B.A. (Hons.

) Political Science Semester-III

CORE COURSE
Paper-VI : Perspectives on Public Administration
Study Material : Unit 1–4

SCHOOL OF OPEN LEARNING

UNIVERSITY OF DELHI

Editor :- Prof. Tapan Biswal

Dr. Mangal Deo
Department of Political Science
 Graduate Course
Paper-VI : Perspectives on Public Administration
Contents Pg. No.
Unit-1 : Public Administration as a Discipline
(a) : Meaning, Dimension and Significance Dr. Shradhanvita Singh/ Dr. Rinki 01
(b) : Public and Private Administration Dr. Shradhanvita Singh 10
(c) : Evolution of Public Administration Dr. Rinki 17
Unit-2 : Theoretical Perspectives
(a) : Classical Theories
i. Scientific Management Approach Dr. Shradhanvita Singh / Dr. Rinki 26
ii. Administrative Management Mhadeno Jungi 32
iii. Ideal-Type Bureaucracy (Max Weber) Anchal 42
(b) : Neo-Classical Theories
i. Human Relations Theory (Elton Mayo) Dr. Neelam Jain 52
ii. Rational Decision-Making (Herbert Simon)
Dr. Devarati Roy Chowdhury 60
(c) : Contemporary Theories
i. Ecological Approach (Fred Riggs) Bijendra Jha 77
ii. Innovation and Entreperneurship (Peter Drucker) Dr. Vaishali Narula 87
Unit-3 : Public Policy
(a) : Concept, Relevance and Approaches Dr. Devarati Roy Chowdhury 96
(b) : Public Policy: Formulation, Implementation and Evaluation
Dr. Devarati Roy Chowdhury 111
Unit-4 : Major Approaches in Public Administration
(a) : Development Administration: An Analysis Bijendra Jha 125
(b) : New Public Administration Dr. Devarati Roy Chowdhury 136
(c) : New Public Management Dr. Devarati Roy Chowdhury 144
(d) : New Public Service Dr. Devarati Roy Chowdhury 150
(e) : Good Governance: Concept and Context Bijendra Jha 153
(f) : Feminist Perspective in Public Administration Dr. Rinki and
Dr. Devarati Roy Chowdhury 159
Edited by:
Prof. Tapan Biswal
Dr. Mangal Deo

SCHOOL OF OPEN LEARNING

UNIVERSITY OF DELHI
5, Cavalry Lane, Delhi-110007
 Unit-1 : Public Administration as a Discipline

(a) Meaning, Dimension and Significance

Dr. Shradhanvita Singh1 and Dr. Rinki**

Structure

 Introduction
 What is Administration?
 Administration, Organisation and Management
 Defining Public Administration
 Dimension of Public Administration
 Significance of Public Administration
 Importance of Public Administration as an Activity
 Conclusion
 References and Further Reading
Introduction
Administration is as old as civilization as a movement. Be that as it may, as control of Study
it began, with the distribution of Wilson’s exposition an investigation of administration in
1887. As a cycle, an organization happens in both government and private associations. It
happens in such assorted establishment like business organization worker’s guilds, strict or
beneficent associations, instructive organizations, and so forth. The organization is usually
segregated into public and private administration. As a part of government movement, it has
exist since the rise of the political system(s). While policy implementation identifies with the
exercises completed by the government, private organization alludes to the administration of
personal business endeavours which has nothing to do with the legislature. It is essential to
comprehend the idea of an organization its measurements and criticalness in the
contemporary situation. In this section, an attempt has been made to bring the concept of
administration specifically, closer to you. This comprehension will go through the course of
Public Administration. It emphasizes on the importance, measurement and criticalness of
public administration.
Meaning of Public Administration
The phrase ‘administration’ is imitative from the Latin word administer, which intends to
think about or to take care of individuals, to care for the issues of individual. An organization
can be characterized as a “group action which includes joint effort and synchronization to

1
Assistant Professor, Amity School of Liberal Arts and Foreign languages, Amity University Haryana and
**
Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Delhi

1
accomplish wanted objectives or destinations”. Comprehensively, the term organization
seems to tolerate at any rate various implications or various faculties relying on the setting
wherein it is utilized: (1) In terms of Discipline: As the part of a learning or scholarly order as
educated in schools, universities and various foundations of notoriety. (2) In terms Vocation:
Depending upon the idea of work, particularly one that includes information and preparation
while learning. (3) In terms Process: The sum of all undertakings occurring in an association.
(4) In terms Synonym for ‘word’ government in real life: Such other group of people in
incomparable charge of undertakings, for instance, Narendra Modi as the Prime Minister of
India and so forth. The couple of famous scholars have noted the definitions. E.N. Gladden
“Administration is a lengthy and somewhat vainglorious word, nevertheless, it has an
unpretentious significance, for it intends to think about or care for individuals, to supervise
issue…. is resolved activity taken in pursuit of cognizant reason”. Streams Adams
“Organization is the limit of planning many, and frequently clashing, social energies in a
solitary creature, so adeptly that they will work as solidarity. Felix A. Nigro “Administration
is the association and use of human and resources to accomplish a reason”. J.M. Pfiffner and
R. Presthus “Administration is the organization and use of human and material assets to carry
out wanted closures”. L.D. White “The craft of administration is the course, recruitment and
control of numerous people to achieve some reason or target”. Luther Gullick
“Administration has to do with figuring out things, the triumph of characterized destinations”.
F.M. Marx “Administration is resolved activity taken in pursuit for a cognizant reason. It is
the efficient requesting of undertakings and the determined utilization of assets, pointed
toward causing those things to happen which one needs to occur and predicting everything to
the nation”. Herbert Simon, D.W. Smithburg and V.A. Thompson “In its broadest sense, the
administration can be characterized as the exercises of gathering collaborating to achieve
shared objectives.” The definitions recorded above with a short investigation uncovers
organization containing two fundamentals, in particular (1) helpful exertion, and (2) quest for
primary destinations. One doesn’t discover any organization if there is just a typical reason
without an aggregate effort or the other way around. The organization is additionally called
an ‘innovation of social connections’. Along these lines, organization is a cycle essential to
all collective endeavour, public or private, common or military, huge scope, medium or little
scope. It is measure grinding away in a retail chain, a bank, a college, a secondary school, a
railroad, a medical clinic, a lodging or a neighborhood executive, railroads streets where
altogether individuals are overseen in satisfaction of specific destinations which are basic to
all. Presently we will attempt to investigate the meanings of public administration gave by
different researchers.
Administration, Organization and Management
Before we move ahead with the subject matter we will try to know what is an interplay
between administration, organisation and management. All these connotations are often used
as a crossing point and identical, it is relatable to understand the commonalities and point of
differences between the three slated terminologies. According to William Schulze

2
Administration is the vigour, which states the objectives and on the other hand management
to endeavour issues and circumstances under which they operate.
Administration is a combination of the necessary human supplies tools, apparatus and
space, accessories, at a common platform to fulfil the desired objectives. Management helps
you to, guide and directs an organisation for the execution of desired objectives as stated by
the organization. To put together in an effortless way, the administration sets an objective
management by trying to achieve it and the organisation is the device of the government for
the accomplishment of the objectives dogged by the administration. There is a different view
about the administration and management by the Scholars. The view is that administration is
entrenched with performing programme activities in following specific measures rules, and
set of laws. The management is simultaneous concerned with the functions which are not
programmed. Management is the function that is concerned with carrying out the broad
policies laid down by the administration. The organisation is the mechanism through which
harmonization is recognized between administration and management.
Defining Public Administration
The public administration can be related to the fact that sort of association which works
within the confine boundaries of the system. It is a way to make the service delivery more
efficient and effective. ‘Public’ can be seen as synonymous to ‘government’. Thus, public
administration is about the activities of the government and the actions of the government in
all the sphere the attention being particularly on open administration. Highlights from
Britannica characterizes public administration as ‘the operation of an arrangement of a state
through its administration.’ Policy implementation, hence, alludes to that part of the
organization that relates to the regulatory exercises of the administration. Presently, we will
attempt to investigate the meanings of Public Administration given by different researchers.
Woodrow Wilson
The public administration is definite and orderly use of law. Each specific utilization of the
law is a demonstration of its activities.
L.D. White
“Public administration comprises of each one of those activities having for their motivation
the satisfaction or requirement of public arrangement”. According to White, this definition
engulfs a large number of specific activities in numerous fields the conveyance of a letter, the
offer of public land, the exchange of a deal, the honour of remuneration to a harmed worker,
the isolate of a debilitated youngster, the expulsion of litter from a recreation centre,
fabricating uranium, and authorizing the utilization of nuclear vitality. It incorporates military
just as common issues, a significant part of crafted by courts, and all the unique fields of
government action police, instruction, wellbeing, development of public creation,
preservation, federal retirement aide, and numerous others. The direct of public undertakings
in cutting edge civilisations requires the work of pretty much every calling and ability

3
building, law, medication, and educating; the artworks, the specialized fortes, the workplace
aptitudes, and numerous others.
J.M Pfiffner
“Administration comprises of completing crafted by the government by planning the
endeavours of individuals with the goal that they can cooperate to achieve their set
undertakings”.
M. Ruthanaswami
“At the point when an administration has to do with the illegitimate relationships of a state or
political establishments like the civil, state or nation gathering (region board), it is called
public administration. All the demonstrations of the authorities of a legislature, from the peon
in a distant office to the top of a state in the capital, establish public administration.” The
meaning public administration is like deployment, the exercises of the chief parts of people,
state-owned and managements, enterprises and individual different offices of a meticulous
eccentric.
“Public administration… is the activity part of the government, the methods by which
the reasons and objectives of government are figured out.”
Dwight Waldo
“Public administration is the cram of the executives as applied to the issues of State.”
M.E. Dimock
“Public administration is worried about the functioning of the government. The ‘what’ is the
topic, the specialized information on a field, which empowers the chairman to play out his
undertakings. The ‘how’ is the method of the executives, the standards as indicated by which
co-employable projects are brought through to progress. Each is imperative, together they
structure the combination called administration “.
Nicholas Henry
“Public administration is a broad going and tenuous mix of hypothesis and practice; its
motivation is to advance an unrivaled understanding of government and its relationship with
the common man, it oversees, just as to empower public strategies more receptive to social
needs and to establish administrative practices sensitive to adequacy, proficiency and the
more profound human essentials of the populace”.
The connotation of public administration is just engaged with completing the approaches
and projects of the legislature. It mirror that it has no part in strategy making and finds the
organization in the presidential branch however today the term policy management is utilized
from a more extensive perspective that it isn’t just engaged with completing the projects of
the legislature. Yet it likewise assumes a significant function in strategy definition and
spreads the three parts of the administration.

4
 In this setting we can mirror the description offered by various scholars
As per them:
● Is collective endeavour in a unrestricted organization.
● organised as three branches of the government and its inter connections.
● a significant function in the plan of open arrangement and accordingly an aspect of cycle;
● it differs significantly from private organization
● is firmly rooted with the various private institutions
In aggregate, public administration
● It works in the interest of the people
● It is the action part of the government which works for policy execution.
● covers each of the three parts of government, despite the fact that it will in general, be
moved in the presidential branch;
● provides administrative and administration capacities to the individuals so as to
accomplish great life;
● differs altogether from a private organization, particularly in its accentuation on people in
general; and
Dimensions of Public Administration
It is challenging to project about the scope or dimensions of any social science subject,
specifically public administration. Frankly speaking, public administration was an unknown
subject about a century ago. Today it is a well- established discipline, and studied across
many universities in India and abroad. Naturally, we can easily take it for granted that with
the changes of people’s outlook, administration and many other related things such as
economic and political affairs, the public administration will also change and the fact is that it
is changing. In earlier decades it was thought that public administration means the
management of day-to-day affairs of states. But this conservative idea has undergone radical
changes.
Individuals of prior decades accepted that public administration implies administration of
human and material assets of state and usage of the strategies and choices of government. A
few people felt that public administration implies the real direct of administrative issues or
preferences. L.D. White once said the central extension or an element of policy
implementation is to authorize the approaches of Government and legitimate administration
of the issues of government. ‘Legitimate’ signifies the public administration will focus on the
overall government assistance of public. The present is the government assistance state and
the measurement or extent of such a state has expanded immensely which implies that the
present state is constrained to do numerous assignments in examination with what Hobbes’ or
Locke’s state did. To accomplish more works intends to take more and significant choices,
the choices are to be actualized.

5
 Once more, for this reason, the state should utilize more people. The entire issue isn’t
just a major one, it is all the while a more unpredictable one. Besides, with the spread of
majority rule government or acknowledgment of ideal, the capacities and responsibilities are
being increased. In the event that the legislature is truly true at its own duty just as
responsibility it must play out specific obligations to fulfill individuals’ requests.
Once more, there is an away from of globalization upon the managerial locale of
government. The truth of the matter is that as the globalization is quickly growing its wings
of impacts upon all over locales individuals of various nations are coming in close contact
with one another. This outcomes in the adjustment in way of life, conduct, standpoint and so
forth. Individuals, through deliberate endeavors, pressurize the legislature to meet their new
and expanding requests which powers the administration to receive new arrangements, take
exceptional measures. All these interest for new arrangements which the administration is
compelled to take. The appropriation of strategy isn’t all, its usage is vital which again falls
inside the territory of public administration. In the sixties or seventies of the only remaining
century the almighty man of China embraced an abhorrent arrangement known as
Xenophobia (unreasonable aversion or dread of individuals from different nations). He didn’t
permit the Chinese public to blend in with the individuals of different nations.
Because he thought that it would contaminate the character and behaviour of the people
of China. Today there is no such possibility. Naturally, free mixing among the various people
of nation-states will bring about a change in everything. Before the Second World War
(1939-1945) there were few- nation-states and international relations were at rudimentary
levels. The governments (particularly of the Third World countries) were not under mounting
pressures of masses of men. Today the situation is different. Now-a-days common people are
extremely conscious, political parties are highly active. The rise and fall of governments are
not trifling matters. The spread of democracy has forced governments of nation states to take
measures to meet the growing demands which has enhanced scope of public administration.
In recent years the concept of political science has changed enormously. It is not only a
science of society. It is also “policy science” which means that political science not only
discusses political arena of human society, it also suggests policies for the proper or
meaningful functions of society. This modification in idea about political science has a
affirmative impact upon public administration. Peter Self in his piece Administrative
Theories and Politics has thrown new light on the political aspect and functional aspect of
government. Peter Self says that in earlier decades government was primarily concerned with
the political aspect or approach. This means that authorities mainly thinks about politics. This
means to maintain law’ and order, conduct elections or the management of day-to-day affairs.
Yet, in late many years this standpoint about administration has changed. Diminish Self
states “Capacities must be fitted into the administrative prerequisites of the overall
authoritative framework.” The administrative angle or approach expresses that the running or
the executives of everyday capacities will never be the sole motivation behind a state.

6
 The state must play out certain significant capacities and the policy implementation plays
out the obligations in the interest of the state. Dwindle Self again expresses that practical
methodology implies that the administration will take or embrace thorough approach to
satisfy the regularly expanding needs of individuals. Once more, the reception and usage of
arrangements require co-appointment among all or the greater part of the branches of
government. Self-further says that the utilitarian association is turning out to be increasingly
convoluted.
John Rawls in his A Theory of Justice has re-imagined and reformulated the hypothesis
of Justice. The way where he has carried out this responsibility has unmistakably changed the
extent of policy implementation in a significant manner. Let us quickly state what Rawls says
about equity. Rawls recommends that rights and freedoms are to be appropriated based on
correspondence. Rawls in addition suggests that financial and different imbalances are to be
organized in such way that no one will be in inconvenience.
This plan of Rawls, it is proposed forces extra weight on government especially the
policy implementation. Rawls’ plan is a significant piece of liberal vote based system. The
administrations, of such popular governments can’t reject their obligations to the individuals.
The outcome is the elements of the policy implementation division are bound to duplicate.
This part of policy implementation has been named as the regularizing measurement. It is
additionally called a moral measurement. It has been proposed by numerous that it is the
obligation of state to see that equity isn’t denied to a specific part of the network.
So as to accomplish this elevated ideal of liberal vote based system the legislature must
take uncommon consideration. The issue is who will carry out the responsibility? The
appropriate response is it is the essential obligation of a liberal government to see that the
ideal of equity has been converted into the real world and the weight of activity falls upon the
division of policy implementation. The policy management of prior period didn’t think the
make a difference in this light.
Max Weber, the father of regulatory organization, restricted his investigation on the idea
of administration and its function in an industrialized entrepreneur society. Be that as it may,
during the most recent eighty years both the industrialist states and individuals’ disposition’
towards government have impressively changed and this change has constrained public
administration to assume more prominent and urgent job.
Significance of the Discipline
In the next section we will be discussing the importance administration as an activity and
discipline.
Importance of the Discipline
The administration has assumed greater importance and scope according to Woodrow
Wilson, all these are consequences of growing problems of society, pro active role of the
state and its welfare activities which has stretched in recent years. The pro active role of the

7
government has resulted in involvement in so many activities which again cannot limit the
work of the administration. In today’s scenario administration has following role to play
1. Base of the government
2. It is the instrument of progress in the general public.
3. It assumes indispensable function in the life of the individuals.
4. It is an instrument for executing laws, strategies, projects of the state.
5. It is a balancing out power in the general public as it gives coherence.
6. It is instrument of public joining in the agricultural nations which are confronting class
wars.
Significance of Administration
The rise of public administration is accredited to the public maneuver. The most important
goal of policy implementation is to proficiently convey public administrations. In some
scenario, Wilsonian highlighted as productivity advancing and realistic field was the primary
unequivocally expressed proclamation on public administration. During the primary portion
of the previous century, many countries had delegated councils to investigate the issues of
organization and prescribed appropriate machinery to counter to various public needs.
Few government report which talks about the changes in administration aftermath of the
administrative reforms. During the most recent forty years likewise, various reports, created
by panels/commissions designated in different nations or multilateral offices, distributed by
researchers.Various reports have been published the few important ones are Fulton committee
report, Reinventing government and other associated reports which talks about the
importance of reforms.
Significance of Public Administration as an Activity
The contemporary time have seen the rise of the Welfare State and how public admin
istartion has transformed into an essential component of the society thus shaping up for the
further reforms. Thus, the enlarged functions calls upon a more proactive role of public
administration and also for outperform in number of spheres.
Views of Scholars
“Administration is action part of government and touches individual lives.
“Administration is a momentous human workforce since its capacity is to hearten social
change and to pad the load of social turmoil”.
“If our progress is not up to the mark then it is the result of the administrative failure.”
The importance of public administration can be listed as follows:
 A Government can exist without other organs but it cannot function without the a good
administration.

8
 An equipment for providing services: “The real core of administration is the services
which are carried out for the general public”. It is the utmost responsibility of the
administration to see that the work is done and public is benefitted.
 An tool for implementing policies: All the policies formulated by the government are
implemented by the administration and thus is is the administration with the help of
which all policies take practical shape.
 Maintenance of balance is very essential for any society and with the help of public
administration such status quo is maintained.
 All the policies of the government whether social or economic are implemented by the
administrative agencies. The main objective of these policies is to bring change and
escalate the standard of the public.
 Technical Character: The present day government and its services have become more
technical in character. Earlier most of the activities of the government were less complex
but the changing time we can see that the change in the character of the government too.
Conclusion
Administration, over the years has become one of the most essential components of society
for implementing the policies of the government. With each passing day the work of the
government is continuously increasing and is thus benefitting the public at large. The
POSDCORB activities of the administration paves way forward for the policies of the
government and thus helps the government in maintaining its balance.
Text:
 Chakrabarty, Bidyut and Mohit Bhattacharaya.2003. Public Administration: A Reader.
New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
 Sapru, R.K.2009.Administrative Theories and Management Thought. New Delhi:
Prentice-Hall India.
 Stevenoff, Jand E.W. Russell (ed.). 2000. Defining Public Administration. New York:
Longman.
References:
 Simon, Herbert A., Donald W. Smithburg, and Victor A Thompson.1950. Public
Administration. New York: Alfred A Knopf.
 Fry, Brian R.1989. Mastering Public Administration: From Max Weber to Dwight
Waldo. Chatham NJ: Chatham House.
 Cox, Raymondand Susan Buck.2009. Public Administration in Theoryand Practice.
Pearson Education.

9
 (b) Public and Private Administration
Dr. Shradhanvita Singh2

 Introduction
 Differences among public and private organization
 Conclusion
 References

Introduction
The significant issue of management is to appropriately arrange resources for efficient
function of society. As a co-usable gathering movement, organization is really general and
works in a wide range of public and private associations. Public administration is legislative
organization worried about accomplishing stated purposes, controlled by the state. Private
organization, then again is, worried about organization of personal business association and is
particular from policy management. Let us expand this from here
A consensus has reached in the matter that contrasts among public and private area
workers exist and is becoming deeper and deeper. Researchers on contrasts and similitudes
among people in general and private areas have got a lot of consideration from the experts
and researchers in this field before, yet it shows blended outcomes. Perry (2000) highlights
requirement for more exact examinations in the area to incorporate more extensive organized
setting to get inspiration and authoritative conduct in open private area associations. Auditing
of writing uncovers tasks inspiration among the elected representatives, administration is
totally different from that of their private area partners. The essential point of task inspiration
is to figure out in what manner to stimulate representatives to play out obligations and duties
inside an association. The essentials of writings shows five essential component which are
inescapable in various standardisation of the work culture. To start with, monetary and
economic incentives is one of the most essential component of public and private
administration. Secondly, job content is directly related condition of the work that has best
predisposition, demeanor and captivating work. Thirdly, vocation improvement leads to
promising circumstances for advancement and improvement inside the association or field of
work. Fourthly, strong and social air alludes to the friendly and helpful working climate and,
fifthly, regard to the public and private life alludes to the business’ regard and comprehension
of representative’s very own circumstance.
A few researchers have engaged the substances zones for looking at difference between
public and private area representatives’ as they have strongly identify with the components of

2
Assistant Professor, Amity School of Liberal Arts and Foreign languages, Amity University

10
motivations for which disparities among both the units were reported. It is strongly said that
there is enough proofs that public workers are less stimulated by monetary awards than
private area representatives
There are many researchers who have argued that money is the not only sole motivating
factor but many other facilities and advantages that makes an employee feel better in the
governmental setup than the private sector. Awards, advantages and incentives that an
employee gets from the their associations whether it is a public or private unit make the most
difference between the two units.
Past exploration has revealed that private area worker, infact esteem significant
compensations essentially more than the public area workers. Public associations are
constantly seen as offering lower pay rates and less salary increases than the private area.
Jurkiewicz reports that public officials enjoy a good and stable position at the top, while
private area individuals put significant compensation/remuneration on the top of the position
request as far as inspirational things are associated.
Differences among Public and Private Organization
Many prominent scholars have made differences among public and private organization. As
indicated by Simon, the qualification among public and private organization transmits
fundamentally to three focuses:
 Administration is governmental whereas private organization is efficient;
 Public organization is politically aware where as private organization is not so much
politically aware.
 Public organization is portrayed by formality where as private organization is
liberated from it.
As indicated by Sir Josiah Stamp, the four standards, which separate public from private
organization, are:
 Equal Access for all: In Public administration everyone has an equal access but in
private the access is not for all.
 Budgetary Control: Governmental body undergoes budgetary control while private
does not.
 Responsibility and Accountability: Public organization is responsible to its political
experts and through them to the individuals.
 Principle of Return: The principle target of an undertaking is benefit, anyway little it
might be. Notwithstanding, the vast majority of the targets of policy management can
nor be estimated in cash terms nor checked by bookkeeping strategies.
As indicated by Paul H. Appleby public administration is unique in relation to private
organization. He commented, “In expansive terms the administrative capacity and demeanor

11
have in any event three reciprocal perspectives that go to separate government from every
single other organization and exercises: expansiveness of extension, effect and thought;
public responsibility; political character. No non-legislative establishment has the broadness
of government.
“Organization is governmental issues since it must be receptive to the public intrigue. It
is important to underline the way that mainstream political cycles, which are the quintessence
of majority rules system, can just work through legislative association, and that all
administrative associations are not simply regulatory substances, they are and should be
political creatures.”
Private organization can’t guarantee the broadness of degree, effect and thought of the
policy implementation. He watches, “The composed government encroaches and influenced
by essentially. This includes arrangements and activities of colossal intricacy.
The more significant distinctive highlights are:
● Administration is political, while private organization is non-political, policy
implementation happens in a political setting.
● Nonappearance of benefit thought process: The nonattendance of benefit intention
from the Public organization is another element, which recognizes it from the private
organization. The main role of legislative association is to offer types of assistance to
individuals and advance social great.
● Esteem: Public organizations are high in esteem while Private organization are low in
esteem.
● Public Gaze: Activities of policy implementation are presented to wide open look in
light of the fact that people in general intently watches it.
● Maintenance: In governmental organizations the maintenance is more but in private
organization it’s less
● Legitimate structure: Public administration works under certain set of rules while
Private organization works on their whims and fancies.
● Public accountability: Public responsibility is the sign of Public organization in a
vote based system. Policy implementation is dependable to people in general,
however not straightforwardly yet by implication through political chief, assembly,
legal executive, and so on
● Enormous scope organization: Public organization is huge scope organization. It is
said that nearly anything under the sun is legitimately or in a roundabout way under
the space of policy implementation. It is by all methods bigger than any large private
worry regarding size, multifaceted nature and variety of exercises.

