experts'. Scientists, engineers, and
technologists examples include these
technologists who have knowledge, expertise, or
skills, would compose the governing body,
instead of politicians, businesspeople, and
economists. In a technocracy, decision makers
would be selected based upon how knowledgeable
and skillful they are in their field.
The
term technocracy was originally used to
designate the application of the scientific
method to solving social problems, in counter
distinction to the traditional economic,
political, or philosophic approaches. According
to the proponents of this concept, the role of
money and economic values, political opinions,
and moralistic control mechanisms would be
eliminated altogether if and when this form of
social control should ever be implemented in a
continental area endowed with enough natural
resources, technically trained personnel, and
installed industrial equipment. In such an
arrangement, concern would be given to
sustainability within the resource base, instead
of monetary profitability, so as to ensure
continued operation of all social-industrial
functions into the indefinite future. Technical
and leadership skills would be selected on the
basis of specialized knowledge and performance,
rather than democratic election by those without
such knowledge or skill deemed necessary.
Some
uses of the word technocracy refer to a form of
meritocracy, a system where the "most qualified"
and those who decide the validity of
qualifications are the same people. Other
applications have been described as not being an
oligarchic human group of controllers, but
rather administration by discipline-specific
science, ostensibly without the influence of
special interest groups. The word technocracy
has also been used to indicate any kind of
management or administration by specialized
experts ('technocrats') in any field, not just
physical science, and the adjective
'technocratic' has been used to describe
governments that include non-elected
professionals at a ministerial level.
History of the
term
The
term technocracy derives from the Greek
words τέχνη,
tekhne meaning skill and
κράτος,
kratos meaning power, as in
governance, or rule. William Henry
Smyth, a Californian engineer, is usually
credited with inventing the word "technocracy"
in 1919 to describe "the rule of the people made
effective through the agency of their servants,
the scientists and engineers", although the word
had been used before on several occasions. Smyth
used the term "Technocracy" in his 1919 article
"'Technocracy'—Ways
and Means to Gain Industrial Democracy," in the
journal Industrial Management (57).
Smyth's usage referred to Industrial democracy:
a movement to integrate workers into decision
making through existing firms or revolution.
In
the 1930s, through the influence of Howard Scott
and the Technocracy movement he founded, the
term technocracy came to mean, 'government by
technical decision making', using an energy
metric of value. Scott proposed that money be
replaced by energy certificates denominated in
units such as ergs or joules, equivalent in
total amount to an appropriate national net
energy budget, and then distributed equally
among the North American population, according
to resource availability.
Precursors
Before the term technocracy was coined,
technocratic or quasi-technocratic ideas
involving governance by technical experts were
promoted by various individuals, most notably
early socialist theorists such as Henri de
Saint-Simon. This was expressed by the belief in
state ownership over the economy, with the
function of the state being transformed from one
of political rule over men into a scientific
administration of things and a direction of
processes of production under scientific
management.
Alexander Bogdanov, a Russian scientist and
social theorist, also anticipated a conception
of technocratic process. Both Bogdanov’s
fiction and his political writings, which were
highly influential, suggest that he expected a
coming revolution against capitalism to lead to
a technocratic society.
From
1913 until 1922, Bogdanov immersed himself in
the writing of a lengthy philosophical treatise
of original ideas, Tectology: Universal
Organization Science. Tectology anticipated
many basic ideas of Systems Analysis, later
explored by Cybernetics. In Tectology,
Bogdanov proposed to unify all social,
biological, and physical sciences by considering
them as systems of relationships and by seeking
the organizational principles that underlie all
systems.
Characteristics
Technocrats are individuals with technical
training and occupations who perceive many
important societal problems as being solvable,
often while proposing technology-focused
solutions. The administrative scientist Gunnar
K. A. Njalsson theorizes that technocrats are
primarily driven by their cognitive
"problem-solution mindsets" and only in part by
particular occupational group interests. Their
activities and the increasing success of their
ideas are thought to be a crucial factor behind
the modern spread of technology and the largely
ideological concept of the "information
society". Technocrats may be distinguished from
"econocrats" and "bureaucrats" whose
problem-solution mindsets differ from those of
the technocrats.