12
 ● Services : Both public and private organization are service oriented but for
government it is a part of welfare activity.
● Authorities: Policy management, even higher level stay unknown and their character
isn’t uncovered. This is so in light of the fact that whatever they do, they do for the
sake of the legislature and not in their own name.
● Monetary carefulness: Public organization must be exceptionally cautious in
budgetary issues since it is filling in as caretaker of individuals’ cash.
● Functional Efficiency: Efficiency is supposed to be the foundation of any
association. In any case, because of fluctuated obligations, absence of compelling
control, less responsibility, inclusion of countless levels and professional stability of
workers, proficiency has not been there in open associations with the impact wanted.
Private organization is considered to be more efficient.
Public and private administration is often paralleled and differentiated There is much in
common between public and private administration and the difference between the two is
only of degree, not of kind. First of all let us see the similarity between public and private
administration. Both public and private administrations have noticeable common features at
several points. Many of managerial practices in administration and its methods are common
to both. The activities like account keeping, planning, organizing staffing, directing, reporting
budgeting and staffing etc. are essential common features of both the administration. The
development of public corporation a halfway house between its commercial type and the
form of department- is a current trend in administration. Thus, there is a great deal of
similarity between public and private administration. Despite these similarities, both function
in different environment and performing different set of functions functions and is affected
by different set of externalities. The environment in which public administration functions
promotes protective attitude of mind in the officials, and it works in the favour and the
benefit of masses at large so that the accountability and responsibility can be fixed. In the
words of Paul H. Appleby, “Government administration differ from all other administrative
works to a degree not even distantly realised outside, by virtue of its public nature, the way in
which it is subject to public examination and commotion. An administrator coming into
government is struck at once, and continually thereafter, by the press and public interests in
every detail of his life, personality and conduct. The detail often runs to details of
administrative action that in private business would never be of concern other than inside the
organization”.

13
 Fig1: Differences between Public and Private Administration

According to him three aspects differentiate government from private administration;

they are
1. Breadth of scope, impact and consideration,
2. Public accountability,
3. Political character.

Fig 2: Difference between Public and Private Administration as per Paul H Appleby

14
Followings are the main differences between public and private administration
1. Public administration: The first and foremost difference between public and private
administration is that of profit orientation. The former works on non-profit basis and
the latter works on profit basis.
2. Public Administration is based on legal rational system which means that it has to run
the show on the basis of legality. On the contrary, private administration is not so
much on rule based. Private businesses are not so much of rule bound but they work
in a flexible environment which enables them to adapt to the changing scenario.
3. The actions of the public administration are open for criticism and wide publicity. An
achievement is rarely acknowledged, but a little problem creates a huge problem
within the society.
4. Public administration is impartial in dealing with the public and no preferential
treatment is met to the general public it is observed that there is principle of
consistency of treatment whereas in private administration discrimination is freely
practiced due to demands and supply needs of the people.
5. Public administration is much complex and is known for programme decision of the
government. There are many push and political pressures in the setup. Many minds
have to meet and discuss before decisions are taken. By contrast private
administration is more well-knit and single minded in operation
6. Public Administration has many responsibilities in terms of nation building and
shaping the future of the society. It is therefore much more value oriented.
7. There is inevitably more of redtape(thus delay) in public administration than private
administration
8. Activities of public administration are mandated by constitutional, statutory or executive
authority. Private administration enjoys a much larger measure of freedom of action
and behaviour
9. Public administration is slow to adapt itself to quick changes in the environment
because of the operation of checks and balances within itself as well as the complexity
of environmental factors. Private administration is quicker to change.
10. Public administration is subject to budgeting
Conclusion
The public administration and private administration is a kind of blended concept where both
have few similarities and differences at the same time. The concept of administration is
universal and has more practical significance in the times to come. The private sector is more
adaptive and supports innovation and change. Private administration is more flexible in
approach when compared with the Public administration. The private sector is also subjected
to constant change in order to meet the circumstances or situation like for tackling the current
15
financial obligations, political or social changes and thus underlining the need to rethink the
processes to adopt, thus make change inclusive.
References
 Perry, J. L. (2000). Bringing society in: Towards a theory of public-service
motivation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(2), 471-488.
 Hansen, S.B., Huggins, L., & Ban, C. (2003). Explaining employee recruitment and
retention by non-profit organizations: A survey of Pittsburgh Area University
graduates. Report to the Forbes Fund, December. Retrieved 10/9/08 at
http://www.forbesfunds.org/docs/PittsburghAreaGraduates.pdf.

16
 (c) Evolution of Public Administration
Dr. Rinki

 Introduction
 Different Phases of Evolution of Public Administration
The first Phase - Politics Administration Dichotomy (1887–1926)
Second Phase - Principles of Administration (1927–1937)
Third Phase - Era of Challenges (1938–1947)
The fourth phase- Crises of Identity (1948-1970)
Fifth Phase - Public Policy Perspective (Since 1970)
 New Trends in the Field of Public Administration
 Conclusion
 References

Introduction
Administration is connected with daily activities of our life and is considered as an important
aspect in which it can be seen that how the government can work better with efficiency and
lower cost. Public administration is playing an important role in modern society. It can be
said that public administration is a means of providing services to the people. It protects the
life and property of the people by maintaining law and order. Public administration as an
activity is as old as human civilization. It can also be said that public administration has been
as old as the government. Administration and government are interlinked. Scholars of politics
have systematically written on the subject of functions of government and its constitution, the
nature, sovereignty and power of the state. The beginning of the development of public
administration as a systematic study or academic discipline has been started from the late
nineteenth century, when Woodrow Wilson article ‘The Study of Administration’ was
published in Political Science Quarterly in 1887. But by this time public administration was
not considered as a branch of science.
Different Phases of Evolution of Public Administration
Public administration need to be understood in the context in which it has been originated.
The actions of the state have been changing with the passage of time and at the same time the
nature of public administration running the state has also changed. In modern times, the
nature of public administration can be understood in the changing socio-economic context of
the state. It can be said that public administration is the act of achieving a particular objective
in a socio-economic context. Public administration includes both theory and practice. Both its

17
theory and practice can be studied at various stages of evolution of public administration.
Thus, the evolution of public administration can be analyzed in five Phases.
First Phase- Politics Administration Dichotomy (1887-1926)
Second Phase- Principles of Administration (1927-1937)
Third Phase- Era of Challenges (1938-1947)
Fourth Phase- Crisis of Identity (1948-1970)
Fifth Phase- Public Policy Perspective (1970 Onwards)
The first Phase - Politics Administration Dichotomy (1887–1926)
During the last decades of the nineteenth century, role of the state was minimal; importance
was given to free competition and free market and the state was seen as a necessary evil.
Under these circumstances public services were provided by the private sector. Fundamental
principles of public administration emerged in these early days and it can be said that this was
the first stage of evolution of public administration. At the same time, in 1887, Woodrow
Wilson’s article ‘The Study of Administration’ was published in Political Science Quarterly
which is accepted as the first article of public administration. This article was written at a
time when there was a need to eradicate corruption and increase efficiency in order to provide
services in the public interest. He believed that there should be a scientific study of
administration. By scientific study of administration, he meant a branch of systematic
knowledge that could improve the field of administration and reduce the shortcomings in this
field.
With the publication of Wilson’s article, a new era actually began, in which the study of
public administration gradually developed. Wilson made a distinction between politics and
administration, arguing that administration is only concerned with the implementation of
policies. That is why this phase is also known as the division of politics and administration;
where the work of politics was to formulate policies and the work of administration was to
execute policies.
Although, Wilson’s work is believed to be the first step in the evolution of public
administration; but this development was further accelerated and acknowledged with the
publication of Frank J. Goodnow’s article ‘Politics and Administration’ in 1900. In this
article he talked about separating politics and administration; and considered it as a two
distinct functions of government. Where, politics is related to the expression of state policies
while administration is concerned with the implementation of these policies. Under this, the
function of public administration was to maintain law and order and collect taxes. Public
administration received attention in the early twentieth century. Public service movements
took place in world universities in the United States that contributed to the development of
public administration.
In 1914, Committee on Instruction in Government of the American Political Science
Association gave its report on training to prepare specialists for the government positions. In
18
1912, Committee on Practical Training for Public Service was established. In 1914 it
submitted its report in which special vocational school was recommended to train public
administrators.
In 1920s, public administration began to gain educational legitimacy with the publication
of L.D. White’s ‘Introduction to the Study of Public Administration’ in 1926. This book was
recognized as the first book in this field. During this time, the main concern of public
administration was to emphasize on value-free science as well as to reduce the cost of
production with increased efficiency. In this phase political and administrative functions were
divided. In this phase of political administrative division, administration was given a
conceptual basis. During this phase, two functional areas of government were seen, one
administrative and the other political.
Second Phase - Principles of Administration (1927–1937)
In the beginning of the twentieth century, there was an ideological change in the form of
public administration and the state. Emphasis was on Social reformism and not on traditional
conservatism. During this time partnership between the public and the private administration
was visible. It was considered necessary to find out the universal principles of administration
which could be applied to all nations. Under this phase also the division of politics and
administration was emphasized and an attempt was made to develop a ‘value free science of
management’. No doubt, the division of politics and administration was made in the first
phase which was taken in the second phase also but the technique of study in the first phase
was scientific rather than legal.
W.H. Willoughby’s book on ‘Principles of Public Administration’ emerged as a second
book in the field of public administration in which the scientific principles of administration
were given more emphasis. It was said that if administrators learn how to apply these
principles, they can perform their tasks better. Frederick Taylor’s work and his theory of
scientific management made a significant impact in the field of public administration. Taylor
believed that his scientific theory of management is universal.
This phase was marked with certain other principles of public administration. Henry
Fayol’s book ‘Industrial and General Management’ (1930) discussed about fourteen
principles regarding organization. Mary Parker Follet’s ‘Creative Experience’ (1924),
Mooney and Reiley, ‘Principles of Organization’, Chester Barnard’s ‘Administrative
Management’, Gulick and Urwick, ‘Papers on the science of Administration’ (1937)
elaborated about seven principles of the organization and coined the term ‘POSDCORB’.
All the thinkers of public administration in this phase laid stress on scientific principles.
The idea of the division of politics-administration was retained and the value-free science of
management was emphasized. In this phase it was stated that the principles of administration
are present which need to be discovered and extended. Economy and Efficiency was included
as the main objectives and principles of the administrative system so that better services can
be provided in administration at a lower cost.

19
 If Wilson is considered as the leader of public administration than Max Weber is
considered as an idealist on the subject of public administration. Weber’s idealistic
bureaucracy has been fundamental to the concept of any organization which is value free
also. He has introduced the concept of social organization and discussed the structural
characteristics in which the division of labor and hierarchy of work can be seen as an
important characteristic. It is said that Weber’s bureaucracy is impersonal and neutral which
was kept away from irrational and emotional values. In this phase these principles of
administration helped in understanding how organizations function.
Third Phase - Era of Challenges (1938–1947)
The decade of 1930 saw a change in the nature of the state which also influenced the nature
of public administration. The private sector and markets failed to meet the needs of citizens.
The market had to be taken under the control of the state. It was deemed necessary that some
professional persons who have commercial attitude towards public services are required for
public management. Ideal values were emphasized under democracy. It was accepted that
economic, social and political policies have an impact on each other. The task of the public
servants not only includes the making of law and order but their important role in the
formulation of public policies was also acknowledged. Here the departments were neither
separated from each other nor was the work divided. During this phase it was felt that politics
and administration are interlinked.
This was the time when scientific management was criticized in the 1940s. It was felt
that not only scientific principles are to be emphasized to increase productivity in an
organization but human aspect also plays an important role; the limitations of the scientific
management were brought into limelight. Elton Mayo, Chester Bernard and thinkers like
Chris Argyris, etc. emphasized human aspects in public administration. In 1938, Chester
Bernard’s book ‘The Functions of the Executive’ got published which discussed about the
significant role of informal organization but its impact on public administration was not up to
mark. But his work influenced Herbert Simon; Simon wrote ‘Administrative Behavior’ in
(1947); a very influential book, written for the professionals and managers to understand the
processes related to management. In this book Simon called the principles of administration
as proverbs.
During this time it was assumed that administration and politics cannot be separated
from each other. Firtz Morstein Marx prepared a first volume, ‘Elements of Public
Administration’ in 1946, in which he questioned the division of administration and politics.
In this volume, fourteen articles were included which created the awareness about what is
often seen as value free politics is basically value laden administration. Those who
challenged the value free administration emphasized that public administrator and elected
office holders were involved in taking political decisions and making public policies. Those
who challenged the division of politics and administration made intellectual changes in the
field of public administration. It was said that the administration has never been separated
from politics. Along with this it was also said that there is no such thing which we can refer

20
as principles of administration. With every principle of administration, there exist a counter
principle and that is why the doctrine of principle of administration is often disputed.
The fourth phase- Crises of Identity (1948-1970)
In this phase there was a transformation in the concept of public administration and emphasis
was on inter-disciplinary studies and analysis, along with the criticism of scientific principles.
This phase begins with the publication of Simon’s book ‘Administrative Behavior’ and
Robert Dahl’s essay ‘Science of Public Administration: Three Problems’ in 1947. Simon not
only spoke about the limitations of the principles of administration but also gave importance
to scientific analysis of public administration. He emphasized the rational principle of policy
making, highlighting the relation between the means and the ends. Along with this, he talked
about bringing scientific analysis in the field of public administration by using psychological
and socio-psychological methods. During this phase, attempts were made to link public
administration with psychology, economics, politics and sociology.
Simon said that administrative principles were taken from the logic and psychology of
human desires. Here, Simon discussed two viewpoints; in the first section, he said that the
development of the science of administration has a deep connection with social psychology.
The second view emphasized on fundamental aspects in which emphasis was on the idea of
what kind of public policy should be there. Under this, instructions are given for public
policy and analysis of sociology and economics gets combined with political science.
However, Simon was aware that in this way public administration could lose its independent
existence. But he also stressed that both the views should exist simultaneously because the
development of public administration as a subject is dependent on them.
In late 1920’s, the Western Electric Company’s Hawthorne experiments were conducted
under the supervision of Elton Mayo. In these experiments human behavior in the group was
analyzed. Along with this, after the Second World War, in various universities studies were
conducted to understand the behavior of human beings and emphasis was on the human
aspect of administration including the studies of Maslow and Herzberg. Both of them gave
importance to social environment and group attitude towards working conditions. It stated
that employee oriented supervision is more effective than official supervision. These studies
highlighted the limitations of machine concepts of organization, while taking into account
social and psychological factors of work conditions.
In this phase, three important problems have been mentioned in the development of
administration. In the first problem, it was pointed that science is value free while the values
affect the administration. In the second problem, it was said that for the development of the
science of public administration, the study of human aspects is necessary. Human behavior is
full of all possible variations and uncertainties, due to which it is impossible to check it
scientifically. Under the third problem, it has been said that on the basis of the examples
drawn from limited national and historical contexts it has a tendency to explore universal
principles. Here the basic principles of administration were condemned and it has been said

21
that public administration is not scientific but fundamental, not universal but linked to the
culture of the nation. Thus, these problems mentioned by Dahl create obstacles in the
development of the science of administration.
Fifth Phase - Public Policy Perspective (Since 1970)
After World War II, new nations have been created in Asia, Africa and Latin America, and
new trends have been introduced in the study of public administration. During this time it was
necessary to understand the administrative nature of newly independent nations in a new
environment. Western scholars, especially the scholars from United States expressed greater
interest in studying the administrative nature of the newly independent nations. It can be said
that the relevance of ecological elements was being accepted at this time. It was in this
perspective that emphasis was given to study the effects of various administrative systems of
nations. During this time, the study of administration put stress on comparative, ecological
and development administration, in which Dwight Waldo, W. Riggs, and Edward Wiedner
majorly contributed and all of them stressed on expanding the field of public administration.
Along with this, the emergence of new public administration perspective in public
administration can also be seen during this phase; where the contemporary nature of public
administration was questioned in late 1960’s. The beginning of the new public administration
dates back to the 1968 Minnowbrook Conference. The Minnowbrook Conference marked the
beginning of a new era in the field of public administration, so that the study and behavior of
public administration can be made social, contextual and responsible. Under this, it was said
that politics should be given priority in administration. It can be said that a new movement
started in the field of American public administration by a new generation of American
scholars. These scholars demanded the protection of public objectives and values. Four main
elements were emphasized under the new public administration, including relevance, value,
parity, and change.
It was during this phase that school of policy choice emerged as another important
discipline in the evolution of public administration in which attempts have been made to
eliminate the evils arising out of bureaucratic monopoly. It was said that the bureaucracy
should be controlled. It emphasized competition and privatization. The school of policy
choice recognizes that there should be options available in providing services to citizens.
Under this, the dominance of the state was challenged by the role of the market.
Simultaneously, it opened up with the possibilities of alternatives to non-bureaucratic civil
partner organizations and to reduce the power of bureaucracy.
After Twenty years, in 1988 Minnowbrook Conference II was another landmark in the
evolution of public administration and the emphasis was on new public management
approach. The purpose of this conference was to change the nature of administration in
changing times. It reflected the changes taking place in the Western nations. The state, which
until now was seen as the main agent of social justice, in 1970’s the role of the state, was
questioned. Attempts were made to reduce the role of the state in every field. Change in the

22
administration of advance western countries had contributed to the development of New
Public Management.
The third Minnowbrook conference was held in 2008. In this conference, democracy,
ethics, accountability, philosophy and economics were examined and the emphasis was on
high quality of service needs. Along with increasing autonomy of public managers,
organizations and individuals have to be awarded if the targets are met. Necessary human and
technical resources should be made available to perform well in providing services to the
citizens. Osborne and Gaebler publication ‘Reinventing Government’ (1992) redefined the
functions of the government, emphasis was on Entrepreneurial Government; where through
measurement and evaluation, public management will improve and the role of the
government will reduce; and lastly it includes the privatization of selected public sector units
(PSU’s).
Its main objective was to keep in mind the interests of the citizens; reduce the traditional
bureaucracy and focus on democratization and decentralization. The main objective of the
new public management here was to empower the citizens. It also included participative
management and community governance and saw citizens as active consumers. The role of
NGOs and community-based organizations in governance was acknowledged. These were
seen as complementary public agencies. It was also said in New Public Management that
citizens cannot be seen as passive recipients of the programs and policies
New Trends in the Field of Public Administration
Globalization has been another phenomenon in development of public administration as a
discipline which has changed the field of public administration and its nature. It changed the
traditional structure of administration; and through cooperation and networks it had made the
field of administration more flexible, less hierarchical and liberalized. Globalization
presented new challenges and it was necessary to change the form of public administration to
fight these new challenges. Globalization emphasized the need for a public administration
that is proactive. It was felt at this time that traditional principles or concepts of public
administration did not hold any importance at the present time.
Good governance is being given more importance in the era of globalization since the
1990s. Along with globalization, the nature of the state has changed; there has also been a
change in the form of administration and interactions between the states have increased.
There are certain criteria set for good governance. In 1989, a report by the World Bank on
Sub Saharan Africa said that the investment that had been made for development in that
region was unsuccessful because there was no good governance there. Good governance was
defined by the World Bank in 1992, in which it can be tested through four aspects- including
public sector management, accountability, legal framework for development, information and
transparency. In good governance the state has been seen as a medium that supports the
market system. The role of the state has been explained by the World Bank that the state has
two obligations. First, the state or government will formulate and enforce the rules that are

23
necessary for the smooth functioning of the market. Second, if the market fails then to
intervene for reforms.
In late 1990s Janet Denhardt and Robert Denhardt introduced the new public service
model in which democratic principles were emphasized. Denhardt & Denhardt in their
publication ‘The New Public Service: Serving Rather Than Steering’ emphasized on serving
the citizens by the government.
In this publication it has been said that the government cannot run as a business but the
government should run like a democracy. Emphasis has been laid on officers’ responsibility
towards citizens where officers provide services to citizens. Officers should have an
association with citizens. They should have a sense of service towards the community. Under
this, the emphasis was laid on the establishment of a new culture of co-governance by
citizens’ participation in the process of governance.
Under globalization, social, economic and political changes emerged which brought
flexibility in the traditional form of governance. There was hierarchy and emphasis was on
networks and participation which was away from bureaucracy. There was also a change in
the distribution of public services and goods. Public services and distribution of goods had
been important functions of public administration. In the time of globalization, a cooperative
form of public administration emerged in reducing the role of the welfare state. Various
methods were used to increase the privatization of welfare distribution; it also includes the
promotion of private provisions and voluntary sectors. This does not mean that it had made
public administration unnecessary. Public administration still remains important. The
centrality of public administration can neither be denied by the state nor by the market.
Conclusion
Public administration as a discipline developed in late nineteenth century. In the present time
also, the continuous process of development of public administration can be seen. In this time
interval, along with the changing nature of the state, at different stages of development of
public administration the changing nature of public administration can be seen. It can be said
that with the time, along with social, economic and political changes, the form of public
administration, its principles and behavior has also been changing. The emphasis which was
on development of public administration; and its traditional principles in the beginning
including the traditional bureaucratic and structural aspects of public administration has been
replaced presently by the participative form of public administration.
References
Bhattacharya, M. (2011). New Horizons of Public Administration. New Delhi: Jawahar
Publishers.
Chakrabarty, B & Chand, P. (2012). Public Administration in a Globalizing World: Theories
and Practices. New Delhi: Sage Publications.

24
Demir, T. (2009) .Politics and administration: Three schools, three approaches and three
suggestions. Administrative Theory and Praxis, 31(4): 503-532.
Henry N. (2012). Public Administration and Public Affairs. New Jersey: Pearson Education.
Pani, N. (2010). Research in public administration in through ages. The Indian Journal of
Political Science, 71(4):1293-1309.

25
 Unit-2 : Theoretical Perspectives
(a) Classical Theories

i. Scientific Management Approach

Dr. Shradhanvita Singh and Dr. Rinki3*

 Introduction
 F.W. Taylor: His books and Methods
 Scientific Management Approach
 Principles of Scientific Management: F. W. Taylor
1. Science of Work and its Development
2. Scientific Selection and Development of Workmen
3. Combining Science of Work and scientifically selected Workers
4. Workers and Management: Division of Responsibility
 Scientific Management Movement
 Criticism
 Conclusion
 References

Introduction
Scientific Management Approach is of vital significance in administrative management. This
approach evolved during the later nineteenth century. Scientific management approach takes
care of complex situation emerging due to mechanical advancements. Frederick Winslow
Taylor is viewed as one of the forerunner of the scientific management, who cleared path for
further research. F.W. Taylor was brought into the world in a German town on March 20,
1856. He got his experience in two European states. As an architect he was involved in the
improvement of many innovations, he concocted a few devices to build the creation. A
portion of the significant instruments he created were cutting apparatus, a warmth treating
device, a steel hammer, water driven force stacking hardware, exhausting and turning
factories and so forth. He was constantly keen on enhancing the methods of the board. He
underscored on the logical method of building up the apparatuses just as logical method of

3
Assistant Professor, Amity School of Liberal Arts and Foreign languages, Amity University Haryana and
*
Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Delhi

26
playing out the work. He has energy for proficiency and logical method of work in the
associations. From USA, it spread to other countries including former USSR, where it took
shape as Stakhanovite Movement during 1920-1940.
According to Taylor, “the same principles can be applied with equal force to all social
activities: to the management of our home: the management of our farms: the management of
the business of our tradesmen, large and small of our churches, our philanthropic institutions
our universities and our governmental departments.”
F.W. Taylor: His Books and Methods
Taylor’s theory of Scientific Management is first of its kind where he has highlighted the
issues of economy, efficiency and effectiveness. His major thrust was at improving the
productivity in the organization. Some of the significant works of Taylor reflects in his earlier
writing and other issues which he has highlighted.
The vital observation of Taylor on Scientific Administration methodology are included
in his major works in which he has specified following assumptions.
1. There should be standard time to finish any particular work.
2. Differential piece wage rate system.
3. Right men at right place.
Taylor also made certain assumption in his theory of Scientific Management which are as
follows:
1. Taylor laid emphasis that the functioning of any organization can be improved with
the application of Science;
2. A good worker accepts the directive from the management;
3. Man is motivated by monetary factors.
Taylor's stay in an organization, his perception and investigation of various tasks in various
manufacturing plants brought into his notice the imperfections in their administration. These
were: absence of lucidity of obligations by laborers and administrations, absence of norms of
work, limited yield due to welding of work, absence of occupation clearness which advances
fastening of work, absence of logical base for choices, absence of division of work, and
arrangement of laborers at various positions without thinking about their capacity, abilities
and inclination.
Taylor depends on broad examination of investigations spread over long 26 years. He
examined instruments for cutting of steel, contemplated movement and observed how
workers handle materials, machines and apparatuses while on work. Taylor found out the
most ideal approach in accomplishing various tasks. He came to the conclusion that right
persons should be selected for various tasks. During his experiments in the industrial
organizations, Taylor came across a soldiering phenomenon, which is a tendency on the part

27
of workers to restrict the output. He classified this phenomenon into two kinds; natural
soldiering and systematic soldiering. The former is the result of personal factors like habit to
take it easy, not to over exert and so on, while the latter is the result of organizational and
social factors. He observed that workers practice systematic soldiering to meet the
expectation of supervisor at lower levels. He felt hat the fundamental way of increasing
efficiency of organization lies in the reduction of soldering through scientific techniques.
Scientific Management Approach
As referenced over the scientific administration approach created in the beginning stages of
mechanical transformation. It attempted to address a portion of the issues of modern culture.
The fundamental worries of mechanical community were to mend productivity, lessen
expenses of creation to reap the benefits. This can be done by two long methods. So, it is
identified with humanizing the innovation thus leading to effective administration of laborers.
The other is with development of new market. Taylor, though this Scientific Management
method attempted to link it with contemporary culture. Henceforth, it is stressed on scientific
methods on getting things done and overseeing associations.
Principles of Scientific Management: F. W. Taylor
Taylor in his theory of Scientific Management laid four principles which he regarded as
crucial for increasing the productivity within any organization. These are as follows
1. Develop scientific approach in various management tasks.
2. The rigorous assortment of workforce and their continuous training.
3. Combination of scientific approach and rationally chosen workforce.
4. Fixing the obligations of the employer and employees.
1. Science of Work and Its Development
Taylor observed that scientific approach is a must in dealing with workforce. He believed that
systematic observation is helpful in finding out the most appropriate way of doing a job. He
attempted to replace the old thumb rule method. This need gathering, recording and
tabulating various work experiences and finally formulating rules based on them. These rules
are to be applied in actual work situation. This will ensure diminishing unnecessary criticism
of the supervisor.
2. Scientific Selection and Development of Workmen
There should be scientific approach in selection of work force and continuous development
of work culture. Taylor believed that each worker his or her potential for growth. There must
be systematic training. Scientific approach implies that right person should be selected for
right job. Proper environment should be created so that workers accept the new methods,
tools and conditions enthusiastically. Opportunities should be created for workers to develop
their new capabilities to the fullest extent.