The
former government of the Soviet Union from
1917-1955 has been referred to as a technocracy.
Even when bureaucracy had taken over, Soviet
leaders like Leonid Brezhnev had a technical
background in education, and in 1986, 89% of
Politburo members were engineers.
Several governments in European parliamentary
democracies have been labeled 'technocratic'
based on the participation of unelected experts
('technocrats') in prominent positions. Since
the 1990s, Italy has had several such
governments (in Italian, governo tecnico)
in times of economic or political crisis,
including the formation in which economist Mario
Monti presided over a cabinet of unelected
professionals. The term 'technocratic' has been
applied to governments where a cabinet of
elected professional politicians is led by an
unelected prime minister, such as in the cases
of the current Greek government led by
economist, Lucas Papademos, and the Czech
Republic's 2009–2010
caretaker government presided over by the
state's chief statistician, Jan Fischer. In
2013, the government of Tunisia failed to
install a technocratic government.
Technocracy and
engineering
Following Samuel Haber, Donald Stabile argues
that engineers were faced with a conflict
between physical efficiency and cost efficiency
in the new corporate capitalist enterprises of
the late nineteenth century United States.
The
profit-conscious, non-technical managers of
firms where the engineers work, because of their
perceptions of market demand, often impose
limits on the projects that engineers desire to
undertake.
The
prices of all inputs vary with market forces
thereby upsetting the engineer's careful
calculations. As a result, the engineer loses
control over projects and must continually
revise plans. To keep control over projects the
engineer must attempt to exert control over
these outside variables and transform them into
constant factors.
Leaders of the Communist Party of China are
mostly professional engineers. The Five-year
plans of the People's Republic of China have
enabled them to plan ahead in a technocratic
fashion to build projects such as the National
Trunk Highway System, the China high-speed rail
system, and the Three Gorges Dam.
Technocracy
movement
The
American economist and sociologist Thorstein
Veblen was an early advocate of Technocracy, and
was involved in the Technical Alliance as was
Howard Scott and M. King Hubbert (who later
developed the theory of peak oil). Veblen
believed that technological developments would
eventually lead toward a socialistic
organization of economic affairs. Veblen saw
socialism as one intermediate phase in an
ongoing evolutionary process in society that
would be brought about by the natural decay of
the business enterprise system and by the
inventiveness of engineers. Daniel Bell sees an
affinity between Veblen and the Technocracy
movement.
In
1932, Howard Scott and Marion King Hubbert
founded Technocracy Incorporated, and proposed
that money be replaced by energy certificates.
The group argued that apolitical, rational
engineers should be vested with authority to
guide an economy into a thermodynamically
balanced load of production and consumption,
thereby doing away with unemployment and debt.
The
Technocracy movement was highly popular in the
USA for a brief period in the early 1930s,
during the Great Depression. By the mid-1930s,
interest in the movement was declining. Some
historians have attributed the decline of the
technocracy movement to the rise of Roosevelt's
New Deal.
Historian William E. Akin rejects the conclusion
that Technocracy ideas declined because of the
attractiveness of Roosevelt and the New Deal.
Instead Akin argues that the movement declined
in the mid-1930s as a result of the technocrats'
failure to devise a 'viable political theory for
achieving change' (p.111 Technocracy and the
American Dream: The Technocrat Movement, 1900–1941 by William E. Akin). Akin postulates that many technocrats
remained vocal and dissatisfied and often
sympathetic to anti-New Deal third party
efforts.
Many books have discussed the Technocracy
movement. One of these is Technocracy and the
American Dream: The Technocrat Movement, 1900–1941
by William E. Akin
|