28
3. Combining Science of Work and Scientifically Selected Workers
The third principle of Taylor’s Scientific Management is about the combination of first and
second principles. Thus he emphasized on bringing together and science of work with the
scientific selection and development of work force. This provides the firm basis to his idea of
Scientific Management.
4. Workers and Management: Division of Responsibility
Taylor emphasized on a conductive atmosphere of shared responsibility by the proper
division of work between the employer and workers. In the prevalent practice, workers were
always blamed for occurrence of any problem in the organization. Hence, Taylor preferred an
equal division of responsibility between the two which can prevent one section to be
overburdened. Such sharing of responsibility is important for creating a stress free
environment for workers in an organization.
Scientific Management Movement
The very first person to talk about Scientific Management in 1910 was Louis Brandies.
Taylor stressed on the universal applicability of his principles of Scientific Management. He
felt that his work covered the whole sphere of commercial management. Techniques
developed by Taylor were termed as Task System or Task Management. His ideas were
developed extensively by his peer group members including Henry Grantt, Frank Gilbreth
and Lillian Gillberth etc.
Thus, scientific management became a ‘movement’ in itself and left a mark as the first
systematic theory of the organization. It gave a solution to many industrial organizations
around the world through utilization of scientific and objective principles. Post 1917, after the
Bolshevik Revolution, Lenin introduced Taylor’s techniques in Russia. This system is viewed
as “a combination of subtle brutality of bourgeois exploitation and variety of its greatest
scientific achievements”. Taylor’s ideas and techniques gathered momentum and support all
across Russia and the Communist Party fully supported the rational movement. Besides,
Taylor’s ideas were introduced in the curriculum for education and training of engineers for
further dissemination of his work.
Reinhard Bendix, in his book Work and Authority and Industry, said that “by
maximizing the productive efficiency of each worker, scientific management would also
maximize the earning of workers and employers. Hence, all conflict between capital and
labour would be resolved by the finding of science.”
Criticism and Disagreement
Scientific Management, is criticized on following grounds
1. It was criticized on the grounds that it only focusses on the lower level of the
organization and entirely neglects the issues pertaining at the higher apex of the

29
 organization. Thus, this approach neglects one set of factors in an organization which is
important for its functioning.
2. The Scientific Theory of Management neglects the human side of the organization. It
focuses too much on the formal structure of the organization and neglected the informal
side of it which is also an important aspect of organization setup. It tends to treat
workers as machines. Social and psychological factors also play their own roles in work
management. The Scientific Management Theory does not focus on these vital aspects.
3. Many scholars have criticized Scientific Management as it has simplified the concept of
human motivation. Taylor has laid more emphasis on the monetary factors than the
social and psychological factors. The Hawthorne experiments revealed that set of factors
that are responsible for the healthy functioning of the organization can be different from
the monetary factors.
4. Taylorism received great opposition from trade unions as the concept of mental
revolution calls out for a cooperative relation between the two which makes the role of
trade unions as irrelevant but this was not entirely true.
5. It was opposed by managerial group as managers were losing out on their discretion and
they were being asked to share their responsibilities. Professor Robert Hoxie put forward
his strong opposition to Taylor by arguing that Scientific Management only focused of
mechanistic facts and neglected the social and psychological facts and orientation.
Conclusion
Taylor’s theory of Scientific Management apart from being the first coherent theory, also
offered solutions to the problems of industrial organizations. The benefits received from the
Taylorism are huge and it also helped many organizations to overcome its issues of
productivity. Taylor was the first administrative thinker to firmly rely on the principle of
science and one best way of doing things. Taylor believed that these principles have universal
application and can be applied to all organization irrespective of its nature. His theory of
Scientific Management focused on the problems of workers. Taylor’s concept of differential
piece wage rate system, mental revolution, propagation of science of work, economy,
effectiveness and efficiency makes his theory of Scientific Management different from other
classical theories.
References
Ali, Shun Sun Nisa, 1977, Eminent Administrative Thinkers, Associated Publishing House,
New Delhi.
Bertram, M. Gross, 1964, The Managing of Organisations, The Administrative Struggle, The
Free Press of Glencoe, Collier-Macmillan., London.
Bhattacharya, Mohit, 1981, Public Administration: Structure, Process and Behaviour, The
World Press Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata.

30
Braverman, Harry, 1979, Labour and Monopoly Capital, The Degradation of Work in the
Twentieth Century, Social Scientist Press, Trivendrum.
Clegg, Steward & David Dunkerley, 1980, Organisation, Class and Control, Routledge &
Kegan Paul, London.
Prasad, D. Ravindra, V.S. Prasad and P. Satyanarayan, 2004, Administrative Thinkers (Ed),
Sterling Publishers, New Delhi. Pugh, D.S., 1985, Organisation Theory: Selected Readings
(Ed), Penguin Books,Middlesex, England.

31
 ii : Administrative Management
Mhadeno Jungi

Learning Outcomes

 Become familiar with the administrative management approach and its importance
 Know the important principles given by contributors of this approach
 Understand how these principles can be used to bring better outcomes through better
management.
Introduction
Administrative management is one of the important approaches dealing with the science and
principles on how management ought to be carried out in an organisation. Organisations have
become increasingly complex with modernisation so the proponents of this approach
envisioned that if a set of universal principles are developed that are scientific in nature, then
it can help in more efficient working of the organisation.
In modern day functioning Administrative management has become integral in the
functioning of an organisation. Information management is one of the important process
undertaken by management. The administrative function “is responsible for the orderly
collection, processing, storage and distribution of information to those within an
organisation”. This enables decisions makers and managers at all levels to execute their tasks
and take meaningful decisions (cited from E. J Ferreira et.al.). A large number of roles within
organisations both public and private involve administrative management and an
‘Administrative manager’ manages the planning, coordination, and directs the business.
Background
By 19th C, industrialization was occurring rapidly in the western world especially United
States. This led to the development of search for objective principles that would improve the
efficiency in manufacturing units. Economy and efficiency were the two watchwords as
industries strived to organise itself better based on objective principles that would increase its
productivity and competitiveness.
In the meantime, modern state had increased the nature and scope of public
administration in every aspect of life and there was an increased demand of public services.
At the same time limited resources for the same required formulations of certain postulates
for more efficient and economical operations in the Government. This led to the development
or quest for finding objective principles that could be applicable in bureaucratic and
administrative management as well. Thus, there occurred a synthesis between the two in
which principles postulated to improve efficiency and economy in industries was now
imported in governmental reforms in the US and this had a resounding impact on
governmental reforms.

32
 This led to the development of classical organisation theory with inherent structural bias.
The current understanding of management functions is based in large part to the contribution
of a classical management theorist, Henri Fayol. The proponents of this theory captured the
essence of economy and efficiency and developed a set of principles that would become the
basis for the form and substance of organisation. Thus, Administrative Management theory
developed as an attempt to find a rational way to design an organization as a whole.
The major proponents of this theory are Henry Fayol, Gulick and Urwick, Mooney, A.C.
Reiley, M.P. Follett and R. Shelton.
Key Premises of this Approach
These thinkers have certain basic premises on which they all agree:
Firstly, this approach emphasizes on the structure of the administration/organisation.
According to the theorists who contributed to this approach, without structure an organisation
cannot function and it is the structure that moulds human nature to the needs of the
organisation. Thus, the proponents of this approach are called structuralists and they envision
a structural theory of organisation.
Secondly this approach deals with the formulation of certain universal principles for
structuring formal organisation. Many of these principles are based on the experiences of the
proponents in the industrial organisation.
Thirdly, these principles are also deemed to be scientifically valid as they have been
derived through rigorous empirical observation of industries and military.
Finally, this approach treats organisation as a closed system that functions autonomously
of the external environment. This approach believed that following an objective scientific
principle would ensure the success of the organisation. Thus, it was not concerned with
human behaviour in the functioning of the organisation. Instead organisation was seen as the
machine and human beings as mere cogs in the machine.
Based on these observations, proponents of this approach truly believed that such
scientific principles would lead to greater efficiency and economy in the organisation.
Contributions of this Approach
Henry Fayol Fayol was a French mining engineer turned leading industrialist and successful
manager whose contribution to management process is significant and he is one of the early
pioneers of the “Management Process School”. He lamented that management was a
neglected activity due to the absence of a theory. So, His work ‘General and Industrial
Management’ (1916) was an attempt to address the lacuna and since then has become a
classic and foundation of classic management theory. His most prominent contribution to
public administration is his paper on ‘The theory of Administration in the State’ (1923).
Besides these, his work ‘General Principles of Administration’ (1908) also deserves a special
mention.

33
 Based on his long experiences as a manager, Fayol identified five elements of duties of
management which are as follows: planning, organisation, command, coordination and
control. This classification is one of his most significant contribution to the field of
management theory that over time, has been subsequently modified by later theorists.
He has further laid down fourteen principles which are as follows
i. Division of work creates specialisation and results in more efficient output of work
ii. Co-existence of Authority and responsibility. For a person to discharge his
responsibility effectively, he must also be designated with certain authority.
iii. Discipline entails carrying out work in good faith and showing diligence in carrying
out commands from superiors.
iv. Unity of Command entails being accountable to a single head in charge.
v. Unity of Direction means that one leader should lead the group following one plan.
The purpose is to bring unity and uniformity for attaining a common goal.
vi. Subordinating private interest of the individual to general interest of the organisation
so that the wellbeing of all is not compromised to serve the private interest or pleasure
of few.
vii. Fair remuneration to personnel which is satisfactory to both employers and employees
and results in conducive work environment.
viii. Centralisation entails that managers to be provided freedom to take initiatives. The
degree of initiative that can be taken will depend on case-to-case basis.
ix. Scalar chain (hierarchy) provides for the arrangement of supervisors in an
organisation from highest to lowest.
x. Order means that placement of each factors in their right place according to its
functions and purpose will enhance its effectiveness. Thus, a scientific selection and
placement of personnel will ensure that they are able to deliver their services
effectively.
xi. Following principle of equity in the treatment of personnel. This will contribute to
employee's allegiance and fidelity towards the organisation.
xii. Creating Stability of tenure for employees to encourage productivity.
xiii. Providing initiative for employees' participation in suggesting fresh ideas and
innovations.
xiv. Promotion of Co-operation/ harmony among personnel to strengthen the organisation.
He was also of the opinion that good administration required efficient managers and laid
down some traits that a good manager should have: physical qualities, mental qualities, moral
qualities, general education, special knowledge, and experience.
Fayol emphasized on the importance of administration for organizing all aspects of life
from home to workplace and thus suggested that a structured, methodical training in
administration begin from school level itself. While he promoted formal organisation, he was
also aware of the danger that lay in conformity to hierarchy and formalism. Therefore, he

34
suggested that that with proper caution, gangplank (level jumping in a hierarchical
organisation) can help in overcoming issues with hierarchy.
These principles have encompassed a description of managerial activity and also laid
down what a manager ought to do. Inspite of its limitations, this approach has laid down the
foundation for the development of principles of administration. Both F.W.Taylor and Fayol
had contributed much to the development of scientific management, but while Taylor’s
scientific management principles was targeted specifically towards only production process
or ‘workshop management’, Fayol gave a universal set of principles that was applicable in
any kind of organisation in all setting.
Apart from this, Fayol by identifying administration as a form of management also called
into question the hitherto existing notion of separating administration and management. He
notes that irrespective of whether it is public or private undertaking, they all require
observance of the same general principles such as planning, organisation, command,
coordination and control. Thus the word administration is limited not just to public service
but also encompasses every enterprise.
Luther Gulick and Urwick
The works of Taylor and Henry Fayol contributed to classical organisation and management
theory. Subsequently the success of these principles in organisations led to these principles
being synthesised and integrated to public organisations. The works of Gulick and Urwick
have contributed immensely in the development of science of administration and their work
‘The Papers on the Science of Administration’ (1937) was notable in this regard.
Both Gulick and Urwick’s thought process have been richly informed by their
experiences of working in the civil service, military and industrial organisations and this went
on to form their perspectives on the working of public administration. References of
discipline and efficiency as well as line and staff reflect their association with the military.
Inspired by the works of F.W Taylor and Fayol, they synthesized ‘universal’ principles of
organisation which is popularly called as ‘classical theory’ of organisation or ‘Administrative
Management Theory’. According to them, it was possible to develop a science of
administration by application of methods that sciences use such as “empirical observation,
analysis and systematized findings”. Thus, if one could process the experience of
administrations similarly, it was possible to develop scientific principles of administration.
This was a big shift as till then, administration seen only as an art.
For Gulick and Urwick, while designing an organisation, the structure of administration
is more important than the role of men in the organisation. According to Urwick, faulty
structures is responsible for the friction and confusion in the society. Thus, in the designing
of organisations, identifying the task as well as the nature of the job and its profile is
prioritised while the role of individuals is relegated to a later function. According to Urwick
lack of design is “illogical, cruel, wasteful and inefficient”.
Firstly, in the absence of design, the nature of job and the qualifications required for it
become ambiguous. And giving wages to an appointed person who has no idea of the

35
functions of his position is illogical. Secondly, it is also cruel and wasteful to have an
appointed person unfamiliar with the qualifications required for the job as well as his duties.
Thirdly, if functions of jobs are not well designed, development of functional specialisation
among the workers is hampered. Therefore in the case of any vacancy arising, finding a
competent replacement becomes difficult. And finally, an ill designed structure promotes
inefficiency when the supervisor is guided not by principles but only by the personalities of
his personnel.
Thus, this approach is also known as structural approach as Gulick and Urwick paid
more attention to development of structure of administration. They accordingly formulated
principles for designing of the administrative structures. Gulick enumerated ten principles of
administration which are as follows:-
i. Division of work or specialisation
ii. Bases of departmental organisation
iii. Coordination through hierarchy
iv. Deliberate coordination
v. Coordination through committees
vi. Decentralisation
vii. Unity of Command
viii. Staff and Line
ix. Delegation
x. Span of control.
Among these ten principles, Gulick held the principle of division of labour as especially
important to Gulick and he said that for him division of work is the basis and reason of
organisation.
Gulick was also influenced by the five elements of administration introduced by Fayol.
Furthering it more, he coined the acronym POSDCORB, each letter signifying one of the
seven functions of an administrator.
 Planning ‘P’ is concerned with identification of all human and material resources as
well as activities required to reach the goals of the organisation in an economic and
efficient manner.
 Organisation ‘O’ is concerned with establishing a formal structure of authority through
which division of work is arranged, defined and coordinated for achieving objective.
 Staffing ‘S’ deals with every aspect of administration such as promotion, recruitment,
training, appointment, discipline, retirement etc required to maintain favourable
working condition.
 Directing ‘D’ is concerned with directing the activities of the administration through
general orders and instructions given by the manager to the subordinates.

36
  Coordinating ‘Co’ is concerned with securing coordination and cooperation among the
team members in the working of an organisation. It also addresses issues of conflict and
overlapping by ensuring proper coordination among the members.
 R stands for Reporting and it is concerned with creating an up flow of information for
executives to be informed on the working of the organisation. Through the process of
records, research and inspection, the information would enable the executives to address
issues and bring improvement in the organisation.
 Budgeting ‘B’ covers the entire field of financial administration in the form of fiscal
planning, accounting and control.
Some principles identified by Urwick are as follows–
1) Objective- He believed that every organisation must have a clear purpose/goal.
2) Correspondence- There should be a correspondence of equality between responsibility
and authority.
3) Responsibility- A superior is accountable for the work of his subordinates.
4) Span of Control- A supervisor can only effectively supervise limited number of people
(5–6) if their work is interconnected. With more workers, responsibility for the
supervisor increases dramatically.
5) Scalar principle- Organising hierarchy in a pyramid structure.
6) Specialisation
7) Coordination
8) Definition- The principle of prescribing duties of each personnel.
Administrative organisation was still a relatively new field and there were many factors that
needed to be understood so Urwick suggested that his principles be used more as a
framework through which one could collect and arrange ideas from one’s own experience.
General Principles of Administration
Some of the important principles that have been enumerated by the thinkers can be explained
briefly as
Theory of Departmentalisation- This theory identifies four bases for division of work and
creation of department. It is generally viewed that departments are often in conflict over the
issue of assignment of duties. They gave the bases of the four ‘Ps’: Purpose (function),
process, persons (clientele) and place to address the problem of assignment of duties in an
organisation. This theory recognises division of labour, a key structural feature of an
organization. Each department will be responsible for the work delegated for achieving
organizational goals.
Purpose– Purpose can mean identifying the major functions and goals of an organisation and
accordingly creating departments on the basis of goods and services being offered.

37
Process– Secondly grouping together work whose completion requires similar process in
terms of skill requirement or technology used such as software skills or stenography.
Thirdly work can be grouped according to the clientele served such as farmers, war veterans,
pensioners, industries etc. Gulick observes that the department members develop specialized
skills when their work profile caters to a particular group.
Finally work can also be categorised according to the Territory/base. Workers can be
categorised according to the area they serve such as Noida, Gurgaon and accordingly
departments can be created. This will promote the members to become area specialists and
with their expertise and knowledge it will also promote development of that area.
Formalized administrative structure– According to this theory, organisation should be
designed using a formalized structure having a top-down approach. This is a hierarchical
structure.
Single Executive- Gulick and Urwick insisted on single top executives instead of an
organisation headed by committees. While insisting on a single line of command that flowed
hierarchically, they were aware that this was not a principle that could be applied universally.
But this functional supervision increases efficiency and Gulick argued that the advantages of
this principle outweighs the negatives like confusion, inefficiency and irresponsibility which
would follow if this principle is violated.
Staff Principle- The objective of this principle is to lay down certain activities for the staff
which will provide support to the executive in the functioning of the organisation.
Delegation- This principle stressed on the importance of learning to delegate while the
administrators still retained the requisite authority with them. For more efficient functioning,
Urwick emphasised on the need for executives to have the initiative to delegate as well as
recognise when to delegate. Subordinates cannot fulfil their responsibility nor carry out their
entrusted function efficiently without clear delegation. Urwick emphasized that the authority
of executives to delegate is absolute and they should be held accountable for the action of
their subordinates. Thus, authority and responsibility must be “coterminous, co-equal and
defined”. They also emphasized the principle of “correspondence of responsibility and
authority”.
Span of Control- We have earlier looked at the meaning of span of control as given by
Urwick. Adding on to it, Gulick identifies three factors that determine the span of control.
a. Certain qualities possessed by an individual can determine the extent of his span of
control. Someone with superior intellect and personality with a commitment to invest
time and energy may possibly control more subordinates.
b. The extent of control also depends on the nature of work being performed by the
subordinates. It will be possible to supervise more workers if the work is routine,
monotonous, singular. Diversification of work will require more supervision.
c. The span will also depend on whether it is a new organisation or an old one. In an
established and stable organisation there is less need for intervention however in a

38
 new organisation, constant supervision is required so that a good model can be set and
proper procedures adopted.
In later writings, Gulick revised his opinion on the role of human beings in an organisation
and opined that the human factor is a major and essential variable in the understanding of
Public administration. He emphasized that the goal of public administration is human welfare
and to this endeavour administration should be reoriented to become more decentralized.
Besides this, he also emphasized on timing as a crucial in a democracy and ‘a hallmark of
statecraft’ where all policy innovations are rooted in timing.
Mooney and Riley in their work ‘Onward Industry’ (1931) provided a central framework
for principles of management. They proposed four principles of organisation: • Coordinating
Principle • Scalar Principle • The Functional Principle • Staff and Line.
They have highlighted the importance of leadership, authority and coordination in
management in their various statements. In the article “Papers on Science of Administration’,
Mooney held that the fundamental principle of any human organisation is ‘coordination’.
Any organisation is the result of a concerted effort.
According to the functional principle given by Mooney and Riley, there are certain
distinctive functions being performed in an organisation and there is a distinction among the
functions. The three functions are
- determinative function– that determines goals and objectives
- the application function– acting purposively to achieve the goals
- and the interpretative function (decision making).
They argued that management must be aware of these functions to be prepared to discharge
them when necessary.
Mary Parker Follet is also one of the important proponents of this approach. According
to her, conflict was a normal and unavoidable part of social interaction in any organisation.
So, she developed the innovative idea of ‘constructive conflict’. In this, conflict is not to be
taken as a ‘wasteful outbreak of incompatibilities’ but a normal process through which
‘socially valuable differences register themselves for the enrichment of all concerned’. In
order to resolve conflict, she suggested that though it can be done through domination,
compromise, and integration, she preferred integration for conflict resolution. Another
important contribution of Follet is the concept of de-personalising order. According to her
issuing order may often invite negative repercussions so administrators often refrain from
doing so. The concept of de-personalizing order means that the order is emanating from the
actual situation so the problem of personalising order does not arise (cited from Chakrabarty
B, Chand P.)
Criticism
Administrative management has been subjected to much criticism especially on the matter of
principles. The principles of administration are formulated more on the basis on what ‘ought

39
to be’. They cannot be subjected to scientific verification. Thus, they are more of
recommendations and less of scientific principles. L.D White critiques that the terms the
proponents of this approach have used to describe or classify administrative functions and
organisations cannot be taken as universal principles. They can only be taken working rules
of conduct validated by wide experience.
Herbert Simon is one of the sternest critiques of this approach. He attacks the principles
as “homely proverbs, myths, slogans, inanities”. According to him “it is a fatal defect of the
current principles of administration that like proverbs they occur in pairs. For almost every
principle one can find an equally plausible and acceptable contradictory principle” that is, the
principles are ambiguous and mutually contradictory with nothing to indicate which of the
principles will apply in case of contradictions. For example, the contradictions that exist
between the principle of specialisation and unity of command. Thus, for Simon “the
principles of administration are at best criteria for describing and diagnosing administrative
situations”. The incapacity of this approach to “confront theory with evidence” is also one of
the critical drawbacks as pointed by critics.
The bases of organisation given by Gulick are also criticised on the grounds on
incompatibility. The principles are vague and overlap each other. The principles are also
prescriptive rather than descriptive and they state how work should be divided rather than
how work is divided (cited from Prasad et.al).
This approach has also been criticised neglecting the human element and oversimplifying
human motivations. The role of human beings in this approach had been reduced to mere
cogs in the machine. However, the human element cannot be taken for granted. As living
entities, human behaviour is motivated by both psychological and physiological processes.
Mere allocations of functions and duties does not lead to optimum contribution by the
workers. And above all personnel are not static factor in this system but an important variable
in the functioning of an organisation that is ignored in a mechanistic approach.
According to V. Subramanian there are two important limitations of this approach.
Firstly, there is lack of sophistication in the theories. They are informed by common place
general knowledge propositions which do not adequately satisfy the theorists and
practitioners of administration. Secondly there is a pro management bias in the classical
management approach. Despite existing operational problems that can be found at other
levels of management too, proponents of this theory were more concerned with the problems
of management in the organisation4.
Relevance
Despite many criticisms, the principles of administration continue to be relevant and are
applied in many present-day organisations. Planning, organising command, coordination and
control still continue to be practiced by management for achievement of goals and to increase
productivity. However, with rapid changes in the management pattern of organisations in the

4
Prasad et.al p 92

40
21st century, some of these principles appear to have lost its relevance. Now there is more
focus on empowering employees and instilling a sense of ownership in the workers by
involving their participation in the decision-making process. Also, in a competitive era, there
is more demand for workers who can reorient their skills and multitask rather than being
relegated to a single task. However, inspite of these issues, one cannot dispute these
principles have provided the bedrock for modern organisation theories and indeed have
contributed immensely to the development of public administration.
Conclusion
This approach has contributed significantly to the theory and practice of administration. The
principles for this approach arose as an attempt to resolve the problems of inefficiency and
low production that emerging industries were facing. This has enabled the effective
functioning of large-scale organisation which are also practices that have been adopted by
contemporary organisations. Despite the many criticisms, the relevance of these principles in
the study of science of administration cannot be dismissed. Proponents of this approach
themselves have recognised some of the limitations of their own theory and have suggested
modifications for the same wherever required and the revision offered by Gulick on the
importance of recognising human values in administration is one example on point. Thus, it
will be the task of future students of Public administration to understand and theorise the
dynamic nature of application of these principles based on the changing context.
Questions
1. What is administrative management? Examine its relevance in present day
organisation?
2. Discuss the principles of administrative management approach as laid down by the
proponents of this approach.
Suggested Readings
Chakrabarty B, Chand P. Public Administration in a Globalizing World. Los Angeles:
Sage:2012)
E.J. Ferreira, A.W. Erasmus and D. Groenewald, Administrative Management, Juta
Academics, 2010
Ravindra Prasad, Y.Pardhasaradhi, V.S. Prasad and P. Satyamarayana (eds), Administrative
Thinkers, Sterling Publishers, 2010

41
 iii. Ideal-Type Bureaucracy (Max Weber)
Anchal

Structure

 Introduction
 Max Weber: His Life and Writings
 Bureaucracy: Meaning
 Max Weber on Authority
 Types of Authority
 Max Weber: The Concept of Bureaucracy
 Max Weber: Characteristics of Bureaucracy
 Max Weber: Limits on Bureaucracy
 Max Weber’s Bureaucracy: Criticism
 Conclusion
 References
Introduction
The German sociologist Max Weber’s thoughts has influenced generations of scholars on
bureaucracy and formal organization. He occupies a central position in the bureaucratic
model and tries to study it in a theoretical framework. He was the first one to use and
describe the term bureaucracy. It is also called the bureaucratic theory of management or the
Max Weber’s theory. His formulation deserves careful analysis as his writings covered a
wide range of subjects including economics, sociology and administration. He also outlined
the impact of religion on the growth of capitalism and his thoughts are the larger
considerations of socio-economic and historical forces that led to the growth of complex
organizations. His thoughts represent the macro view of all these aspects. Weber believed
that bureaucracy helps in administering and establishing the organization in the most efficient
manner.
Max Weber : His Life and Writings
Max Weber (1864-1920) was born in a business family involved in textile manufacturing in
western Germany. He studied law from the University of Heidelberg after completing his
preliminary schooling in 1882. He completed his doctorate and worked as an instructor in
University of Berlin and wrote number of papers on law highlighting the social, political and
economic factors. In his writings, Weber main focus was on analytical and systematic study,
he always preferred to gain knowledge through practical experience as he was of progressive
outlook. His major writings include ‘The Theory of Economic and Social Organizations’,
‘General Economic History’ and ‘Protestant Ethic and Spirit of Capitalism’.

42
Bureaucracy: Meaning
Bureaucracy simply means ‘Desk Government’. Vincent De Gourney, a French national was
the first one who coined the term ‘bureaucracy’ in 1745. After him, several French writers
were involved in popularizing the word bureaucracy but as a term it was used in 19th century.
The famous economist J.S. Mill and the sociologists like Mosca and Michels extensively
wrote on bureaucracy. For Weber, bureaucracy is an “administrative body of officials”, who
all are needed to bring out the efficiency in the organizations. In his opinion there is a lot of
economic competition in the modern era, due to which capitalist organizations required a
highly efficient kind of organization system. The bureaucratic principles gave a scope to the
organization to go ahead with economic planning and maintain the stability in the market.
Weber observes, “The capitalist system has undeniably played a major role in the
development of bureaucracy. Indeed, without it capitalist production could not continue…Its
development, largely under capitalistic auspices, has created an urgent need for stable, strict,
intensive and calculable administration.” (Weber, 1953, p. 48) He further said that
“capitalism is the most rational economic basis for bureaucratic administration and enables it
to develop in the most rational form, especially because, from a fiscal point of view, it
supplies the necessary money resources”. (Weber, 1953, p 48)
Max Weber on Authority
Weber tried to explain bureaucracy as a sociological phenomenon; where theory of
domination can be understood in general context. Domination basically refers to a power
relationship that is authoritarian power of command between the rulers and the ruled. But
power is accepted, only when if it is justified and legitimate. Authority legitimizes the
exercise of power, where a person willingly complies with commands or orders; and on the
basis of this belief Weber identified three types of legitimation, each correspond to a
particular type of authority.
Types of Authority
i) Charismatic authority
ii) Traditional authority
iii) Legal-Rational authority
i) Charismatic authority: The term charisma can be defined as ‘gift of grace’. The
charismatic leader holds some personal qualities which makes him different from the
common man. He may be a hero, masiha or a prophet and by virtue of his magical powers he
has a wide acceptance which forms the basis of legitimate system. People follow his
commands or order without questioning him, they believe in his extraordinary capabilities.
The disciples of the charismatic leader have full devotion in him; however they don’t have
any special qualification or status. The administrative apparatus in this type of authority is
unstable and is very loose as the disciples work in accordance to the likes and dislikes of the
leader.

43
ii) Traditional Authority: Traditional Authority derives its legitimacy from the goodness of
the past where actions are based on customs and traditions. Individuals who exercise this
authority are referred as masters and those who obey the masters are called followers. The
masters have authority by virtue of his status which he inherited from the previous rulers; and
his commands are obeyed by the followers who have personal loyalty towards him and faith
in traditional status including household officials, relatives and personal choices of masters.
iii) Legal Rational Authority: Under legal rational authority, rules are applied judicially and
are applicable on all the members of the organization. In modern society, this authority plays
a dominant role. It is legal as it is based on systematic rules and procedures and it is rational
because it is well defined and more in accordance to proper channel to achieve an end. The
members who exercise this authority are referred as superiors, who follow an impersonal
order; and others include the administrative staff who obeys the laws. Strict adherence to
rules and procedures delimit the authority of the superiors.
Max Weber: The Concept of Bureaucracy
For Weber, in the administrative staff the appointed officials is referred as bureaucracy.
Bureaucracy explicitly includes the appointed officials and elected representative has no role
to play in it. Weber considers that legal rational authority which is based on rules, norms and
procedures holds a predominant position in bureaucracy. For Weber: "Bureaucratic
administration means domination by the force of knowing: that is its fundamental character,
specifically rational" (Cruz, 1995, 689).
“The development of the modern form of organization concurs in all sectors with the
development and continuous expansion of bureaucratic administration […] Because the
bureaucratic administration is always observed under equal conditions and from a formal and
technical perspective, the most rational type [...] The main source of the superiority of
bureaucratic administration lies in the role of technical knowledge, which, through the
development of modern technology and economic methods in goods’ production, has become
absolutely indispensable [...] Bureaucratic administration fundamentally means the exercise
of domination based on knowledge. This is the trait that makes it specifically rational. It
consists, on the one hand, of technical knowledge, which is, per se, sufficient to ensure a
position of extraordinary power for bureaucracy. On the other hand, it should be considered
that bureaucratic organizations, or those in power who use it, tend to become even more
powerful by the knowledge that comes from the practice that they attain in the function.”
(Weber, 1966, pp. 24-26)
The bureaucracy presented by Weber is an ideal or a mental map of a fully developed
bureaucracy, which means that it is an abstract and cannot be found in reality. This ideal type
model of Weber is based on the studies of ancient bureaucracies of Egypt, Rome, China and
Byzantine Empire. It was also influenced by the modern emerging trends of bureaucracy in
Europe during the 19th and early 20th century. He believed that in modern state system the

44
ideal type of bureaucracy should be followed which is based on the rationalization of
collective activities and assures the predictability of the behavior of employees.
According to Weber, “Bureaucracy is by far the most efficient instrument of large-scale
administration which has ever been developed and the modern social order has become
overwhelming dependent on it… this type of organization is in principle applicable with
equal facility to a wide variety of different fields. It may be applied in profit making business
or in charitable organizations, or in any number of other types of private enterprises serving
ideal or material ends. It is equally applicable to political and to religious organizations with
varying degrees of approximation to a pure type; its historical existence can be demonstrated
in all these fields.” (Weber, 1946, pp. 329-340)
Max Weber: Characteristics of Bureaucracy
According to Weber the bureaucratic rationality in organization consists of following main
characteristics as depicted in figure 1 also.
1) Division of work with high specialization: The task of the organization should be
divided on the basis of number of specialized function. Every employee is specialized
and efficient in one type of job. This ensures increased productivity and efficiency of
the organization as a whole.
2) Functions defined by law (formalized written rules and regulations): Bureaucracy
operates in accordance to complete strict adherence to formal rules. These written
formal rules and regulations have been stressed by Weber so that personal favors,
arbitrariness, or gratitude may not infringe the working of the organization; and the
conduct of the organization is based on the defined technical rules or norms.
3) Hierarchy of authority (Observance of legitimate order): Hierarchy holds an important
position in rational type of bureaucracy. The concept of hierarchy holds lot of
importance as administrative system is heavily structured in subordinate services and
management positions. Each lower office is under the control and supervision of higher
one. This system offers the governed to appeal to the higher authority against the
decision of the lower authority in a regulated manner.
4) Assessment and selection of employees for their technical competence: The employee is
appointed on the basis of free and fair selection and this selection is based on tenders,
exams and diplomas which also requires special training programs for the candidates.
The assessment is based purely on the capabilities and performance of the candidates.
5) Formal social relationship according to the position held: The concept of impersonality
should be followed in bureaucratic form of organization. The relationship is based on
formal social aspect and not on irrational sentiments; there is no space for personal likes
and dislikes. The commands of the superior to the subordinate are based on impersonal
order.

45
6) Employees’ regular wage: The employee wage is in the form of the fixed salaries which
are given in accordance to the nature of the job and responsibility. The salaries are
given according to the internal hierarchy of the organization; moreover, there are
chances of career advancement through promotion on the basis of seniority and merit.
7) Separation of ownership and the employee function: There must be a complete
separation between the ownership and employee function. The personal demands and
interests should be kept separate and not to interfere with the organizational activities,
since no employee can be the owner of his or her position.
8) Regular career of employees’ overtime: The promotion of the employees is based on the
objective criteria and not on the discretion of authority which helps in the enhancement
of the regular career advancement of employees over the time.

Source: Adapted from Ferreira et al., 2004, pp. 24 and 25.

The above mentioned characteristic clearly highlights, Weber’s theory of bureaucracy as

ideal, pure, neutral, efficient, hierarchical and rational and inevitable in contemporary society.
He referred the ‘ideal type’ of bureaucracy as an ultimate efficiency machine. Weber said
“Experience tends universally to show that the purely bureaucratic type of administrative
organization... is, from a purely technical point of view, capable of attaining the highest
degree of efficiency and it is in this sense formally the most rational known means of
carrying out imperative control over beings. It is superior to any other form in precision, in

46
stability, in the stringency of its discipline and in its reliability. It thus makes possible a
particularly high degree of calculability of results for the heads of organization and for those
acting in relation to it. It is finally superior both in intensive efficiency and in the scope of its
operations and is formally capable of application to all kinds of administrative task.”
(Maheshwari, 1992) When Weber characterizes bureaucracy as value neutral, he
conceptualizes bureaucracy as a form of social organization which can be examined from
three different points of view. First is the structural view which gained maximum importance.
The features like division of work and hierarchy are included under the structural aspect.
Secondly, bureaucracy can be viewed in terms of behavioral characteristics; and includes the
characteristics like objectivity, precision and consistency. To quote Weber, “when fully
developed, bureaucracy also stands in a specific sense under the principle of sine ira ac
studio. Its specific nature, which is welcomed by capitalism, develops the more perfectly the
more the bureaucracy is ‘dehumanized’, the more completely it succeeds in eliminating from
official business love, hatred, and all purely personal irrational, and emotional elements
which escape calculation. This is the specific nature of bureaucracy and its special virtue.”
(Gerth and Mills, 1946, p. 215) Lastly bureaucracy is defined from the instrumental point of
view which includes the achievement of purpose. In the opinion of Peter Blau, “the
organization that maximizes efficiency in administration or an institutionalized method of
organized social conduct in the interests of administrative efficiency.” (Blau, 1956, p. 60)
Max Weber: Limits on Bureaucracy
While emphasizing the importance and need of bureaucracy, Weber was aware of the fact
that bureaucracy has an inherent tendency of accumulation of power. Albrow also pointed out
that due to this issue Weber considered number of mechanisms to limit the scope of system of
authorities in general and bureaucracy in particular. These mechanism falls into five major
categories.
i) Collegiality
ii) The Separation of Powers
iii) Amateur Administration
iv) Direct Democracy
v) Representation
Collegiality: The principal of collegiality is opposite to monocratism. In monocratic
bureaucracy Weber pointed out that at each stage of the official hierarchy there is only one
person but the moment more than one person get involved in decision making the collegial
principal come into being. Collegiality helps in limiting the role of bureaucracy but it also
results in to the disadvantage in terms of speed of decision and fixing of responsibility.
The Separation of Power: Separation of power meant dividing the same responsibility or a
function between two or more bodies. All the involved bodies have to make compromises, so

47
that they can reach to a decision. This will help to make bureaucracy free from monopoly of
decision by a single body; however, such a system is inherently unstable.
Amateur Administration: Under amateur administration, administration is run by those
people who have public esteem to command, general confidence and their activity is basically
unremunerated. But this system lacked in the expertise of professionals and experts which
modern society requires.
Direct Democracy: Direct democracy also limitize the power of bureaucracy, as under this
system officials are guided by and answerable to an assembly. It may take many forms like
short term of office, selection by lot and possibility of recall. But this system is successful
only in case of small organizations and in local governments.
Representation: Elected representatives of people shares the authority of bureaucracy which
helps in limiting or controlling the power of bureaucracy. But there is a possibility that these
representatives being bureaucratized. However, Weber believed that through the
representation, there is a greatest possibility of a check on bureaucracy.
Thus, Weber was conscious about the excessive authoritarian role of bureaucracy and that is
why he wants to limit the role of bureaucracy. There is a need to control the administrative
apparatus.
Max Weber’s Bureaucracy: Criticism
Weber’s bureaucracy is marked with several criticisms which mainly revolve around the
bureaucratic design, authoritative norms, administrative efficiency; and concept of rationality,
individuality and reliability.
Weber theory failed to take in to consideration the individuals and their behavioral
aspects within the organization. It is constructed as an ideal which cannot be found in reality.
Carl J Friederich observes the term ‘ideal type’ is unfortunate in that the entities to which it is
applied are certainly not ‘ideal’ even in a platonic ‘ideal’ sense; there is, more particularly
nothing ‘ideal’ about bureaucracy. Furthermore, if they were ‘ideal’ they would not be
‘types’ since ‘types’ derive their significance from the empirical reality which they typify…
But Weber, instead of thus proceeding by empirical observation and analysis of the
ascertainable givens of such experience, set forth his ‘ideal types’ as mental constructs which
are neither derived by a process of deductive ratiocination from higher concepts, nor build up
from empirical data…” (Friederick, 1963, pp. 469-70)
Critics are of the opinion that Weber’s theory is not fit for the task which involves
innovation and creativity as it is fit for routine and repetitive work of the organization
following strict rules and regulations. Robert K. Merton viewed that no doubt strict rules and
regulations; and impersonality helps in maintaining reliability and predictability of employee
behavior but it results in to rigid and formal structure in an organization and loss of
organizational effectiveness. Weber emphasized on specialization and differentiation and the
focus is on decentralization and delegation of responsibilities. The outcome is that there is a

48
goal displacement as mentioned by Philip Selznick. There are differentiated goals of different
sub units and the goals of the organization as a whole takes a second place as the focus of the
employees is on the goal of their sub units.
To quote Merton, “An effective bureaucracy demands reliability of response and strict
devotion to regulation. Such devotion to the rules leads to their transformation into absolutes;
they are no longer conceived as relative to a given set of purposes. This interferes with ready
adaptation under special conditions not clearly envisaged by those who draw up the general
rules. Thus the very elements which conduce towards efficiency in general produce
inefficiency in specific instances. Those very devices which increase the probability of
conformances is also lead to an over concern with strict adherence to regulations which
induces timidity consumerism and technicism”. (Merton, 1957, p. 156)
Another criticism was posed by Alvin Gouldner, he viewed that rules and regulations of
the organizations tend to highlight the minimum levels of acceptable behavior or
performance. If the focus of the superiors and subordinates is more on the rules and
regulations and less on the organizational goals then this would result in to goal displacement
of the organization marked with apathy and constant rifts amongst the superiors and
subordinates. Victor Thompson also put forward his argument that superiors are dependent
on the lower level specialists for the fulfillment of the organizational goals. They try to
formulate more and more rules and regulations to escape from the insecurities and their
answerability towards the performance of the organization. There is complete formal
structure followed by Weber in his theory, he failed to recognize the informal relationship
which plays an important role in the growth of an organization. Lloyd Rudolph and Susanne
Rudolph pointed out that, “Formal rationality (and technology) can contribute to
organizational efficiency, but can also contribute to organizational ineffectiveness by
building up the sources of alienation and resistance, and fuelling the struggle for power
against authority. The Persistence or retention of patrimonial elements in bureaucratic
administration can mitigate if not eliminate the struggle, just as the presence of bureaucratic
features in patrimonial administration can (and did) enhance its efficiency and effectiveness”.
(Rudolph and Rudolph, 1979)
Weber equates the authority of the administrative staff with the technical superiority,
Talcott and Parsons criticized this aspect as it leads to internal inconsistency. According to
them, it is not always possible that those who possess authority to give orders are equally
good in their technical skills. Another important drawback of Bureaucracy is that employees
do not get opportunity to express themselves, their opinions or decision making abilities do
not hold any value. As a result employees feel disheartened and demotivated. With the course
of time they are not bothered about rules and regulations and started boycotting them or
simply criticizing them.

49
Conclusion
Despite of several criticisms, many empirical researches have accepted the importance of
Weber theory of bureaucracy. It is of great benefit for managing the large scale organizations
which includes multi-level hierarchy, work based on well-structured established rules and
procedures; and also helps in increasing overall efficiency. In the present day administration
also the utility of Weber’s theory of bureaucracy is clearly visible. It is beneficial in both the
societies whether it is capitalist or socialist. In free economy where state has a minimum role
to play, bureaucracy performs some of the necessary functions of the state and fulfills day to
day requirements. He is a first theoretician who gave a theoretical base to bureaucracy and
highlights its importance in maintaining the organization in an efficient manner.
References
Albrow, M. (1978), Bureaucracy, The Macmillan Press Ltd., London
Bhattacharya, Mohit, 1981, Public Administration: Structure, Process and Behaviour, The
World Press Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata.
Braverman, Harry, 1979, Labour and Monopoly Capital, The Degradation of Work in the
Twentieth Century, Social Scientist Press, Trivendrum.
Lakshmanna, C. and A.V. Satyanarayana Rao, 2004, Max Weber, in D. Ravindra Prasad,
V.S. Prasad and P. Satyanarayan (Eds), Administrative Thinkers, Sterling Publishers, New
Delhi.
Clegg, Steward & David Dunkerley, 1980, Organisation, Class and Control, Routledge &
Kegan Paul, London.
Cruz, M. B. (1995). Teorias sociológicas. Os fundadores e os classics in Sociological
theories: The founders and the classics, Lisboa: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian.
Ferreira. J. M. C. (2004). Abordagens clássicas [Classic approaches]. In J. M. Ferreira, J.
Neves, & A. Caetano (Coords.) Manual de psicossociologia das organizações [Handbook of
psychosociology of organisations]. Lisboa: McGraw-Hill.
H.H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills, Bureaucracy (Ed.), From Max Weber: Essays in sociology,
Oxford University Press, 1946
Friederick, Carl J., (1963), Man and his Government, New York, McGraw Hill.
Maheshwari, S.R. (1992). Bureaucracy on Bureaucratic Theory, Employment News, 17-23,
October
Merton, R. (1957), “Social Theory and Social Structures”, Free Press, Glencoe, III
Blau, Peter M. (1956), Bureaucracy in Modern Society, Random House, New Jersey
Rudolph L and Rudolph S. (1979), Authority and Power in Bureaucratic and Patrimonial
Administration: A Revisionist Interpretation of Weber on Bureaucracy”, World-Politics

50
Weber, M. (1946), The Theory of Social and Economic Organizations, translated by A.M.
Henderson and Talcott parsons, New York
Weber, M. (1953), “The Monocratic Type of Bureaucratic Administration”, in Dwight Waldo
(ed.) “Ideas and Issues in Administration”, McGraw- Hill, New York
Weber, M. (1966). Os fundamentos da organização burocrática: Uma construção do tipo
ideal in The basics of bureaucratic organization: A construction of the ideal type. AAVV.
Sociologia da Burocracia. Rio de Janeiro: Zahar Editores.

51
 Unit-2
(b) Neo-Classical Theories

i. Human Relations Theory (Elton Mayo)

Dr. Neelam Jain

Structure
1. Introduction
2. Professor George Elton Mayo
3. Early Experiment:
4. The Hawthorne Experiment
4.1. The Great Illumination Experiment (1924-27)
4.2. Relay Assembly Study (1927-1932)
4.3. Human Attitudes and Sentiments (1928-31)
4.4. The Bank Wiring Observation Study (1931-32)
5. Main Findings of Hawthorne Experiments
6. Chester I Barnard’s Contribution to Human Relations Theory
7. The Essence of Human Relations Approach
8. The Human Relations vs. Classical Theories
9. Evaluation of Human Relations Approach
10. Conclusion
11. References and Further Reading

1. Introduction
The Human Relations theory is a path-breaking theory in the organization with its emphasis
on the human side of management and organization. The human relation movement come as
a criticism of classical theories, particularly, Scientific Management theory propounded by
Frederick W. Taylor. The Great Depression and economic damage of 1920s to 1940s lay bare
the shortcomings of earlier approaches to management. During this period, there was a
growth of labour unionism and an increasing demand of improved work conditions, labour
rights and social security. Such issues created a gap between the managers and labourers and
there was need of increased communication for developing more humane way of addressing
various problems of organization.
The Human Relations theory views organization in a holistic social perspective and
highlights the limitations of mechanistic approach to labour productivity and efficiency of an
organization. The pioneer of this theory was Professor George Elton Mayo. He is regarded as

52
the father of Human Relations approach to organization. In collaboration with his colleagues
of Harvard Business School, Mayo conducted series of experiments in this field.
2. Professor George Elton Mayo
Professor Elton Mayo was born in Australia in 1880. He studied Psychology and Philosophy
at University of Adelaide. He joined as lecturer in Logic, Ethics and Psychology at the
University of Queensland in 1911. Later on he was elevated to the rank of professor of
Philosophy there. He pioneered research on psychoanalytic treatment of shell-shock. His
research findings from the study in the Hawthorne Plant of the Western Electric Company
throw light on industrial and organizational psychology as well as certain aspects of
sociology.
3. Early Experiment
In 1923, Mayo conducted his first research in a Textile Mill near Philadelphia. It was later
termed as ‘first inquiry’. This research site was a highly organized sector. The environment
for workers there was conductive. Despite this, the general labour turnover (absenteeism) in
all the departments was estimated to be approximately 5 per cent per annum. Again in the
mule-spinning department the turnover was approximately 250 per cent. Various incentives
were provided to the workers to improve the situation, however, without much success.
Subsequently, Elton Mayo and his team studied the multi-spinning department from various
directions. On the basis of his research, he found that workers suffered from fatigue or lack of
adequate rest and there was a need of introducing rest periods to them. The motivating effect
of the scheme was tremendous. Mayo’s study was comprehensive in nature. It took into
account production levels, rest periods, working conditions, occasional accidents etc. By
delegating the decision of resting periods to the workers, the management in the Textile Mill
set in motion the social interaction between management and workers. It started a new
beginning.
4. The Hawthorne Experiment
The Hawthorne Plant of Western Electrical Company at Chicago happened to be one of the
progressive firms in the US. It was reputed for better working environment, favourable
workings hours and various facilities. But from the early 1920s, the firm was reduced to
moderate level of productivity. The management of the firm attempted every positive change
to improve productivity as suggested by the Scientific Management theory and Classical
theories of organization but the result were not satisfactory. Under this circumstance, the
management of the firm had approached Harvard Business School to find out the solution of
the problem of low productivity. Hence, Elton Mayo and his associates took this
responsibility and conducted a series of experiments and put forward their Human Relations
Approach to organization. The notable studies of this Hawthorne experiment are as follows.

53
4.1 The Great Illumination Experiment (1924-27)
In this experiment, two groups of female workers who were engaged in assembling telephone
relays, were placed in two separate rooms. One was a test room and another was a control
room. The object was to study the level of production. The hypothesis was that the level of
productivity corresponds positively with the enhanced degree of illumination. The control
group remained with constant illumination of the level and the type with which the two
groups started. Experimental changes were introduced periodically in the test group’s room.
Then slowly a change was effected in the working conditions. Its object was to mark the
effect of this change on the output. The research work continued for two years. It was
observed that regardless of the level of illumination, production increased in both the control
and experimental groups. The findings were a bit surprising. Then the rest periods were
deliberately altered. Change was also effected in wage payment, duration of work, room
temperature, humidity etc. to assess their impact on productivity. However, quite contrary to
the expectations of the researchers, the groups kept a steady growth rate. The researchers
concluded that the better communication between managers and workers during the
experiment and increased attention to the worker’s situation by the research group led to the
positive result.
4.2 Relay Assembly Study (1927-1932)
With a view to critically analysing the hypothesis on illumination theory and assessing the
impact of variety of factors on productivity, two new groups were formed. It was based on
the two hypotheses which were proposed by the researchers after the illumination study:
The first hypothesis: Firstly, it was found that the individual wage enhancement
stimulated increase in the output.
The second hypothesis: Secondly, it was observed that positive changes in supervision
methods improved the attitudes and output.
In this study, the two groups were offered individual incentive on piecework basis. It was
observed that initially the total output improved whereas it remained constant after a certain
period. The second group was placed on individual incentive plan. Variations in rest periods
and duration of work and their impact on productive output were also studied. There was an
average rise of productive output over a period of 14 months.
The researchers did not confirm the first hypothesis. It was found that not wage but other
conditions enhanced output in both the groups.
In order to find out the validity of the second hypothesis, working condition was made
more relaxed, conductive and cordial. Free and frank communication was encouraged among
fellow workers and supervisors. Supervisors modified their managerial practices. They
responded with the workers in a democratic manner. The workers came to realise that they
were integral part in the productive system. It led their response turning more positive.

54
 It was observed by Mayo that work satisfaction largely depends on the informal social
pattern of the working group. It was observed that cordial techniques of supervision
positively impact productivity.
4.3 Human Attitudes and Sentiments (1928-31)
Mayo and his team conducted another study during 1928-31. It was related to human
attitudes and sentiments. For this, they interviewed 21000 workers and asked them to express
freely their opinion about the working conditions and the policies of the management. These
interviews were more of an attempt to boost the morale of the workers than collecting data
about the various problems faced by the workers. It was observed that without proper
appreciation of the feelings and sentiments of the workers, it is difficult to delve deep into
their real problems. In the process, the research team acquired new insight in understanding
the concerns of the workers.
The study identified mainly 3 things:
First, Collection of information about the problems faced by the workers create a feeling
of equality among the workers, since they find place to participate in managerial decision
making. This create hope of improved working environment.
Second, the observation of the research team encouraged managers and supervisors to
become more responsive to the problems of workers.
Third, it was felt by the researchers for understanding the real problems of the workers it
is necessary to appreciate their sentiments and feelings. This in turn derive both from
employee’s personal history and social situation.
4.4 The Bank Wiring Observation Study (1931-32)
This experiment involved a group of 14 men (9 wirers, 3 soldiers, 2 inspectors) who were
assigned to do a wiring job which also included the job of soldiering and fixing the terminals.
Wages were paid on the basis of a group incentive plan and each member got his share on the
total output of the group. In contrast to their expectations, researchers found that the workers
were not reacting positively to the incentives. Workers fixed their own productive target
which was the lower than the target fixed by the management. There was an informal
consensus among the workers to maintain uniform rate of output and workers did not try to
increase or decrease production from the standard they agreed for themselves. Thus the
researchers uncovered an underlying group psychology and informal code of behaviour that
influences overall industrial productivity. Such behavioural pattern among the workers was
directly attributed to the deep seated distrust against the management. In this particular
experiment, the group used informal pressure to rectify the deviant members. The following
rules were framed:
 Too much work should be avoided. If one does so, s/he will be regarded as ‘rate
buster’.

55
  Too little work should be discouraged. If one does so, s/he will be regarded as
‘chiseler’.
 Anything negative about a fellow worker should not be reported to the supervisor.
 Nobody should attempt social distance or act in an officious manner.
Thus this study was very useful in highlighting the fact of intra-group forces in the working
of an organization.
5. Main Findings of Hawthorne Experiments
The Hawthorne experiments and subsequent studies were very important in highlighting the
working of informal organization and socio-psychological factors as major determinants of
worker’s satisfaction and organizational output. This study has led to the understanding of
importance of human factor in organization and necessity of proper communication system
between the management and workers. The findings of experiments of Mayo and his
associates can be summarized as below:
1. Social Factors in Output: The level of organizational effectiveness is determined not
by the official prescriptions but by the social norms. Workers are not mere cogs in the
machine. They are human beings with social characteristics which in turn determine
the productivity and efficiency in organization.
2. Group Influence: In the organizational setting, workers not merely act as an
individuals but do as member of the group. Group standards exert major impact on
individual behaviour. The productivity of workers corresponds to this standard. The
group also provide protection against executive retaliations. In these ways, the
working of the informal groups somehow limit the executive power.
3. Rewards and Sanctions: Non economic rewards such as social rewards and group
sanctions are more effective than economic incentives for the increment of
productivity.
4. Supervision: Organizational objectives become acceptable to workers if they are also
involved in discussion and their informal leader is consulted. This necessitates
effective communication and willingness on the part of management to ensure
participation of the workers in decision- making.
5. Communication: Communication is key to develop a better environment for work
and development of organization. The rationality of a particular decision or action
should be properly communicated to workers. Management should try to identify the
attitudes, social and psychological factors, and methods of working of workers
through proper communication.
6. Chester I Barnard’s Contribution to Human Relations Theory
Another important exponent of Human Relations approach to organization is Chester I
Barnard, which is reflected in his work The Functions of Executive (1938). The main features
of Barnard’s theory of organization can be summarised as below:

56
  Organization as cooperative system: Cooperation is necessary for proper working of
an organization. Individuals have limited capacity to manage the affairs of
organization without the cooperation of others.
 Formal and Informal Organization: Barnard believed that formal and informal
structure complement each other in the proper functioning of the organization.
 Consent Theory of authority: According to Barnard ‘consent’ or acceptance should be
the basis of authority. Effectiveness of the authority is determined by the willing
participation of the subordinates. He has identified four essential preconditions;
intelligibility, conformity to the purpose of the organization, compatibility with
personal interests and physical and mental ability to comply behind the acceptance of
authority.
 Inducement-Contribution balance: Bernard sought to bring equilibrium between
contribution in an organization in terms of labour and satisfaction level generally
calculated in terms of inducements and incentives.
 Moral Responsibility: Moral responsibility of executive form the backbone of an
organization.
 Communication: Success of any cooperative system depends on proper
communication network.

7. The Essence of Human Relations Approach

First, Human Relations theory, in contrast to other classical theories, views organization
in its holistic social perspective emphasising on the human element in the working of
organization.
Second, the Human Relations theory believes that each worker carries with him/ her
culture, attitude, belief and way of life. Organization should take proper cognizance of all
these socio-cultural factors. The social and psychological factors are responsible for
worker’s productivity and job satisfaction.
Third, this theory identifies the impact of informal groups on motivation and productivity.
Fourth, it emphasises on sense of belongingness among the workers and need of social
solidarity in an organization.
Fifth, Human relation theory discovers a new form of management; participative
management, which may reduce the gap between workers and management.
8. The Human Relations vs. Classical Theories
Like other Classical theories, The Human Relations theory acknowledges the importance of
‘management’ in efficient production, however, it differs in its basic approach to the
organization from the former. Organization is in fact a social system. In addition to its formal
structure, it involves individuals and informal groups. The Human Relations theory is
regarded as a vital theory in relation to its impact on productivity. It is also called the ‘neo-

57
classical theory’ as it emphasises efficiency and regards productivity as the essence of an
organization. But this theory rely on different techniques to achieve desired objectives.
Though alike in terms of achieving objectives, Classical and Human Relations theory are
different in their approaches. The Human Relations theory attempts to eliminate the
dehumanising factors of the classical theory.
9. Evaluation of Human Relations Approach
The Human Relations theory brings a new perspective in organization theory by
acknowledging the importance of workers in their respective socio-cultural milieu. However,
this theory is also criticised on the following grounds:
1. Critics have pointed out several shortcoming of research methods of Hawthorne
survey. It is argued that the sample size at the Hawthorne plant was inadequate. It did
not deal with the entire organization. Carey’s criticism is based on the fact that small
groups of ‘cooperative girls’ do not indicate the general pattern. Inadequate samples
cannot help us to arrive at acceptable conclusions. The theory supports the old view
that monetary incentives, conductive working environment and discipline are the vital
impacting factors of productivity. According to Carey, the theory lacks scientific base.
2. Peter F Drucker is also a critic of this theory. According to him it does not attach due
significance to economic dimensions. The Harvard group neglects nature of work. It
primarily focuses on inter-personal relations.
3. This theory is also criticised for its lack of understanding the role of unions in an
organization. Mayo and his team substitute human relations oriented supervisors for
union representatives. Scholars like Loren Baritz and others criticise the theory as
‘anti-union’ and ‘pro-management’. Some Marxist critics prefer to call Hawthorne
researchers as ‘cow sociologists’. According to them conflict free organizational
situation is utopian.
4. The theory is also criticised for the reason that it draws inspiration mainly from
classical theories. It did not go far enough to ensure ultimate contentment and well-
being of employers.

10. Conclusion
No theory can be regarded as all-inclusive and perfect. Elton Mayo’s Human Relations theory
has also certain short comings. But in spite of this, it may be regarded as milestone in
augmenting subsequent development of organizational practices. His ideas of adequate
communication system, participative management, importance of informal organizations, and
human side of organization among others are regarded as very crucial in organization
theories. His ideas led to the further development of Neo-Human Relations approaches,
particularly in the analysis of the work design and management evolved in the writings of
Douglas Macgregor, Abraham Maslow, Frederick Herzberg, Chris Argyris. At last we can

58
say that Elton Mayo and his Human Relations approach is relevant still today not only for its
innovative ideas but also for practical application.
11. References and Further Reading
Baritz, L. (1960). The Servants of Power, Westport, CT: Greenwood.
Carey, A. (1967). “The Hawthorne Studies: A Radical Criticism’’, American Sociological
Review, 32 (3), pp. 403-416.
Chakravarty, B & Chand P. (2006) Public Administration in a Globalizing World, New
Delhi: Sage.
Chester, B. (1954). The Functions of the Executive, Cambridge: Harvard University Press
Drucker, Peter F. (1961). The Practice of Management, London: Mercury Books.
Jha, P. K. & Dubey, S. N. (Eds) (2015) Administration and Public Policy, New Delhi:
Scholar Tech Press.
Mayo, E. (1933). The Human Problems of an Industrial Civilization, Cambridge, MA:
Harvard.
----------(1945). The Social Problems of Industrial Civilization, Andover, Massachusetts:
Andover Press.
Roethlisberger, Firtz J., and Dickson, W. J. (1939). Management and the Worker, Cambridge:
Harvard University Press.

59
 Unit-2

(b) ii. Rational Decision-Making (Herbert Simon)

Dr. Devarati Roy Chowdhury

Structure

 Introduction
 Definitions of Decision Making
 Types of Decision Making
 Principles of Decision Making
 Meaning of Decision Theory
 Intuitive Decision Making Model
 Creative Decision Making Model
 Rational Decision Making Model and Criticism
 Rational Decision Making and Herbert Simon: Concept of Bounded Rationality
 Critical Evaluation of Herbert Simon’s Model
 Conclusion
 References

Introduction
The subject of decision making is very extensive. Decision making is a multi-step process
which is considered as the most significant activity of the organization. It is the most basic
and central function of management at all levels. Decision making involves a clearly defined
elements based systematic process of selecting a course of action from multiple possible
alternatives for the achievement of the desired objective. Each defined element involves a
decision in itself and also serves as a building block of the decision process.
The main objective of the whole activity is to guide and channelise the human action for
the achievement of a proposed goal. It involves systemizing the organizational infrastructure
and required resources into the suitable course of action which would lead to achieving the
desired results in an orderly manner. The course of action involves questions like ‘what is the
objective’, ‘what is to be done to achieve the objective’, ‘how it is to be done’, ‘who all will
be involved’, ‘what are the resources’. By considering all the questions, alternative
possibilities are chalked out and then the best alternative is selected which is called as
‘decision’ and the whole process through which the final decision is taken is known as
‘decision making’. The word “decision” is derived from Latin word “decido”, which means

60
settlement, a fixed intention bringing to conclusive result and decision making means arriving
at a conclusion as a solution of a problem.
All the administrative activities such as planning, organisation, direction, budgeting and
control etc are performed through decisions. That is why, the whole decision making process
is the most crucial aspect of administration.
Definitions of Decision Making
According to Koontz and O’Donnel, “Decision-making is the actual selection from among
alternatives of a course of action.”
Melvin T. Copeland said “administration essentially is a decision making process and
authority is responsible for making decision and for ascertaining that the decisions made are
carried out.”
According to Peter Drucker, “Whatever a manager does, he does through decision
making.”
Above mentioned definitions show that as the core function of management process,
decision is an act of choice selecting a particular alternative out of many possibilities. As an
act of choice, the whole process involves thinking, designing and deciding at each step. This
makes it a cognitive process where the knowledge about the problem helps to decide what to
do about the problem, how to solve it. Decision making involves gathering the available
information which is known, identifying the resources, chalking out the alternatives,
assessing the risks involved and making the best decision weighing all the alternatives in a
timely manner and evaluating decision effectiveness. This is fundamentally basic for each
individual decision to big organization, however, process of arriving at final solution is
complex can vary from individual to organization and at each level. (Bhattacharya and
Chakrabarty 2005)
Types of Decisions Making
There are many types of decisions which can be classified in a number of ways:
a.) Programmed decisions and non-programmed decisions
Programmed decision are structured and recurs after a regular interval. These types of
decisions involved routine and repetitive problems. The conditions of the programmed
decisions are highly certain which means that information about these problems are already
available and solutions are offered in accordance with habit, rule or procedure in a pre-
planned manner.
Non-programmed decisions are relatively unstructured and occurs much less often than a
programmed decision. Problems are unique and novel and conditions for non-programmed
decisions are highly uncertain and non-repetitive in nature. There are no prespecified
procedure to rely upon while taking decisions. Each situation is different from the other,

61
involving situations and problems which are not often seen and thus, requires more
innovative solutions.
b.) Organisational decisions and personal decisions
Organisational decisions involve organizational goals and are made for the advancement
of the organization. These are the decisions which an executive or manager takes on behalf of
organisation. These can be delegated or transferred to others. These decisions making involve
decisions pertaining to practices and problems of the organisation.
Personal decisions are concerned to an employee of the organisation. These are basically
the decisions which are made by an executive or manager as an individual and not as a
member of the organisation. These decisions are made to achieve personal goals and cannot
be delegated to others.
c.) Individual decisions and group decisions
Individual decision is taken by an individual. In this an individual can often reach
decisions more quickly and it is less expensive in comparison to group decision. The clear
accountability lies with the individual who has taken the decisions.
Group decisions are those decisions which are taken by group or organisational team
which is constituted for the purpose. These decisions involve more information, process of
deliberations and the accountability lies with the whole group.
d.) Routine (tactical) decisions and strategic (basic) decisions
Routine decisions concerned with routine and repetitive problems. These types of
decisions neither require collection of new data nor conferring with the people. These can be
taken without much of deliberation. The primary purpose of these decisions is to achieve high
degree of efficiency in the ongoing activity. Within an organisation, lower level units can
take routine decisions in accordance to organisational rules.
The strategic decisions are taken on the serious problems and these require fact finding
analysis of the possible alternatives. These decisions require lengthy deliberations and has
long term implications. The strategic decisions are taken by top level management in an
organisation.
e.) Policy decisions and operative decisions
Policy decisions are the decisions that define the basic principles of the organization and
determine how it will develop and function in the future. These are taken by top level
management to change the rules, organizational procedure.
Operative decisions involved determining and planning short term objectives and goals
concerning routine tasks. These decisions are taken by lower management in order to put into
action the policy decisions.

62
 Apart from these categories, there are more types of decision making like departmental,
interdepartmental and enterprise decisions, major and minor decisions, short term and long
tern decisions, simple and complex decisions etc. Each decision making model has its own
advantages and disadvantages.
Principles of Decision Making

 Marginal principle of decision making: it is based on principle of diminishing

returns. This principle maintains after reaching the optimal level of utilization, any
further addition of factor of production will yield diminished per unit returns. The
principle works to identify the optimal level and is applied for training, promotion,
sales, advertisements.
 Mathematical principle of decision making: this principle gives scientific approach
to managers in organization. It rationalizes the filtering of all the data, information
which are used for analysing a problem, balancing all the possible alternatives and
taking decision thereafter. It helps in balancing the overwhelming flow of
information in form of data in a orderly manner. It underlies computer programme
and venture analysis, probability theory, game theory are based on these principles.
 Psychological principle of decision making: it works on the idea that decision
making is a cognitive process in which analysis of the problem, exploring alternatives
and choosing the best possibility, all these elements are based by expectations,
aspirations, technological skills, personality traits, organisational and social status
etc.
 Limiting factor principle: as per this principle, the basic fundamentals of problem
are analysed and on that basis possible inferences or conclusion are drawn.
 Principle of participation in decision making: this works on the idea of team
participation. It maintains that decision influenced by human behaviour and thus are
the by product of human relationship. Like in organization, this principle favours
consulting the subordinate for reaching to decisions.
 Alternative principle idea in decision making: according to this principle all the
possibilities are evaluated one by one and after weighing all the possible alternatives,
best alternative is considered as final decision.
All the decisions are fully or partially based on these principles. (Bhattacharya and
Chakrabarty 2005)
Meaning of Decision Theory
Decision theory is considered as an interdisciplinary process to take decision which are
considered as the best possible decision in unknown circumstances. As an interdisciplinary
process, analysis of the decision making process is done through a diverse lens of
psychology, philosophy, mathematics, statistics, sciences and social science.

63
 On the basis of that three different areas of decision theory have been generated which
examine the decision making from three different point of view. These are descriptive,
prescriptive and normative decision theory.
 Descriptive decision theory examines that how the irrational beings understand the
problem and take decisions.
 Prescriptive decision theory provided fundamental guidelines to a decision taker in
order to draw possible inferences and make the best possible decision in uncertain
environment.
 Normative decision theory highlights the importance of values and norms and
provides guidance for taking decisions based on set of norms and values.
Types of Decision Making Model
Decision making model describes the methods which is taken to make the decisions. There
are four main models of decision making and each model is relevant for a specific kind of
decision. It is important to mention here that each model of decision making has its
advantages and risks. The models are:
 Intuitive decision making model
 Creative decision making model
 Rational decision making model
 Bounded rational decision making model
Intuitive Decision Making Model
Intuitive decision making model focuses on the idea of reaching the decisions without
considerable conscious reasoning. With great deal of uncertainty attached, constraints of
time, finances, and limitation in terms of lack or imperfect information, it is often found that
people are taking decisions without considering the formal steps of the rational decision
making. But it is important to note here that, as it is seldom criticized from an outsider that it
is more based on gut feeling and guessing power, it is also a systematic model of decision
making. (Lumenlearning course)
Unlike rational decision making model, in this model decisions are not taken on the basis
of exploring best alternative out of possible options. Rather the decision taker here, analyses
the environment and figure out the pattern and use past experience and takes the suitable
course of action. If it is not coming out to be a workable solution then another new idea is
picked so at one given point of time, one choice is considered. Once a workable course of
action is recognized, the decision maker uses it to solve the problem. The basic strategy here
is trial and error, testing one solution at a time, understanding the patterns, scanning the cues
and thus reinventing the wheel every time.
Intuitive model is opposite of rational decision making model which is a multi-step
process of taking a decision based on facts analyse. This model is good to analysis ill-
structured and fragmented problems.

64
Creative Decision Making Model
Creative model of decision making highlights the power of imaginative new ideas. With the
multi-disciplinarity approach, 360 degree outlook, increasing competition and providing
something new, setting up new trend momentum, individuals and organizations are
constantly trying to be more creative and unique with the decisions. The criteria for this
model ranges from cutting costs to offering new innovative ways to do something. One point
which is need to be clear here is creativity and innovation are noy synonyms to each other, in
the innovation process, creativity is the first stepping stone. Innovation is a combination of
creative and realistic, workable planning.
Steps of creative decision making process:
• Problem recognition: identifying and understanding the problem
• Immersion: conscious thinking and gathering information
• Incubation: setting aside the problem, however brain is working on the problem,
unconscious state.
• Illumination: in a least expected scenario, solution become visible, similar to a ‘eureka
moment’
• Verification and application stage: conscious verification of the solution leading to the
implementation of the final decision. (lumenlearning course)
The combination of three factors evaluate the level of creative in the decisions making
process. These are fluency (ability to generate the maximum number of ideas), flexibility
(range of different ideas), and originality (newness and uniqueness of ideas).
Rational Decision Making Model
The rational decision making model presents a multistep process for making decisions
through logic and reasoning between possible alternatives. It is known as rational model of
decision making because the decision taken by this model seems to optimize utility and
minimize the cost involved (Simon 1947). It is also rational because the inferences are drawn
based on logical evidences as in form of facts and information and are not based on any guess
work or imagination. According to this model, any decisions which has been taken without
considering the information and reasoning is seemed to be highly irrational.
It is a model of making logical decisions based on objectivity, utilization of experiences,
economizing on efforts and give lesser importance to intuition and subjectivity.
Stepwise Rational Decision Making Model
 Identifying the problem
The very step involves defining and framing the problem
 Establishing decision criteria

65
 In this step, people need to establish the relevance of all elements which are involved in
taking decisions like all the information, stakeholders involved, their requirement,
interest, preferences etc.
 Weighing the decision criteria
This step revolves around putting the priorities and information in the decision in a
correct order.
 Exploring possible alternatives
After the identification of the problem, and collection of the relevant information, the
next step is assessing them and chalking out all the possible alternatives.
 Evaluate each alternative
This is the fifth step and in this step all the possible alternatives are evaluated on the
various parameters like feasibility, realistic and reliability of the alternatives, merits and
demerits of each alternative.
 Choosing the best alternative as decision
Once the evaluation of the alternatives are finished, the decision maker now choose the
best suitable alternative and clearly state as decision.
 Implementation of the decision
The final decision is implemented by the decision maker in order to solve the problem.
 Evaluation of the decision
The last and final step involves evaluation the results of the decision.
Assumptions of the Rational Model of Decision Making
This model maintains that people choose the best alternative out of possible inferences on the
basis of maximization of benefits and minimization of cost analysis. The basic assumption of
rational model are:
 People have complete and perfect knowledge about the problem and related
information on the basis of which they will make choices.
 People have the perfect data to measure cost benefit analysis.
 People possess the required cognitive ability to process the data, evaluate all possible
combinations against each others and has sound logical and objective ability to choose
the best possible alternative. (lumenlearning course)
Problems with the Rational Decision Making Model
The very basic problem with the model is its unrealistic assumptions of the decision maker
knows everything starting from the problem to all available choices, to choosing the best
alternative. The rational decision maker is expected to choose the ‘optimal alternative’ which

66
has minimum cost and maximum benefits. In this decision making process, the ethical and
normative parameters are not taken into account. This model is dominated by the idea of
giving more preferences to fact, data and scientific analysis. (Henry 2003)
Critiques of the Rational Decision Making Model
The model have been criticized for having bias to the over-simplified and unrealistic
assumptions like:
The model assumes that all information is available pertaining the problem. It may not be
the true case and secondly, the decision maker might not be able to get and retain all the
information. There are many sort of limitations to it. As per the stepwise decision making
process, all information has to be gathered and analysed in order to create all possible
alternatives. There are some inherent problems with the very assumption as, first, it is tough
to get all information about any problem, there are some limitations to how much information
we can gather.
Secondly, pile of information can lead to ‘information analysis paralysis’ where too
much time would get wasted in analysing information and making sense out of it without any
conclusive decision. Too much reliance on these unrealistic assumptions has its problems.
Thirdly, individual rationality has its own boundaries to see through the data and figure
out alternatives out of that. There are cognitive, infrastructural, ecological restraints to it.
And, the more complex is the problem, more tough is to get information regarding it and
more are the limitations in order of making more rational decision.
Rational Decision Making and Herbert Simon
Nobel prize winning economist Herbert Simon’s (1916-2001) most celebrated work is
Administrative Behaviour: A decision making process was published in the year 1947. His
notable works are:
Administrative Behaviour (1947)
Fundamental Research in Administration (1953)
Organization (1958)
Human Problem Solving (1972)
In his book ‘Administrative Behaviour’ Simon mentioned that “decision making is the central
concern for understanding the organization and its working. And, in order to understand the
organization better, one need to analyse the human behaviour and its ethical and values
preferences in the whole decision making process.
Herbert Simon attacked the scientific and structural approach for their contradiction and
oversimplified, idealistic assumptions and thus making the discipline of public administration
inconsistent with no universal relevance. Simon in particular, questioned the theoretical basis
of rational decision making and challenged its universal validity. (Simon 1947)

67
 Herbert Simon’s investigation of the role of rationality in decision making has led to the
growth of behavioural approach in the field of administrative behaviour with focus on
decision making. For Simon, decision making is a universal process and has contextual
relevance. In his own words, “a theory of administration should be concerned with the
processes of decision as well as the processes of action. Mere setting up of a theory and no
relation to reality is of no value.” (Simon 1947)
For Simon, “administration is the art of getting things done” and for that he emphasized
on choices which ensure actions. Simon highlighted that in administrative study, more
attention has been given to action than choices. Choice precedes actions and without
understanding the choice properly, action cannot be analysed. And, decision making study is
the study of choices in behavioural approach. (Simon 1955)
Simon asserted that one has to understand that every administrative activity involves two
different and interrelated activity. These are:
 ‘deciding’ (decision)
 ‘doing’ (action)
‘Doing’ is integrally related to deciding. And, that is why deciding factors should be
analysed, should be based on sound principles so that it ensure effective action. Simon argued
that traditional administrative thinkers did not diagnose the situations thus lacked the frame
of reference which eventually made them suffer with the problem of universal validity. Thus,
Simon proposed his model of rational decision making which is based on logical positivism
and excluded value judgement, preferences and any normativity. Simon favoured that
administrative behaviour should only take into account those knowledge which is coming
from rigorous factual analysis. It is important to mention here that ‘logical positivism’ (a
philosophical movement arose out of Vienna Circle in the 1920s) basically holds the idea that
the only knowledge is scientific knowledge and meaningful knowledge which is based on
facts. Logical positivism differs from erstwhile schools of empiricism and positivism and
maintains that knowledge acquired by verification, experimental process should be
considered as basis of knowledge. (Bhattacharya and Chakrabarty 2005)
On the basis of logical positivism, Simon supported empirical approach and negated the
use of normative approach in the study of decision making in administration. According to
Simon, “factual information can be verified and tested, they are highly objective in nature but
value based judgements are subjective in nature and cannot be tested”. (Simon 1947)
Simon believed that decision making is a tough task as the decisions maker within an
organization is constantly facing new, complex challenges and out of the many possible
alternatives, the decision maker has to select the most suitable alternative to provide a
practical and workable solution to the problem.
Simon’s decision making theory is based on the basic idea that rational administrator or a
rational decision maker possesses perfect and complete knowledge about understating the

68
problem, has all the required information, cognitive ability to interpret the information and
has the farsightedness to vision out the possible alternative and best alternative too.
Flowchart of Simon’s decision process

Is there a problem?

R
E
What are the V
alternatives? I
E
W

Which course of action

one should choose?

This process of decision making comprises of number of stages:

 Intelligence activity in this stage the environment is analysed to identify the issues
and events which require decision. Information as data is gathered, processed and
analysed to define the problem.
 Design activity involves development of the possible alternatives on the basis of
processed data and each course of possible action is evaluated. This ranges from
problem analysis, figuring out possible alternatives and testing alternatives for their
feasibility and practicality.
 Choice and Implementation stage comprises of selecting the most suitable
alternative and that is implemented.
 Review stage involves monitoring the performance of the implemented course of
action and evaluate outcomes.
As per the rational decision making model, a complete rational decision maker is a ‘economic
man’ as defined by neo-classical theory. And, in the state of classical perfect rationality
condition, each possible alternative would be given numerical utility value and the alternative
having highest value would be selected as rational perfect decision. (Henry 2003)
As stated above, in this manner, it is assumed that the rational decision maker:
 Knows all about problem, information and alternatives

69
  Knows the outcome of each alternative
 Knows all the preferences of all the outcomes
 Have a sound computational cognitive ability to compare and choose most preferred
possible course of action.
Simon mentioned that it is a condition of perfect rationality but in an imaginary world. In real
life situation, the whole decision making process suffers from many limitations like
inadequate information, cognitive limitations, no possibility of chalking out all possible
solutions, decision maker’s own biases, beliefs, intellectual and skilled capacity, external
environment, organisational factors etc. (Henry 2003)
Simon didn’t negate that crucial role of rationality in decision making and highlighted
the importance of rationality stating that “all decisions should be based on rational choices as
preferred behaviour alternative in terms of some system of values whereby the consequences
of behaviour can be evaluated.” He explained rationality as means-end construct. Out of
many possible alternatives, picking the one doesn’t signify that rest alternatives are not
suitable or wrong. As per Simon, if we go by rationality, we will understand that in that
particular situation, that particular course of action is selected by decision maker. However,
in different situation, the decision maker might opt for some other alternative. So, rationality
helps to understand the problem better.
Simon suggested that there are mainly six types of rationality.
 Subjective rationality: a decision is considered as subjectively rational if it leads to the
maximization of the achievement in comparison to the knowledge of the subject.
 Objective rationality: a decision is considered as objectively rational if it maximizes
the given value in that given situation.
 Deliberate rationality means deliberately adjusting the means to ends.
 Conscious rationality refers to the conscious process of adjusting means to end.
 Personal rationality is related to decision directly to individual
 Organization rationality refers to the extent to which decisions are related to
organisation. (Simon 1947)
Herbert Simon’s theory of rational decision making differed from traditional rational decision
making model because in Simon’s theory, values and preferences and rationality have given
major importance. Simon’s theory have adequate analysis of behavioural approach and has
universal application.
According to Simon, “the Rational-Economic Model (Classical decision theory) assumes
the manager faces a clearly defined problem, he knows all possible action alternatives and
their consequences, and then chooses the optimum solution. Whereas in Administrative
Model (Behavioural), the Behavioural decision theory accepts the notion of bounded
rationality. It assumes the manager acts only in terms of what is perceived about a given
situation, and then chooses a satisfying solution”. (Simon 1947)

70
Understanding the Concept of Bounded Rationality
Rationality is the central point in Simon’s decision making model. On the basis of this
bounded rationality concept, Simon has tried to show the limitations of human rationality and
how human rationality differs from pure economic rationality.
‘Bounded rationality’ decision making model of Herbert Simon provides a holistic
understanding of how decisions are taken. The basic principle of this theory works on the
same line that decision making is a rational process. However, Simon gives a condition here
that as decision maker lacks the basic cognitive ability and due to many other limitations like
time constraints, lack of information, organizational procedure etc. decision maker cannot
attain the optimal decision which can maximize benefits with minimum costs. (Bhattacharya
and Chakrabarty 2005)
Instead the decision maker, in such cases, on the basis of his/her rationality opt for
suitable course of action thus making ‘good enough’ decisions. The rationality here is that
decision maker is fully aware of limitations and then opt for most suitable possible
alternative.
The theory of bounded rationality highlights the point that decision maker should adapt
the rational approach, and must determine the extent and range of information which needs to
be gathered and processed for identification of the problem, creating alternative solutions at
information gathering and analysing stage and finally choosing the alternative.
Simon clearly points out that the decision maker is not in control of all the stakeholders
and of environment and that is why it is almost impossible for a rational man to take rational
decisions knowing its limitations. So, with limited information and manageable alternatives,
the decision maker would settle with suitable alternative without exhaustive exploration.
(Lumenlearning course)
The most important principle of bounded rationality model is the ‘principle of
satisficing’ which means that choosing the most suitable possible alternative which meets the
minimum criteria. The concept of satisficing is similar to rational decision making but
whereas in later, the best possible alternative becomes the final choice thus leads to
maximization of benefits and minimization of costs, in the former, opting for suitable
alternative meeting minimum criteria saves efforts, time and the most viable realistic
approach to decision making.

71
Image 1. Courtesy Figure on ResearchGate.

Herbert Simon said that “the word satisficing is actually a combination of two words: satisfy
and suffice. As one can get all information, and even if one gets all information, he will not
be able to process it. In contrary, in bounded rationality, seeking ‘good enough’ something
which is satisfactory, fulfilling minimum threshold, acceptable works best and in the practical
world, this satisficing decision making is the most realistic approach.” Simon applied the
concept of bounded rationality and satisficing to individual to organisational decisions.
(Simon 1947; 1955)
So, in nutshell, there are some basic factors which are leading to satisficing decisions
based on bounded rationality. These are:
 Dynamic and Complex nature of reality and administrative objectives.
 Limited ability of decisions maker to foresee the alternatives and outcomes.
 Lack of information and lack of cognitive and computational ability to process the
information.
 Organizational pressure and other external factors in environment.
 Personal interests, preferences and biases are bound to influence the decisions.
(Bhattacharya and Chakrabarty 2005)
On the basis of that, the administrative man has following traits:
 On the basis of bounded rationality, administrative man takes satisfactory decisions
with meeting minimum threshold
 He takes a simplified version of problem with only that much information which he
thinks adequate and do not fall for information analysis paralysis.

72
  Administrative man looks for satisficing conditions rather than maximization
conditions. (Bhattacharya and Chakrabarty 2005)
Simon developed a more realistic workable model of decision making. Whereas the classical
theory product ‘the economic man’ maximizes, Simon’s ‘administrative man’ satisfices.
Administrative man simplifies the situation by considering fewer for deciding which he
thinks as crucial.
A practical decision maker would opt for a satisfactory decision in order to solve the
problem rather going for an endless hunting of ideal perfect option. A good decision maker
will only consider information which he is aware of, see the relevance of these, which he can
process and interpret for proper decision making.
Critique of Simon’s Bounded Rationality Model
The bounded rational model of decision making is an acclaimed theory of decision making
but many researchers claim that this theory despite its difference still it comes under the
school of rational decision making model. Scholars like Huber, Das and Teng stated that
there is no clear cut distinction between perfect and bounded rationality. As per these
scholars, Simon himself admitted that this theory of bounded rationality is a theory of rational
decision making with condition.
Simon has also been given criticized for giving too much importance to the role of
decision making and setting up decision making process as the only most important activity
of the organisation. In that process Simon neglected the role of political, social, cultural and
economic factors and how they are influencing the administrative behaviour. Critics point out
that decision making is the important function of organisation but by theorizing and analysing
only decision making, one cannot understand the organization fully.
Critics like Norton E. Ling and P. Selznick commented that the dichotomy of fact and
value in Simon’s theory is basically a revision in a new way the discredited dichotomy of
politics administration. They further stated that Simon undermined the role of bureaucracy in
administrative studies and limited it to a neutral agent which is not true in real sense.
Bureaucracy is the most important agency in the administrative studies and without
understanding the bureaucracy, the study of administrative behaviour would always remain
flawed and narrow in its approach. (Henry 2003)
Das and Teng criticised Simon’s theory of bounded rationality for its factual based
analysis and excluded values. For them, the bounded rationality theory of decision making is
more relevant to business administration, for private organisation and not for public
administration and governmental activities. In public administration, along with the factual
data, many social and ethical values, welfare concerns have to be taken into account while
deciding and difficult to measure these factors just in the units of costs. (Henry 2003)
Critics have also pointed out that distinction between facts and values and exclusion of
values is not a correct way of approaching the problems as values hold an essential part of

73
policy making cycle. Excluding values and limiting the policy making to only factual study
would make the public administration too mundane, routinized, mechanical, and antipublic.
Many critics maintained that efficiency and cost benefit analysis should not be the only
concern of decision making. Satisfaction of all the stakeholders, societal welfare, optimal
utilization of resources are also equally important objectives of decision making which Simon
have ignored in the process.
Then, Simon has also been criticised for considering rationality as the only and most
crucial element of decision making. Whereas in reality, along with rationality, many other
non-rational dimensions play important role in decision making. Simon have failed to
recognise the role of tradition, faith, culture, personality traits, intuition and creativity in
decision making.
In this regard, Chris Argyris criticized Simon for not acknowledging the influential role
traditional values, belief system and intuition or sixth sense play in whole decision making
process. (Bhattacharya and Chakrabarty 2005)
Critics are skeptical that Simon’s idea of ‘satisficing’ might become a ‘justification tool’
or an excuse for those who are not serious about their decisions and taking decision that are
less beneficial.
They also critics that the difference between ‘maximizing’ and ‘satisficing’ is not clear,
rather these are overlapping and relative to each other as under many situations, satisficing
condition can also led to maximization and versa and again in many condition these two can
be poles apart.
Simon model is an attainable model for many critics because it is unattainable and
idealistic to get fit into real public administration and real world. Critics commented that the
concept of bounded rationality and satisficing are oversimplified and too generalistic ideas
and has nothing to guide or to contribute to the real planners.
Despite the criticism, Simon’s contribution and his path breaking work in public
administration cannot be neglected. With the rational decision making model, a new
paradigm emerged in the discipline of public administration with behavioural approach
shifting the traditional approach with a more scientific and logical orientation. Herbert Simon
highlighted the significance of decision making as role of choice can give a better
understanding of the administration and would help to understand the dynamics of
administrative behaviour.
Influenced by Simon’s idea and this path breaking work, several public administration
theorist, management thinkers, economists like Victor Thompson, Anthony Downs, Michel
Crozier, Gordon Tullock, Dwight Waldo, Golembiewski have further researched and
contributed to study of administrative behaviour.

74
Models of Decision Making at a Glance

Image 2. courtesy Lumenlearning.com

Conclusion
As discussed, decision making is one of the most important activity of not only an
organisation but an essential part of everybody’s daily life. The good decision is linked to
efficiency and effectiveness of choices one makes. Whereas the rational model characterizes
decision maker as a rational economic man, later Simon’s rational model of decision making
shows despite the limitations of decision maker, how the administrative man optimizes.
Simon, as opposite to the hard system approach, makes the decision making relatively simple
and clear. In the real world, problems are complex, face many constraints of varying range
and degree, with fast moving economy, ever changing administrative functioning, the
decision making have become more tougher and facing newer challenges.
Along with the manifestation of the problem based on these models, a decision maker or an
administrator, policy maker can improve his/her understanding of the social, economic,
political, cultural and cognitive factors and bring new ways of dealing with the issues and
problems. The main objective is to create more suitable and relevant conditions to make good
choices for the welfare of the society at large.
References
Bhattacharya, M. and Chakrabarty, B. (2005) ‘Introduction: Public Administration: Theory
and Practice’, in Bhattacharya, M. and Chakrabarty, B. (eds.) Public Administration: A
Reader. Delhi: Oxford University Press, pp. 1‐50.

75
Henry, N. (2003) Public Administration and Public Affairs. New Delhi: Prentice Hall, pp.
53‐74.
Simon, H.A. (1947) Administrative behaviour. New York, NY:Macmillan
Simon, H.A. (1955) A behavioural model of rational choice, quarterly Journal of Economics,
59, pp. 99-118
Website Reference
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-management/chapter/rational-and-nonrational-
decision-making/
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-orgbehavior/chapter/11-2-understanding-decision-
making/
Image Reference
Image 1: Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Illustration-of-the-concept-of-
bounded-rationality-Due-to-cognitive-limitations-time_fig1_326439800 [accessed 1 Nov,
2020)
Image 2: Available from https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-orgbehavior/chapter/11-2-
understanding-decision-making/ (accessed 1 Nov, 2020)

76
 Unit-2
(c) Contemporary Theories
i. Ecological Approach (Fred Riggs)
Bijendra Jha

Structure

 Introduction
 Riggs’ Ecological Approach to Administrative System
 ‘Agraria (Fused)’, ‘Industria (Diffracted)’ and ‘Prismatic’ societies
 Sala Model: Administrative subsystem in prismatic society
 Bazaar Canteen: Prismatic Society’s Economic Subsystem
 Conclusion
 References

Introduction
In the field of comparative public administration, F W Riggs (1917-2008) was a pioneer
intellectual in the period of post-world war II. He was chairman of Comparative
Administration Group (CAG) of the American Society for Public Administration. CAG
maintained that in order to enrich the discipline of Comparative Public Administration and
make it more scientific, it has to be more critical, analytical, and cross-cultural. Delivering his
lecture at Indian Institute of Public Administration in New Delhi (1969), Riggs has chosen
his title of talk as ‘The Ecology of Public Administration’. He had selected three models viz.,
United State of America, Thailand and Philippines to illustrate different models of
administration. The contemporary studies in public administration made use of ecological
approach to the public administration developed by F W Riggs in 1950s and 1960s. He
revised and reexamined his study various times and offered cross-cultural analysis of
administration.
He was the first who gave intellectual and organizational leadership to the comparative
public administration (CPA) movement in 1950s and 1960s. His empirical and comparative
studies of the administration popularly known as ecological approach are found in his book
‘The Ecology of Public Administration’ (1961)’, and ‘Administration in Developing
Countries: The theory of Prismatic Society (1964)’. Riggs borrowed from Sutton’s two ideal
model of Agraria and Industria to illustrate relationship between societal structure,
administration and whole culture. He illustrated the typology in comparative public
administration as Agraria and Industria, and claimed that similar category can be developed
by illustrating relationship between administration, society and culture. Later he termed
77
‘Agraria’ as ‘Fused’ model and ‘Industria’ as ‘Diffracted’ model and developed an
intermediary model what Riggs calls ‘Prismatic’ model discussed below in details. His
contribution in the study of administrative structure and their socio-economic environment
(ecology) in developing societies (Third world) is popularly known as ‘Fused-Prismatic-
Diffracted Model’. It is famous as ecological approach to public administration. F W Riggs’
task was to investigate how administration interacts with their social and economic factors in
developing societies.
In the post-World War II period, many nation-states have become free in Asia, Africa
and Latin America. These developing countries, backward as per norms of western model of
development, were ruled by western administrative systems originated in western countries; it
was interesting for scholars to inquire how western originated administrative system does
function in these post-colonial societies. Many western scholars have started to study the
public administrative system in developing societies in a comparative perspective. Riggs was
one of them. His study is unique in the sense he looked at functioning of administration in the
context of socio-economic and cultural factors of the society. In other words, he emphasized
on interaction between administration and its environment such as social, political and
cultural context. He also highlighted that western model of administration is relatively less
relevant in the developing societies where ecology viz., social, economic and cultural
environment is very much different from western society. Unlike western societies, the
administrative system in developing countries are considerably shaped by the social,
economic, and cultural context.
Riggs’ Ecological Approach to Administrative System
Initially ecological approach applied to biology which refers to mutual relation among
organisms, especially between organisms and their environment. In public administration,
ecological approach denotes administration and their environment influences each-other. An
inquiry into the dynamic process of interaction between administration and their larger
ecology is necessary to understand administration. In the study of public administration, this
approach was introduced by J M Gaus, Robert A. Dahl, Robert A Morton but F W Riggs’s
contribution is significant. Developing the concept, he analyzed the relationship between the
administrative system and social, political, cultural, technological and communication factors
in a larger perspective. He studied interaction between administrative systems and their larger
ecology in Thailand and Philippines and showed how environmental conditions (ecology)
influence the functioning of administrative systems. By doing this, he tried to understand the
disparity between the administrative system of developed and developing countries. Each
nation has a different social, economic and cultural setting which shapes the functioning of
administration.
In analyzing administrative systems from an ecological point of view, F. W. Riggs has
applied a structural-functional approach. Talcott Person, Robert A Morton and G Almond
have applied a structural-functional approach in their study. Structural-functional approach
signifies that in every society certain important function are carried out by a number of

78
structures. This approach is a method of analyzing the functions that are carried out in a
society, the structures that are responsible to carry out functions. Riggs insists that in every
society five types of functions are discharged viz., social, economic, communication,
symbolic and political.
‘Agraria (Fused)’, ‘Industria (Diffracted)’ and ‘Prismatic’ Societies
For the purpose of analysis, Riggs has developed models of administrative systems. In the
1950s, he divided societies into two groups: ‘Agraria’ (Fused) and ‘Industria’ (Diffracted).
‘Agraria’ (fused) refers to post-colonial societies dominated by a traditional economic system
like subsistence agricultural economy. No modernization in economy and politics have taken
place so primordial social and cultural systems exist along with traditional subsistence
economies, for example, China, Indonesia and Philippines in the 1950s. In these societies, a
single structure carries out a number of functions. Economics in these societies are based on
the traditional mode of exchange system and barter system. The king or Royal family and
nominated member rules the country with established traditional social laws. The
administrative system in these societies are based on the structure of the King’s/Royal family
and the entire administrative system serves the interest of the Royal family rather than to the
people of the society aimed at development, happiness and good life. Parochial culture
dominates the society at large and ascriptive values matter in everyday life. In these societies,
people have very limited social and political mobility and there is no specialized division of
labour. Old age customs, faith, value, believe, and way of living enabled people to live their
life collectively and control each-other’s behaviour. In these societies, critical thinking or
examination is depicted as a threat to the society. The Royal Family is all in all in the
country’s life and common people live a subjugated life.
In contrast, ‘Industria’ (Diffracted) refers to a developed society like the United States of
America whose economy was majorly industrial along with modern political and bureaucratic
structures. In these societies, modern industries play an important role in shaping a country's
economic structure along with a dynamic system of production and high level of specialized
division of labour. All organizations and structures are created and based on the basis of
modern scientific rationality. Economy is based on free market rationalization. Riggs termed
these societies as free marketized societies. In ‘Industria’ (Diffracted) society, government’s
intervention in the market and market operation is negligible. Social and spatial mobilities are
very high and people enjoy modern technology for their industries and individual’s utility.
In politics, democratic values like individual liberty, equality and justice play an
indispensable role in a country's political structure. Individuals have certain fundamental
rights against excesses of the state. Citizens have the right to participate in elections and get
elected for even the highest political office. Ascriptive values do not matter too much in
public/political life and the government is responsive to the citizens’ development, happiness
and good life. In these societies, there are independent civil society organizations in order to
protect the interest of the common people and government’s response to protection of human
rights is enormous. Citizens’ groups pressurize the government to work in the interest of the

79
common people and get their demand fulfilled. There is consensus among citizens about how
to organize collective affairs of the state and basic aspects of social life at large. People pay
attention and give respect to common laws of the nation. They are active regarding
government’s policy. In these societies, there are more or less universal political cultures and
citizens are open minded and critical to the government’s public policy.
Administration in these societies are more or less independent, accountable and
transparent. They serve to rule of law in the interest of common citizens rather than to any
family or group. Entire administrative systems are based on Max Weber’s legal-rational
authority rather than traditional social ascriptive values. The Weberian model of bureaucratic
systems works in these societies. Universalization of rule of law applied to everyone
irrespective of their ascriptive identities. According to Riggs, all societies transform from
‘Agraria’ to ‘Industria’ in due course of time. For him, ‘Agraria’ is functionally diffused
societies also known as ‘fused’ societies (In primordial societies, various social and economic
functions are functionally diffused, that is, there is no specified division of labour), but
industrial societies (Industria) are functionally diffracted as division of labour are highly
specified. These are two but diametrically opposed societies. He has identified structural
features of ‘Agraria’ and ‘Industria’ which are following:
Agraria (Fused) Industria (Diffracted)
1 Ascriptive value Modern value
2 Particularistic or parochial cultural Universal political culture
3 Diffused pattern Specificity
4 Limited social and spatial mobility High social and spatial mobility
5 Simple and stable occupational Well-developed occupational
differences pattern
6 Differential social stratification Existence of egalitarian class
system
Source: Prasad and Prasad (Ch.17, p.215)

Later Riggs developed an equilibrium model named ‘transitia’ which refers to transforming
societies which represent transitional stages from agrarian to industrial economic systems.
These societies are economically, socially and politically between ‘Agraria’ and ‘Industria’
reflect characteristics of ‘Agraria’ as well as ‘Industria’. Riggs called it ‘prismatic’ societies,
an intermediate society between fused and diffracted.
Firstly, it must be noted that ‘prismatic’ societies are the post-colonial societies who
have been freed from colonization of western power in the 1940s and 1950s. Western power
ruled these societies for centuries through their developed administrative system along with
their social, economic, political, technological as well as cultural domination. They imposed a

80
modern bureaucratic system to govern these societies. They have also recruited local people
in their bureaucracy in a limited sense. In the post Second World War, these countries have
gained independence. Secondly, when these western powers left these countries, they left
structures of modern bureaucratic systems, political systems, industrial systems, and
technological systems in these countries continuing with indigenous people. So, these
societies consist of a modern economic, political, and administrative system along with
traditional social, political and cultural structures. Therefore, these societies are intermediate
societies between ‘Agraria’ (Fused) and Industria (Diffracted). Riggs was curious to look into
the relation between western imposed administrative system and their social, cultural
environment in prismatic society.
In ‘prismatic’ societies, one can find that a traditional subsistence agricultural economy
exists along with modern heavy industrialization. Big and modern cities exist along with rural
hinterland and modern political institutions exist along with traditional social, political and
cultural structure. People's behaviour in these societies vary from participation political
culture (citizens aware of their rights and assertiveness for their due) to parochial political
culture (politically unaware citizens who find themselves powerless in front of bureaucratic
structure and state). One can find mix-political cultural structure in these societies. Here,
there are large gaps between rural-urban divide, poor-rich divide along with divide in the
administrative practice in favour of dominant class/caste. Administrative structure functions
within their social, economic, political, technological, and cultural environment.
Riggs’ focus of study was prismatic society where one can find characteristics of modern
industrial societies like heavy industry, technology, modern political structures like
parliament, judiciary, and bureaucracy as well as primordial social, economic and culture
structures like hierarchy based on traditional social stratification, social status, traditional
ascriptive identities dominates in everyday life. Traditional social values have equal or more
importance than modern values like individual’s rights, liberty, and equality. Riggs’ interest
was to inquire about interactions between modern bureaucracy and their social, economic,
cultural structure in developing societies. In other words, Riggs was concerned with social
structure at large of the prismatic society and their interaction with the administrative
subsystem.
Riggs has identified three characteristics of prismatic society: 1) heterogeneity: It refers
to co-existence of modernity along with traditional; simultaneous presence of different kinds
of systems, practice and view point. Riggs finds a high degree of heterogeneity in prismatic
society regarding structure, practice and worldview; 2) formalism: there is a large gap
between envisaged vision of the society in the constitution and actual practice. Discrepancy
exists between descriptive and perspective, between formal power and effective power, and
between aims and objectives stated in the constitution and real practice. Due to formalism
actual behaviour bureaucratic officials vary and result in official corruption; and 3)
overlapping: in prismatic society, modern political, administrative structure has created but
indifferent and traditional structures continue to dominate in the social behaviour system.

81
Thus, newly created highly modern structures are paid only lip-service and overlooked
widely in favour of traditional social structures. This is regarded as overlapping. Western
bureaucratic and political structures have been created for administrative purposes but often
ignored in favour of traditional social structures. Thus, modern structures co-exist with
traditional but traditional structures continue to dominate in actual practice.
Overlapping has several important dimensions like nepotism, favouritism, poly-
communalism (hostile interaction among different groups), poly-normativism (existence of
several norms rational as well as irrational/traditional), existence of clects (interest groups
based on communal identity), poly normativism (various norms for various group depending
on group’s social status, and bargaining capacity) and modern administrative system co-exists
with traditional administrative structures. Riggs calls economic structures in prismatic society
as bazar-canteen and it has characterized a different set of prices for a commodity or service
for different sets of people depending on social status and bargaining capacity.
Sala Model: Administrative Subsystem in Prismatic Society
The prismatic society is characterized by numerous social, economic, political and
administrative sub-systems. Riggs calls the administrative subsystem a ‘sala’ model. In
diffracted (Industria) societies, it is termed as ‘office’ or ‘bureau’, and in Fused (Agraria)
societies, it is termed as chamber. These three administrative structures have different
characteristics of their own. In a prismatic society, nepotism or patronize bestowed or
favouritism based on family relationship and kinship is prevalent. In fact, nepotism or
favouritism plays a very significant role in selection in various administrative offices and
performance of administrative functions. Family lineage, kinship and traditional law
prevailed and universalization of rule of law was lacking in practice or infact disregarded.
The ‘sala’ official gives priority to social structure while dealing with administrative matters.
They prioritize family/kinship and social ascriptive identity of the individual rather than to
common citizens their political equality. They increase personal power, wealth, and
prosperity rather than to social welfare. The ‘sala’ official behaviour and performance are
highly influenced by his socialization and parochial character. As a result, they don’t apply
law universally. They are biased and their action and interactions are guided by his ascriptive
value and parochialism. Few get more benefits from the government programme and rest
remain ignored from government’s general welfare schemes.
Various social groups interact with each-other as communal members rather than
common citizens. In prismatic society, these communal identities and their hostile interaction
is denoted as poly-communalism. Interest groups are formed on the basis of ascriptive
identities and there is constant struggle among these groups to get bureaucratic favours.
These interest groups based on ascriptive/communal identities are known as ‘clects’. In his
study of prismatic society, Riggs has noted that poly-communalism and presence of clects
creates certain administrative problems. Normatively speaking, government officers
implement laws, schemes and programme universally and without any favouritism and
discrimination, but ‘sala’ officials shows greater loyalty towards member of their own

82
community. In the process, a dominant minority community gets high proportion
representation in government recruitment, and gets elected parliament and assembly. Over-
representation of the socially dominant minority creates dissatisfaction among vulnerable
caste/class. To diffuse the situation and to protect the interest of vulnerable groups/class and
minorities, certain mechanisms of ‘quotas’ or reservation system adopted to provide some
sort of proportional representation in administration and government’s institutions. As a
result, such an arrangement creates mutual hostilities in the socially dominant caste/class
against marginal caste/class who get representation through the ‘quota’ system. It creates
tension among various communities which further generates hostilities among sala ‘official’
working in the government.
Family, community and caste plays indispensable roles in society and simultaneously
several groups emerge on the basis of caste/community membership. Riggs termed these
groups as a ‘clects’, a typical group (associational organization) in prismatic society depicting
modern values but retaining traditional social law and values in practice. Administrative
structures in such society deliver functions giving priority to ‘clects’ and sometimes ‘sala’
official or its one of agency develop closer relationship with particular ‘clects’ and start
functioning itself like ‘clects’. Thus, in prismatic society administrative structure continues to
maintain close relationships with particular clects and works for their interests and only pay
lip services to achievement and universalization of norms.
In prismatic society the traditional behaviour co-exists with a modern set of norms. As a
result, there is overlapping of the formal standard and informal set of norms. There is no
consensus on norms of behaviour. The ‘Sala’ official may be appointed on the basis of high
educational qualification and competitive examination, but for promotion and career
development, they largely depend on ascriptive identity, and favour of senior officials. The
‘Sala’ officials claim modern universalization of application of laws but they are indifferent
and inconsistent in their behaviour in day to day administrative function. Riggs finds
administrative structure divided in the de jure (legal) power and de fecto (actual/real) control
in the prismatic society where the de jure authority succumbs to the de fecto control. The
authority of the ‘sala’ officials overlap with traditional social authority and control structure
based on poly communism, clects and poly normativism (various norms for various groups
depending on the group's social status, and bargaining capacity). Various social structures
function differently and sometimes it behaves against the very purpose of the administration
for which it has created. There is overlapping authority of socially dominant class and the
‘sala’ officials.
Riggs depicted polity of the prismatic society as ‘unbalanced polity’ as administrative
bureaucratic officers exercise a dominant role in the decision-making process, despite the
political leaders’ constitutional power. Due to such centralization and concentration of power
in bureaucrats, there is a lack of response to the citizens’ need and welfare. Riggs concluded
that such development of bureaucracy in prismatic society hinders the progress of political

83
development. In such weak political development modern institutional structures like
legislature, political party, voluntary organization, and civil societies become less effective.
Riggs said that the efficiency of the administrative system depends on the skills and
acumen of the politician whether he/she is able/unable to punish the inefficient bureaucrats,
but often bureaucrats escape his/her wrong decision and action, and go unpunished. In such
circumstances talented ‘sala’ officials tend to spend more time in self-aggrandizement and for
the promotion of self-interest. Since the government's output highly depends on the ‘sala’
official, there is a close link between bureaucrats’ behaviour and administrative output. The
most powerful bureaucrat is often a less efficient administrator. As a result, the ‘sala’ official
is characterized by nepotism and favouritism, institutionalized corruption, and inefficiency in
the administrative output. The ‘sala’ officially governed by the motive of self-interest and
personal power and to protect their own interest.
Bazaar Canteen: Prismatic Society’s Economic Subsystem
F W Riggs described the economic subsystem of the prismatic society as a bazaar-canteen
model. In a diffracted society economic system depends on free-market rule of demand and
supply and also on market’s economic consideration. In contrast, the economic system of the
fused society depends on ‘arena factors’ like religious, social and king’s or royal family
consideration. In prismatic society, both market factors as well as ‘arena factors’ play an
important role in shaping the economic system. Economic factors interact with non-economic
factors and influence the economic structure. Under such circumstances it is not possible for
the common price of a commodity or service in prismatic society. Price of a commodity or
service depends on a combination of the market factors as well as arena factors coexisting
together. In prismatic society a small fraction of the people enjoys most of the benefits and
substantially control over economic institutions. As a result, a small fraction of people not
only control over economic institutions, they exploit a large section of the population. These
are a few characteristics of the bazaar-canteen model. Influences of a small section of people
on economic structures and institutions result in slow economic development and progress.
In a diffracted society everyone gets the services on equal basis and without any
discrimination and favouritism. In such society employees get salary and remuneration based
on his/her skills and talents, and on the basis of market price value of labour. In contrast,
people get services in fused society on the basis of Royal family’s or kings’ patronage. In
prismatic society one can witness equality in urban areas while services in rural areas are
based on patronage and favouritism. But in prismatic society the relationship between
bureaucratic (the Sala) officials and their clientele is like buyer-seller. The price of service
depends on the nature of the relationship between the ‘Sala’ official and their clientele. The
price of the commodity or service varies from place to place, time to time and person to
person. It also depends on the family contact, social status, bargaining capacity, individual
relationship and power politics. Services are guaranteed to the socially dominant class/caste
and at lower prices but the marginal caste/class has to pay heavy charges. Thus, the economic
structure and institutions of the prismatic society acts like a ‘subsidized’ canteen to the

84
members of the dominant community, clects, privileged groups, and politically influential
people have access to market and its institutions like canteen for the army who serves at the
subsidized rate. Conversely it behaves like a ‘tributary’ canteen to the members of the
marginal communities who have to pay a higher price than the influential political people and
dominant caste/class.
The fluctuation of price in prismatic society creates more problems and it encourages
black marketing, hoarding, adulteration, and ultimately leads to high inflation in the
economy. It has a direct impact on common people. In such a situation, the ‘sala’ official in
prismatic society tries to develop contacts with business groups, foreign business clubs and
institutions, and misuse foreign exchange for private purposes. It would often lead to large
corruption, exploitation of the common people, poverty and decline of life standard of
common people in prismatic society. In prismatic society wage depends on political
influence. There is a great divide between higher wage and lower wage in the economy and
that results in high economic inequality and social injustice. Thus, exploitation, poverty, and
social injustice become the major features of the bazaar canteen model.
Conclusion
F W Riggs’ ecological approach has been criticized for being too pessimistic about the post-
colonial society and neglecting social change. It is too much theoretical without adequate
empirical evidence and too static about the external factors and overgeneralization. Riggs
himself examined and re-examined his own model of public administration in developing
society. His model is too broad and overgeneralization of the post-colonial society. Great
scholar of the public administration Ramesh Arora has identified the negative character of the
prismatic/ecological model of the public administration. He argues that Riggs’ ecological
model has western bias towards post-colonial society and the model has portrayed a negative
picture of the prismatic society. Actually, study was conducted with parameters of western
society and it has painted a bad picture. It is not that administration in the prismatic society
has all bad characteristics, there are many good that Riggs’ ignored in his study like nation-
building institutions. It is not that the administrative office ‘bureau’ is not corrupt and biased
in western society but Riggs has painted them as transparent and clean.
Riggs in his study of post-colonial societies, he left many variables that are very
important to understand the bureaucracy like population, territorial size, the role of the
military, and especially the role of national leaders/freedom fighters who have played
important role in creating the entire structure of the post-colonial state. Most importantly, the
unique social context of each country influences the administrative behaviour that Riggs
seldom debated in his entire explanation of the ‘sala’ official as well as the bazaar canteen
economy.
References
Chakarvarty, Bidyut and Prakash Chand. 2017. Public Administration: From Government to
Governance. New Delhi: Orient Black Swan.

85
Haque, Shamsul.2010. ‘Rethinking Development Administration and Remembering Fred W
Riggs’, International Review of Administrative Sciences, Sage publications.
Jreisat, Jamil. 2011. Globalism and Comparative Public Administration. London: CRC Press.
Prasad, Ravinder et al. 1989. Administrative Thinkers. New Delhi: Sterling Publication.
Rathod, P. B. 2007. Comparative Public Administration. New Delhi: ABD Publisher.
Riggs, F W. 2001. ‘Bureaucratic Links between Administration and Politics’ in Ali
Farazmand (ed) Handbook of Comparative and Development Public Administration. Second
edition. Public Administration and Public Policy 94, United State of America.

86
 Unit-2
(c) Contemporary Theories

ii. Innovation and Entreperneurship (Peter Drucker)

Dr. Vaishali Narula

Structure
● Introduction
● Biographical Sketch
● Major Contributions of Peter Drucker
● Drucker’s Management Theory
● Drucker’s Theory of Management: An Appraisal
● Conclusion
● References

Introduction
Peter Drucker is well acknowledged thinker in the field of management for his contribution to
management theory. His contribution to the field of administration is acknowledged all over
the world. Peter F. Drucker is known for his contribution to management theory and practice.
He examined the working of organization in the wake of privatization, advent towards
decentralization, change in power contours of the world, rise in importance of market and
development of informed societies. In the wake of these changes the management theory of
Drucker led to understanding of administration with a new perspective towards theory and
concepts of management. His contribution is widely recognized and has gained approval in
the field of administration and management both in the public and private sector. This
chapter will focus on understanding the basic principles of Peter Drucker in relation to the
idea of modern management and their relevance in the contemporary times.
Biographical Sketch
Peter Drucker is known as the father of modern Management. He contributed immensely
towards understanding the management and functioning of organization. Born in Vienna,
Austria on November 19, 1909, Drucker was born in a family which had active intellectual
environment. His parents were actively involved in discussions on economics, politics,
science, literature and more. This helped him develop a broader perspective towards
understanding the various aspects in an interdisciplinary manner. For his higher education
Drucker moved from Austria to Germany to study Admirality Law at Hamburg University
and then he moved to Frankfurt University to pursue his study of law.
Drucker was influenced by the writings of Aristotle, John Maynard Keynes, Schumpeter
and various other thinkers. Drucker worked with several British newspapers like the financial

87
times. Subsequently, he became editor-in-charge of foreign affairs and business at Frankfurt’s
largest daily newspaper Frankfuter General – Anzeiger.
Drucker obtained his Ph.D. in International Law in 1932 from Frankfurt University.
John Maynard Keynes had a major influence on Drucker. It is often said that Keynes lecture
made him realize that people largely focus on behaviour of commodities, however he is keen
on understanding behaviour of individuals. Drucker started teaching as a part time faculty in
Sarah Lawrence College, New York. He also got an opportunity to examine the working of
General Motors and subsequently came out with his work Concept of Corporation (1946).
Subsequently, Drucker became a professor of politics and philosophy at Bennigton College
and was given the highest of Presidential Citation at NYU. Another landmark work The
Effective Executive was published in 1966.
Drucker himself acknowledges to be influenced by Plato, Aristotle, Henri Bergson, Max
Weber and Emile Durkheime, Schumpter and many more. Drucker utilized inter-disciplinary
approach to understand the working of organization and the various relationships that govern
them. In his writings Drucker drew a path not only for structure of organization but also for
conceptualization of moral system for maintaining the individuality while achieving the
larger purpose of the organization.
In 1973 Drucker made a significant contribution through his work titled Management:
Tasks, Responsibilities & Practices. It became popular amongst the executives and leaders. In
this work Drucker tried to equip the managers with understanding, thinking and skills for
management of organization. In 1987 the Claremont Graduate centre of Management was
renamed as Peter F. Drucker centre. In this decade he came out with some prolific work
including The Non- Profit Drucker (1989). In 1990 Drucker laid the foundation for non-profit
Management which is now known as Frances Hesselbein Leadership Institute. In 1997 the
Drucker centre was renamed as the Peter F. Drucker school of management. His key works
also include Innovation and Entrepreneurship (1999), The Practice of Management (2005)
and many more.
Drucker identified concerns in the functioning of government which had been serving as
an obstruction in the achievement of its larger purpose. He identified the government with its
bureaucratic scope due to which it is unable to abandon policies and programmes which are
inefficient or redundant. He identified that encouragement of participation of local levels was
missing. There was a need to prioritize the programmes and policies and make them work
towards effective initiatives.
As a contemporary management thinker, Peter Drucker is recognized for his contribution
to the theory of management and functioning of organization. With his varied experience and
background with psychology, sociology, law, and journalism he aimed to develop solutions
to number of managerial problems. Therefore, his contributions cover various approaches of
management. He has written many books and papers.

88
 The more important works are; Practice of Management (1954), Managing by Results
(1964), The Effective Executive (1967), The Age of Discontinuity (1969), Management:
Tasks, Responsibilities and Practices (1974), and Management Challenges for 20th Century
(1999).
Major Contributions of Peter Drucker
Peter Drucker examined the bureaucratic structure of the organizations and devised
innovative methods for management of practices in the organization. He has been critical of
the classical thinkers for their principles of organization such as unity of command, hierarchy
and more. He criticized the bureaucratic principles for its absence of accountability and
prescriptive methods. He describes the concept of management to be different from
administration and is generic in nature. The key concepts which contributed towards
management practices and entrepreneurship as follows
● Nature of Management
Drucker describes management as the means of introducing innovation and creative
characteristics. Innovation is an important component of an organization as it looks at
a combining new and old ideas, building new ideas and incorporating ideas from
across discipline which encourages new ideas. Drucker describes management as a
practice towards building skills, tools and techniques in the working of an
organization. He also emphasise that management along with skills and techniques
requires right perspective as per the socio-economic and cultural needs of a system.
● Management Functions
Drucker describes Management as a mode of accomplishing tasks. These tasks are
carried out by managers. Manager helps the organization to accomplish specific
objectives e.g. a university has specific purpose and mission which aims to
accomplish. Managers direct the workers towards achievement orientation and
making it more productive. They also play an important role in managing the
organization towards its social responsibilities.
Manager has a key role to play in the conduct of activities. Manager acts as an
administrator as well as an executor where he/she focuses on redirecting the various
resources and utilizing them in an innovative manner. Manager directs and redirects
resources by setting up objectives and defining functions to achieve those objectives.
Drucker further emphasise that innovation, productivity, profitability, financial
resources, development, performance and responsibility towards people is important.
● Restructuring Government
Drucker focused on innovation techniques towards management of organization. He
emphasised on the need to reform the bureaucratic structure of organization with its
dysfunctional methods. In his view towards working towards effective organization

89
 he emphasises on certain characteristics such as performance, reducing the number of
managerial levels and training of young managers.
While focusing on structuring effective organization Drucker identifies three aspects
for organizing Activity Analysis, Decision Analysis and Relation Analysis. Activity
Analysis focuses on work to be put together, work to be performed and work to be
emphasised upon. The notion of Decision Analysis focuses on factors that contribute
towards a decision and the impact of these factors on decision. Drucker states that
relation amongst these factors helps in defining the structure of the organization and
in pursuance towards various objectives.
● Federalism
Drucker while advocating the concept of federalism creating decentralized structures
in the organization with not just to the idea of creating levels of participation but by
creating new autonomous units for decision. Federal organization should encourage
participation at local levels and also set independent decision units.
Drucker emphasise that federalism helps to build positive values in various methods
of organizing the working.
● It defines the functioning and responsibilities of operating level
● This helps top management to focus on its functions
● Defines parameters to measure success and effectiveness of various jobs
● Management by objectives
This is one of the key concepts of Peter Drucker towards the management of organization. He
introduced this concept in 1954 in his book The Practice of Management. This is a strategy
management model which works towards improving the performance of organization. This
redefines the objectives in coordination with the management and the employees. It works
towards defining objectives and at the same time acquiring a feedback towards them. This
helps to set challenges towards attainable objectives and work towards those which would
help in increasing performance.
● Management Business Organization (MBO)
This refers to setting up of organizational goals and targets. It includes defining of the
objectives of the organization with the lower level, middle level and top management level.
MBO includes planning, setting standards, focusing on performance, performance appraisal
and motivation. He describes MBO as a philosophy of management. It does not describe the
process of management as a way of exercising control instead it is a way towards self-
control. It links the various level of the organization i.e. bottom up as well as top down in the
functioning of organization. While linking various levels it focuses on performance
objectives. These are defined by goal specificity, participation, time period and performance
feedback. These help to work towards objectives of management.

90
To work towards these, it is important that the organization must meet certain criteria such as
▪ Categorizing the objective from most important to the least relevant ones.
▪ Quantification of objectives
▪ Specify the goals
▪ Consistency of goals
Therefore, the concept of Management Business objectives has redefined the practices
and objectives of organization. Under this he also identifies some important task of
the manager. He emphasised that he/she should be able to integrate the team towards
the defined objectives, devise strategies towards it. They should be able to
communicate information and motivate employees to gain commitment and
motivation. The manager should be able to have a holistic approach in the functioning
of the organization. He emphasised on the need to integrate the functioning of the
whole organization by taking into account the product and the total environment in
the context of social, economic and political changes and developments.
● Organizational Changes
In view of the various changes happening in the social and the economic framework
there has been changes guided towards philosophy which defines the structuring and
functioning of the organization. These changes have made organizations dynamic.
While examining the organizational structures and their development in the
production he criticises the perception that workers are an appendage to machine. In
the move towards strengthening of capitalism he emphasised that workers should be
given an opportunity to participate in the management of production process. He
describes it as essential that workers should be given an opportunity to participate in
the production and management activities.
● Rethinking and Abandonment
In this concept Drucker focuses on the restructuring of organization in which he
focuses on the notion of downsizing organizations. He outlined that instead of
focusing on downsizing of organizations there should be a focus on expanding and
promoting activities. The organizational based activities can be restructured. There is
a need to make organizations more flexible, collaborative with delegation. Along with
the management the workers should be given an opportunity to take risks. The
management and the subordinates should work in a collaborative manner and take
risks together.
Drucker’s Management Theory
Drucker’s theory of management has evolved in the context of social transformations
pertaining to high levels of corruption, along with a shift from owner capitalism to manager
capitalism focusing on social, technological and ethical changes with new management

91
approach. Drucker’s (1985) analysis of capitalism led to construct of hypothesize and link
between changes in technology and understanding the responses of management to new
social trends. This transformation has led us towards new management approach. Drucker’s
management approach represents various concepts towards management approach. These are
as below:
Decentralization
Drucker focused on decentralizing the conduct of activities at workplace. He believed and
emphasised on the participation of subordinates and assigning tasks to them. He wanted
that there should be a relationship between workers and supervisors and they should
together work towards accomplishment of goals. Through this relationship he wanted to
strengthen the working of organization and make the workers feel empowered.
Knowledge Work
In an organization knowledge worker are the actors who generate knowledge. Their key
function is to generate knowledge. This Knowledge includes technical knowledge, data
handling and information. This helps in innovation and creativity. It is the leading
dimension towards productive process and helps to create a culture of bringing in insight
and ideas. They play an important role in expansion, and are the key driver of
competitive advantages within and among societies. Knowledge implies the capacity for
action in social life. Realization of knowledge depends upon the social, economic, and
intellectual context (Stehr, 1996). These knowledge workers have helped to create
knowledge societies. The knowledge workers will demand new rules in management and
will build innovation and change.
Management by Objectives
Peter Drucker is the father of Modern Management and has worked towards social
change. Drucker emphasised that management by objective is a strategic way to enhance
the performance of the organization. This is the process by the organization that conveys
its desire towards the achievement of various objectives to the members of the
organization. All the members of the organization i.e. workers at various levels work
together to achieve the common objectives. The workers also express their opinion and
can give inputs. The key steps towards MBO are:
1. Defining organizational objectives
2. Defining objectives of the employee
3. Monitor the progress of performance
4. Evaluate performance
5. Reward the performance

92
Peter Drucker in his initiative towards strengthening the functioning of organization,
mentioned that knowledge of work with decentralization work towards specific and
measurable tasks. This helped towards setting objectives and monitor progress of the
organization with the insight and capabilities of workers. This helps to encourage
flexibility and collaborative approach in the organization. This would help the
organization in achieving performances in a time bound manner. This increases the
efficiency of the organization. In order to uphold these objectives and work in this
manner he outlined certain dimensions that organizations should follow:
▪ Delegate Equal Work
All the workers in the organization should be treated at power and given an
opportunity to share their inputs and ideas. The participation of workers and
opportunities given to them to share inputs motivates the workers to collaborate
with the managers and help achieve the objectives of the organization. The workers
and the managers should collaborate with each other, help enhance each other’s
capability. The role of the workers through participation would help them realize
their role in organization and its relevance.
▪ Encourage Collaboration
Collaboration is a way that facilitates coordinating activities and exchanging
information. It is a resource leveraging strategic behaviour that necessitates
coordinating activities and exchanging information for mutual benefit.
Collaboration builds trust, transparency, and respect amongst the various members
of the organization. It helps to build proficiency in skills. It is a comprehensive way
of thinking and acting that takes proficiency in multiple skills and developing the
necessary capability. Drucker describes capability as an imperative component to
evolve the leadership system and encourage collaboration.
▪ Increase Efficiency
Drucker, while outlining his concept of MBO, insists on collaboration of workers of
all levels as he believed that this helped to achieve the common goals of the
organization in a more efficient manner. Drucker outlines that these goals should be
SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Reliable and Time Oriented). The
various members of the organization working towards various objectives should
work towards these goals in a collaborative and cooperative manner would help
increase efficiency.
▪ Encourage Innovation
While emphasising on objective of participation and delegation amongst workers in
his concept of knowledge workers he emphasises on innovation. Drucker, focuses
on innovation in organization. This helps to understand the initiatives and the
shortcomings of the organization. The organization should work towards fulfilling

93
 the needs of all employees. Innovation and creativity should be encouraged amongst
all members as this would help to achieve efficiency and effectiveness in the
organization.
Drucker’s Theory of Management: An Appraisal
Peter Drucker is assessed and evaluated for his contribution towards understanding the
conduct of management and functioning of organization. His people-centric approach to
business management became the foundation of both his writing and subsequently his
principles of professional management. Drucker highlighted that management has an
obligation to people that goes far beyond just meeting the objectives. Peter Drucker
underlined that professionally managed organizations should work towards building
intellectual and moral capacities of employees.
Drucker focuses on the principle of manner as against matter which emerges as a
consequence of traditions, culture and the values in which they participate. Drucker in this
theory towards management has focused on various ideologies and how one ideology derives
strength from the other. He focuses on understanding the behaviour and working of
organization in the context of socio-economic changes and how humans have adapted to
these changes.
Drucker’s theory of management rests on his understanding of societal changes which
subsequently lead to changes in political institutions and the conduct of economy. He
emphasises that the shift from agrarian framework to industrialization which led to the advent
of capitalism was accompanied by revolution and innovations which led to shaping up of
human values and human control. Drucker describes the profession of management as a
discipline which helps us to identify significant features and characteristic by focusing on
data and information which otherwise gets neglected.
Drucker’s theory of management has focused on initiatives and participation with self-
control and responsibility on the conduct of activities. The institutions of business should
work towards cumulative objectives of all members of the organization i.e. in the field of
economics, societal and political. His concept of Management by objective encourage
participation at all levels and that initiatives to be taken at all levels. But Drucker’s notion of
Management of objectives is often criticized for not being able to achieve the objectives due
to failure in procedure or maybe implementation. Nonetheless, Peter Drucker has made a
significant contribution to the field of administration and has developed some key principles
towards the working of management.
Drucker has emphasized the need of conducting the business in enterprises with virtue
ethic which critics generally failed to recognize. Kurzynski (2009) compares Drucker
management philosophy with Aristotle’s moral philosophy as Drucker believed that business
and managers have a purpose that surpasses the individual ethic of self-interest and profit
maximization. He describes business organization as a human and social organization where
workers find a purpose and strive to achieve their objectives. However, Drucker’s writings

94
are criticized for being journalistic and generalist in nature. Nonetheless, his views towards
business organization and management are recognized in both public and private sectors for
the conduct of activities.
Conclusion
Drucker with his interdisciplinary approach focused on dealing with business problems and
concerns of management in the second half of the 20th century. He contributed towards
immensely body of knowledge in the field of management, economics, public administration
and public policy. He integrated perspectives from various disciplines worked towards
developing theories and concept for efficient organizations. He emphasised on
entrepreneurship and innovation for the conduct of activities in an organization with inputs
from all levels. He extended his consultancy services to all kinds of organizations that helped
organizations to develop a holistic view on management. Drucker’s first book titled ‘The
End of Economic Man' published (1939) outlined his faith in modern society which focus on
economic equality and at the same time focused on freedom to all levels. He looked at
organization in a holistic way with a focus on goals to build efficiency and effectiveness in
organization. Peter Drucker has made a significant contribution to the field of Public
Administration and are relevant for both public and private organization.
References
● Carmella S. (2018). “The Management Theory of Peter Drucker”. Retrieved from
http//www.business.com/ article/management-theory-of-peter-drucker
● Drucker, P.F. (1954) The Practice of Management, USA, Harper Business:62-63
● Kanter, R.M. (1985), "Drucker: the unsolved Economic puzzle", New Management,
Vol. 2 No.1, pp.10-13.
● Kurzynski, M. (2009). Peter Drucker: Modern day Aristotle for the business
community. Journal of Management History, 15 (4), pp 357-374.
● Stehr, N. (1996). Knowledge as a capacity for action, Peter Wall Institute for
Advanced Studies. Vancouver, Canada: The University of British Columbia.
● http://www.bl.uk/people/peter-drucker
● http://hbr.org/2009/11/product/why-read-peter-drucker
● http://www.drucker.institute/perspective/about-peter-drucker

95
 Unit-3 : Public Policy

(a) Concept, Relevance and Approaches

Dr. Devarati Roy Chowdhury

Structure
 Introduction
 Understanding public policy
 Characteristics of public policy
 Types of public policy
 Significance of policy analysis
 Levels of policy analysis
 Different forms of policy study
 Models of policy making
 Relevance of public policy
 References

Introduction
A better understanding of public policy is very crucial for understanding the relationship
between the state and its people. The presence and relevance of the state is evident in all
aspects of lives and with the rapid geo-political and economic changes, the mutual
relationship between public and state has also become very significant. In this regard, the role
of public policy has enhanced tremendously.
Simply put, public policy is a like a strategical framework which the government within
a state uses to fulfill its functions. And, in this regard, public policies become very significant
as it holds the power to change and reshape the lives of the public in their given political
system.
The presence of public policy can be seen in every socio-economic aspect of public.
States are enacting policies to bring economic development and promote social justice and
empowerment of all sections of the society. So, not only the economic but the social
relationships are also getting transformed due to the sound public policy. In this way, it
become essentially important to understand the public policy so as to know the state and
society and their relationship better.
Understanding Public Policy
One important point which is necessary to highlight here is that as countries are different in
all aspects, the public policy also differs. The nature, process, policy priority and impact of

96
policy significantly vary from country to country depending on social, political, economic
aspect, priorities, available resources, stakeholders involvement etc. In India, the policies are
made keeping in mind the problems of poverty, illiteracy, rampant unemployment, food
insecurity, priorities like social and gender justice, empowerment of the weaker section of the
society, development of agriculture and industries, sound economic growth, for better human
security indicators, environmental sustainability, and national security broadly. One can
realize the comprehensiveness and complexities of public policy as it is highly interconnected
to different aspects.
Therefore, it has also become difficult to give a defined public policy. This means that on
the basis of semantics, simply put, linguistically it is difficult to define public policy because
of the comprehensiveness of the very nature of public policy. Public policy has been defined
by different scholars in different ways focusing on different aspects of the policy and policy
process. Different definitions give different perspectives and dimensions to understand policy
making.
Thomas R. Dye says that “public policy is whatever government choose to do or not to
do”. (Dye 2008).
David Easton defined public policy “as the authoritative allocation of values for the
whole society”.
According to William Jenkins “public policy is a set of interrelated decisions taken by a
political actor or group of actors concerning the selection of goals and the means of achieving
them within a specified situation where those decisions should, in principle, be within the
power of those actors to achieve”.
Harold Lasswell and Abraham Kaplan define public policy as “a projected program of
goals, values, and practices”.
According to Cochran et al, “the actions of government and the intentions that determine
those actions”.
Robert EyeStone mentions public policy as “the relationship of government units to its
environments”.
Richard Rose says that “public policy is not a decision, it is a course or pattern of
activity”.
In the words of Carl J. Friedrich’s word, “public policy is a proposed course of action of
a person, group or government within a given environment providing opportunities and
obstacles which the policy was proposed to utilize and overcome in an effort to reach a goal,
an objective or purpose”.
From the above definitions, it becomes very evident that public policies are decisions
taken by government to achieve pre-conceived goals which involves proper planning, and a
well planned course of action. Definitions also make clear the public policy is a product of
well coordinated relation and meaningful interaction between various stakeholders like
government agencies as executive, legislature, judiciary, bureaucracy, various associations,

97
pressure groups, civil society, and private and international organizations etc. (Krafts and
Furlong 2004)
However, where such definitions as feasible to understand public policy in ordinary
circumstances, but these are not sufficient indicators of a systematic study of public policy.
As Adam A. Anyebe (2008) mentioned that “these definitions make public policy look like
mere decisions, as expression of interests. It is true that these definitions work as a reference
point for starting with the discourse of public policy but a more precise definition is needed to
structure our thinking and to facilitate effective communication with one another. Public
policy also means patterns of resource allocation presented by projects and programmes
designed to respond to perceive public demands”. In this regard, Political Scientist James E.
Anderson (1997) defined policy as “a relatively stable, purposive course of action followed
by an actor or set of actors in dealing with a problem or matter of concern.” This approach
helps us to understand what actually has been done rather what has been proposed for doing
in a complex environment with multiple challenges.
The characteristics, types, policy analysis, approaches and policy cycle can help make
meaningful understanding of public policy. Policy analysis helps to understand the policy as a
whole, the linkages with political and social system and develops a scientific investigation of
the factors which influence public policy and its outcome. According to Thomas Dye “policy
analysis is a perquisite to prescription, advocacy and activism”. (Dye 2008)
The policy process or policy cycle presents a very basic, most fundamental framework of
understanding a policy which includes formulation, implementation and evaluation stages.
Characteristics of Public Policy
1. Public Policy is a goal oriented purposive action. The basic objective of a public
policy is to achieve predetermined goals on the basis planned course of action by
utilizing the available resources and infrastructure.
2. Public policy is the result of ‘doing, it is ‘action oriented’ and it is not about what the
government obligated or intended to do. Government forms public policy on the basis
of number of parameters. The availability of resources, financial commitments,
priority groups, complexity of the problem, data availability, engagement of various
stakeholders in a political environment within in a specific administrative system.
3. Public policy is the result of collective action of government decisions. It shows the
action pattern of the government officials and reflects their concerns and
commitments towards the citizens.
4. Public policy is a well planned, well researched course of action. And, it gets
implemented with a sanction of law and authority to it.
Types of Public Policy
1. Distributive policy involves allocation of benefits and services for a specific section
of the society. Through these policies government try to reach out to all sections of

98
 the society benefitting specially the vulnerable sections of the society. These policies
allocate resources and use of public funds to assist vulnerable communities, groups
and industries. Example of these policies are education policy, poverty alleviation
policy, health policy etc. These are for specific sections of the society.
2. Redistributive policy involves deliberate actions of the government to
allocate/redistribute the rights, income, property among all sections of the society.
These are basically concerned with social economic changes and rearrange policies to
achieve welfare of the society in general. These policies are difficult to design as it
involves allocation of huge finances, proper use of power and rights. These policies
are managing the economy of the country. The techniques involved here manage the
fiscal (tax) and monetary (flow of money) policy in the country. Redistributive
policies tend to benefit one group (vulnerable section, lower income group) by
reallocating wealth of the another group (higher income group). Examples of
redistributive policies are taxation policy, fiscal policy, social welfare policy etc.
3. Another typology of the public policy is regulatory policies. These policies allow the
administrative state to authoritatively control or simply put imposition of restriction or
limitation on the behaviour of individuals the citizens for some activities. The
examples are regulative control for the consumption of alcohol and tobacco,
environmental protection policies, environmental pollution control polices, health and
safety policy etc. These policies focus on those sectors which need to be regulated
keeping in mind public interests.
4. Procedural/Substantive policies are related to those governmental actions to deal with
problems like roads, highways, dams construction, maintenance of the public
property, irrigation polices, environmental protection etc. Basically, while making
such procedural policy, the main focus is how the policy is designed and who are the
actors, what are their functions. All administrative procedure are taken into
consideration in this type. These policies are concerned with welfare and overall
growth of the society and all are not related to any particular segment of the society.
5. These are the types of policies on the basis of governmental functions. Apart from
these types, on the basis of various administrative business, activities, there are
several other policies like patronage/promotional policies which are further divided
into sub-policies as: contract, license and subsidy. One type is capitalization policy,
another is constituent policy.
6. Other types are symbolic or material policies, private goods policies, collective
policies.
Significance of Policy Analysis
According to Thomas Dye, “Policy analysis is finding out what government do, what they do
it, and what difference, if any, it makes”.
Similarly, Chochran and Malone explained that “policy analysis describes investigations
that produce accurate and useful information for decision makers”.

99
 On a more elaborative note, Jenkins Smith mentioned “policy analysis is a set of
techniques and criteria with which to evaluate public policy options and select among
them……to rationalize the development and implementation of public policy…….and as the
means to greater efficiency and equity in allocation of public resources”.
According to Charles Jones, “policy analysis is a good way to understand public policy”.
He mentioned few observations stating the relevance of policy analysis in policy making in
his book ‘An introduction to the study of Public Policy’. These are:
1. The society we live in and state which we have made to govern the society has
changed over a period of time and many people have interpreted these differently in
different ways. Policy analysis helps to understand the context more efficiently. And,
that is why policy analysis is relevant beginning to understand public policy as a
whole.
2. Many problem has same vantage point. They are result of the same event or
interrelated to each other. For example, poverty, illiteracy and unemployment are not
separate problems, they are interrelated and in order to understand and tackle either of
the issue, one needs to have a more broad and multi-dimensional view of the problem.
3. It is not necessary at all that government would act to all problems. It all depends on
government ability and desire to do something, the biggest question is ‘how to do’,
the agenda needs to be very clear and should be relevant for the society. The
government has to consider resource sustainability and financial obligations policy
making.
4. The problems of society are complex and they have not been solved by the
government alone. Policy making is a product of multi stakeholder partnership in
which not only the government agencies but also international organizations, private
institutions, think tanks, policy study groups, civil society media get involved in every
step of policy making.
5. The issues and problems in the society and the demands towards the administration is
active and continuously changing and posing new challenges to the government,
which in turn, also making the government to keep experimenting with policy
making, as the policy which couple of years back was yielding result might have not
remain relevant in contemporary time. In this regard, it becomes highly essential that
each problem and complete policy process should be analyzed to reach conclusive
decision.
6. Policy system has its own biases. There are resource and financial constraints,
multiple stakeholders have their own preferences, political and economic preferences,
organizational pressure, and so many other limitations. All these get reflected in the
policy and that is why it is very necessary to have a very objective policy analysis to
understand the policy process from all angles and make it useful. (Kingdon 2003)
Thomas Dye mentions three important lessons which one can learn through policy analysis
are:

100
 1. Description: policy analysis helps to describe the public policy. It helps to understand
the functioning of the government better and what government is doing and what not
doing.
2. Causes: through policy analysis we can investigate the causes, analyze determinants,
the effects of various institutions, behaviours and policy processes on policies. Policy
is ‘dependent variable’ and several factors like social political, cultural, economic
factors which are determining policies become ‘independent variables’.
3. Consequences: this is very important part as it helps to understand the result of the
polices implemented. This is known as ‘policy evaluation’ where it is evaluated that
whether the specific policy which is implemented brought any significant change in
the lives of the people? In this, the effects of public policies are learnt and used for
future policy design. (Dye 2008)
Policy analysis understands the relationship between public policy, political system and
social system.

Image source: Dye 2008

H. Lasswell (1917) explained the characteristics of public policy analysis. These are as
follows:
1. Public policy analysis is multidisciplinary in nature.

101
 2. Public policy analysis is an engagement with understating the linkages between policy
options, policy process and policy outcome.
3. Because of its diverse nature, it uses on multifold methodology.
4. Analysis have a direct impact on government actions, public choices and market.
Levels of Policy Analysis
1. Meta analysis is related with the understanding of the idea that public policy analysis
works by using metaphors. This analysis in order to describe something, would use
something else. Models of policy analysis based on this approach are elitist, pluralist,
neo Marxist.
2. Meso analysis is a middle level approach which focuses on the links between
definitions, agendas, and decision making process in policy design.
3. Decision analysis: the major question which this approach investigates is that ‘who
get what and how’ in the approach. Policy making is understood not just for
understanding the design purpose rather main focus is to analyze it to understand who
is taking the decisions, for whom decision is taken and how much everyone got out of
the decision? Models like Marxism, elitism, technocracy, pluralism, corporatism
come under this approach.
4. Delivery analysis understands the outcomes of the policy in terms on execution of the
policy, evaluation, impact and change level. (Kingdon 2003)
Different Forms of Policy Study
There are three different forms of policy study.
1. Descriptive form of policy study is concerned with describing the issues, the various
factors which are detrimental to policy study, role of various stakeholders involved,
and methods, techniques used by policy makers. This form is also concerned with
description of the policy outcome.
2. Prescriptive form of policy study suggests ways to improve policy design and how a
policy can be made relevant to the society at general. Suggestions are also prescribed
to improve the whole policy process by making it more inclusive, participatory and
change oriented.
3. Comparative form of policy study basically studies different policies, their structures,
traditions, priorities, different agencies, actors, policy outcomes etc so that ample
information can be collected to make the policy more effective and efficient.
Models of Policy Making
Policy scientists have developed various models to understand the whole policy making
process.
According to Thomas Dye, “models of public policy try to:
 Simplify and clarify our thinking about politics and public policy.
 Identify important aspects of policy problems

102
  Help us to communicate with each other by focusing on essential features of political
life.
 Direct our efforts to understand public policy better by suggesting what is important
and what is unimportant.
 Suggest explanation for public policy and predict its consequences”.

Thomas Dye in his book has talked about the ‘policy model’ in great length, and following
the same conceptual scheme, the main models of public policy are as follows.
Process model Institutional model Rational model
Elite model Incremental model Group model
Public choice model System model Game theory

One important point which needs to be highlighted here that each model is understanding the
public policy from a specific point of view and give a different understanding of public
policy making. However, the policies are the product of public choice, elite preference,
political process, system process, rational planning, incrementalism, group activity and game
function.
1. Process Model
In this model, the pattern of political activities that is ‘process’ of policy making is examined.
The various stages of process model are:
 Problem identification: policy problem is identified by analyzing the demands which
the various groups within society or society as a whole present to the government for
action.
 Agenda setting: different stakeholders like administrative officials, media focus the
attention to the specific demands and decision is taken on what should be decided as a
course of action
 Policy formulation: policy proposals is developed by various stakeholders involved.
 Policy legitimation: a specific course of action is selected to tackle the problem and
enactment is through legislature, executive and administrative system.
 Policy implementation: the policy is now get executed through public officials and
government institution.
 Policy evaluation: the outcome and further implications are analyzed. Government
agencies themselves, and various other actors like media, think tanks, private
consultancies, and civil society, general public evaluate the policy outcome.
This model is beneficial to understand the various activities of the policy making in a
structured way.
2. Institutional Model
Public policy and political institutions are intricately related to each other. All political
activities are performed by political institutions like president, executive, legislature,

103
judiciary, bureaucracy, urban and rural government institutions and public policies are also
designed, executed by the government institutions.
Thomas Dye mentioned that “the relationship between public policy and government
institutions is very close. A policy does not become a public policy until is adopted,
implemented and enforced by government institutions”. (Dye 2008)
Government institutions give three distinctive characteristics to public policy.
1. Legitimacy: It gives legitimacy to the policies. Government policies become legal
obligations and seek compliance of the citizens for the same. The legal legitimacy
is sanctioned through the government institutional activities.
2. Universality: The government institutions are the only and legal institutions
through which government policies are extended to all people in a society.
3. Coercion: Government can use authoritative force against the people who are not
complying to the policies and government regulations. Only government has the
legitimate authority to use force against the violators.
3. Rational Model of Public Policy Making
Thomas Dye mentioned that “a rational policy is one that achieves "maximum social gain";
that is, governments should choose policies resulting in gains to society that exceed costs by
the greatest amount, and governments should refrain from policies if costs exceed gains”.

Image source: Dye 2008

The two important pre requisite to maximize social gain are:

 Policy should not be adopted if it’s input costs are exceeding its output benefits or
returns.
 While selecting policy as the final course of cation, decision maker should choose that
policy which gives maximum benefit in comparison to input costs.
In this way, a rational policy is that policy which gives maximum returns over cost. In words
of Thomas Dye, “a policy is rational when the difference between the values it achieves and
the values it sacrifices is positive and greater than any other policy alternative.”

104
This model works on certain principles which policy maker must possess:
 Policy maker should have the perfect knowledge of societal values, preferences,
 Policy maker should know all the possible alternatives of solving specific problem,
 Policy maker should envision the outcomes of each possible course of action,
 Policy maker should know the cost benefit analysis of each policy alternative,
 Policy maker should be rational, knows the value preference and society demands and
select the most effective and efficient alternative.
This must possess characteristics make it clear that policy making is a rational process which
includes all perfect information about possible policy alternatives, cognitive and
computational ability to process the information and weigh cost benefit analysis and can
facilitate rationality in policy design.
4. Elite Model
According to this model, public policy is the result of preferences and values of elite. It
reflects the interests of the elites and achieving their ends through the policies. Thomas Dye
explains that “elite model suggests that the people are apathetic and ill-informed about public
policy, that elites actually shape mass opinion on policy questions more than masses shape
elite opinion. Thus, the public policy really turns out to be the preferences of elites. Public
officials and administrators merely carry out the policies decided on by the elite. Policies
flow downward from elite to masses and they do not arise from mass demands”. (Dye 2008)
In this model, public policy making has been studied from the point of elitist theory.
Elite theory postulates that the decision making power is in the hands of powerful groups in
the society. Mosca, Pareto, Michels are the thinkers who have developed the elitist model of
political theory. In public policy, this idea of elitism have been developed to show the
domination of elites in decision making mechanism. According to Dye, “public policy
reflects elite values, serves elite ends, and is a product of the elite”. (Dye 2008)

Image source: Dye 2008

105
Thomas Dye summarized the elitist theory as:
1. “Society is divided into the few who have power and the many who do not. Only a
small number; of persons allocate values for society; the masses do not decide policy.
2. The few who govern are not typical of the masses who are governed. Elites are drawn
disproportionately from the upper socio-economic strata of society.
3. The movement of non-elites to elite positions must be slow and continuous to
maintain stability and avoid revolution. Only non-elites who have accepted the basic
elite consensus can be admitted to governing circles.
4. Elites share a consensus on the basic values of the social system and the preservation
of the system.
5. Public policies does not reflect demands of the masses but rather the prevailing values
of the elite. Changes in public policy will be incremental rather than revolutionary.
6. Active elites are subject to relatively little direct influence from apathetic masses.
Elites influence masses more than masses influence elites”.
Elitist theory, however, does not mean that elitists make the public policy completely hostile
to common people but highlights the responsibility of elitists towards the society as a whole.
5. Incremental Model
This model is associated with the works of political scientists David Braybrook and Charles
Lindbloom. They first developed this model as a critique of rational model of decision
making. They argued that policy makers face many constraints like complex societal
demands, time constraints, infrastructural limitations, financial constraints, while deciding
about existing and proposed polices in an administrative system. (Anyebe 2017)
The incremental model recognizes the limitations and realistic barriers of a perfect
rational decisions making process and helps the policy makers to adopt a more broader and
practical approach to decision making.
In this model, the focus is given to small incremental change which a policy creates and
also to the changes in the cost benefit analysis in policy and expenditure aspect.
6. Group Model
According to this model, public policy is a result of group struggle. According to Anderson
(1997), “What may be called group public policy is the equilibrium reached in this group
struggle at any given moment, and it represents a balance which the contending factions or
groups constantly strive to win in their favour. Public polices do reflect the activities of
groups and this model highlights that how each of the various groups in a society tries to
influence public policy to its advantage at the policy formulation level”.
Groups are made on common interests and they form different interests groups on the
basis of that. According to David Truman, “an interests group is a shared attitude group that
makes certain claims upon other groups in the society; such a group become political if and
when it makes a claim through or upon any of the institutions of government”. Individuals as

106
part of group, act as important actor in politics. Group is link between individual and
government. And, the political system manages the groups, their conflicting interest by
managing the groups, making accommodative policies to balance all the group conflict,
formulate and implement policies. (Kingdon 2003)
Thomas Dye mentions that “according to group theorists, public policy at any given time
is the equilibrium reached in the group struggle. This equilibrium is determined by the
relative influence of various interests groups. Changes in the relative influence of any interest
group can be expected to result in changes in

Image source: Dye 2008

public policy; policy will move in direction desired by the groups gaining influence and away
from the desires of groups losing influence. The influence of groups is determined by their
numbers, wealth, organizational strength, leadership, access to decision makers and internal
cohesion”.
7. Public Choice Model
It is an economic study of public policy making. It postulates that in ‘politics’ and in ‘market
place’, all individual actors in different role as voters, tax payers, government officials,
private owners, political parties, interest groups, behave in the same manner and take their
choices on the basis of the principle of ‘maximization of the personal benefits in politics as
well as in the marketplace.
This theory maintains that individual doesn’t behave differently which means when it
comes to political choices, individual will think differently and in market place differently.
Similar to market place, in politics too individuals come together for their mutual benefit.
And, by coming together, they influence the policy decisions and thus enhance their own well
being also. (Kraft and Furlong 2004)

107
 Thomas Dye aptly concludes that “people pursue their self interest in both politics and
the marketplace, but even with selfish motives they can mutually benefit through collective
decision making”.
8. System Model
David Easton has developed this approach and widely used in public policy discourse too.
The public policy is considered as a political system which responds to demand coming
from the environment. Environment consists of social, economic phenomenon, and settings
that are external to political system. The political system consists of interrelated systems of
administrative machinery and activities as the authoritative allocation of values that are
getting implemented on the society. There are demands and support in political environment.
Demands basically are the claims for decisions that people seek to satisfy their personal or
group interest and societal values. Support is given by the citizens to the political system as
taxpayer, casting vote, abiding by the law.

Image source: Kingdon 2003

The feedback loop is the subsequent impact that alters environment and converts into demand
once outcome of the policy is visible. Policy output leads to fresh demand and it’s a cyclical
process.
9. Game Theory
Game theory of public policy making is about analyzing rational decisions in the conditions
where two or more than two participants have to take decisions and outcome of that decisions
depends on the choices that they have made.
Game theory is not about how people are making their choices rather it informs that how
the people should make their decisions knowing their selected course of action is going to

108
bring specific outcome and as a rational man, people know that outcome depends on their
selected choices.
Each model is relevant and crucial to understand the public policy making from different
dimensions. Each model has its advantages and disadvantages. Some model can be more
suitable to understand some situation or events in comparison to others. A good policy model
is based on objective analysis of the political behaviour without validity one preferred
theoretical biases. (Kraft and Furlong 2004) The goal of inquiry into public policy discourse
should be flexible and inclusive and should contribute for the better understanding of the
problems and solving the issues.
Relevance of Public Policy
Public policy is purposeful, meaningful and action oriented. It is outcome of a well planned
coordinated policy design to determine a course of action to achieve a set of goals. It has a
defined course of structure starting with policy formulation, policy implementation, and
policy evaluation. As policies are made for public, society at large and through policies, state
can overcome several challenges and fulfill basic demands of the citizens. Good policies
promote positive change and growth of the nation. As the time is growing, each country is
facing more and more challenges on every front. These problems are complex and more
severe. Along with national and security challenges, today we have more human security
threats too like population, food insecurity, water insecurity, health security, unemployment,
poverty, illiteracy etc. In such case the relevance of public policy becomes more crucial and
ever expanding.
Public policy helps to understand the society better and it brings a combination of
scientific understanding and value normativity to the discourse of policy science. It is
multidisciplinary in nature and develop linkages between social, economic, political aspects.
It equips the citizens to analyze the policy outcome, evaluate the performance of the
government and also highlights the significant role of the individual, group in public policy
making.
In India, there is a proper well coordinated administrative machinery including president,
prime minister, cabinet, executive, legislature, state government, Neeti Aayog (erstwhile
Planning Commission), bureaucracy, local urban and rural governing institutions etc. along
with thin tank, policy planners, academicians from different discipline address, media,
people, interest groups, civil society, international organization engage, debate and design
policies which then government implements.
The most important objective of public policy in India is socio-economic development.
Many agricultural, industrial policies, health, education, employment policies have been
implemented since independence. The main aim is to achieve socio-economic development
with social justice and national integrity.

109
 Understanding of public policy help us to know our country better, it helps us to
understand our problems more closely and equips us with more dynamic and realistic
approach to explore public policy.
References
Anyebe Adam A (2017) An Overview of Approaches to the Study of Public Policy.
International Journal of Political Science (IJPS) Volume 4, Issue 1, January 2017, PP 08-17.
Anderson, J.E.(1997). Public Policy-Making: An Introduction 3rd ed. Boston: Houghton
Miffilin Company.
Dye, T. R. (2008). Understanding Public Policy, 12th Edition, Upper Saddle River New
Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Kingdon, J. W. (2003). Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies, 2nd Edition, New York:
Longman.
Kraft, E. M., and Furlong, S. R. (2004). Public Policy: Politics, Analysis and Alternatives,
Washington D.C.: CQ Press.

110
 Unit-3

(b) Public Policy: Formulation, Implementation and Evaluation

Dr. Devarati Roy Chowdhury

Structure
● Introduction
● Meaning of Public Policy
● Characteristics of Public Policy
● What is Policy Cycle
● Understanding Policy Formulation
● Policy Implementation
● Policy Evaluation
● Features of Good Policy
● Challenges Faced by Policy Cycle
● Significance of Public Policy
● Conclusion
● References
Introduction
The significance and relevance of public policy lie in the fact that its presence and scope
relate to all aspect of a society. In simple definition, a policy is described as a set of principle
or set of rules which guide decisions and achieve rational objectives. It is a course of action
which is goal oriented, the goals here are defined in terms of demands based on societal and
economic needs, societal values, preferences. Policy is based on preconceived outcomes and
course of action is planned to achieve the objectives.
Meaning of Public Policy
According to Harold Koontz, “as a course of action, public policy can be understood as
political management, financial and administrative mechanisms arranged to reach explicit
goals. Policy is a means of encouraging discretion and initiative within units.
According to Richard Rose says that “public policy is not a decision in itself, it is a
course or pattern of activity”.
Robert Eyestone terms public policy as the “relationship of government units to its
environment”.

111
Characteristics of Public Policy
● Public policy is goal oriented.
Public policy is purposive. It is designed to achieve objectives based on societal and
economic demands.
● Public policy is a course of action not merely a decision.
Public Policy is just not a decision rather it is course of action which is designed,
implemented based on combination of decisions.
● Public policy is outcome of a strategic and ethical process.
Public policy is designed and implemented to meet societal and economic requirements. In
public policy, decisions are taken based on scientific understanding and also keeping a
balance with the societal values and norms. It upholds the state’s commitments to social
justice, welfare of all and sustainable growth.
● Public policy is highly dynamic.
It is a continuous activity which takes place within a structure of political system and external
environment work as social and political system. It is dynamic because public policy is not
static and changes with changing issues. As environment is changing drastically, it is posing
more challenges to the public policy than ever and public policy is also getting more
comprehensive and dynamic in the process.
● Public policy is a complex process.
Multiple issues with demands, societal preferences are influencing public policy designing
and these aspirations, needs are coming in form of demands. It becomes very challenging for
the government to accommodate each demand into consideration. There are several aspects
which government must keep while designing policies. There are social, economic relevance,
national integrity and security, financial constraints, budget, infrastructure availability,
validity of the information and data and so on which makes the public policy highly complex
in nature.
● Public policy includes different components.
Public policy is made of various structures environment, system, and feedback mechanism. It
comprises of environment which provides demands and support to the system. This
environment is basically social and economic environment. The system is political system.
Demands are individuals’ and group’s requirements, their needs which they provide to the
government present in political system and supports are in form votes, supporting the
ideology and political party etc.
Political system is the system in which demands are processed and converted into policies
and then get implemented on the environment itself.

112
The feedback loop sends the evaluated reviews to the environment which affects the policy
outcome, people’s perceptions and generate new demands.
● Public policy is a product of well coordinated relationship between various stake holders.
Multiple stakeholders participate starting with executive, legislature, judiciary, bureaucracy,
think tanks, civil society, people, media, all formal and informal structures etc. Every agency,
actor has an important role to play in the making of public policy.
● Public policy is based on guidelines.
It lays down major policy guidelines based on that policy is implemented. Policy guidelines
inform about the principles of policy making and functioning of policy.
● Public policy is directed towards future.
Public Policy is based on objectives. It is based on public interest. These objectives strive to
achieve social justice, sustainable growth and economic development which makes the nation
ahead. Policies make the future of a nation. More sound and holistic the polices are, better it
will be for the nation.
Policy making is also flexible as future holds lots of uncertainties, policy making change its
tone and course as the future requirements.
● Public policy uses the best available methods.
Public policy uses both quantitative data and qualitative data for designing the public policy.
Scientific data and normative values are considered and available infrastructure are used in
best possible manner to make the policy effective and efficient.

What is a Policy Cycle?

The policy cycle suggests that the policy making is a continuous process and comprises of
multiple stages. Thomas Dye mentioned that “policymaking is a continuous process rather
than a single event; different actors are influential at different stages and previous decisions
set the agenda for future decisions”. (Dye 2008)
Public policy is model in two ways:
a) As a prescriptive model postulates how policymaker should ideally operate in a
planned and systematic way. It is based on the idea of what a public policy should be
‘what ought to be’.
b) Descriptive model explains how a public policy is operating, how decisions are taken
in the policy making process. It is based on the idea of ‘what it is’.

113
The Generic Policy Cycle

1. Issue identification and agenda setting

It implies identifying the problems that requires governmental support and policy attention, it
also defines the nature of the problem and prioritizing the issues.
2. Policy formulation
This is the formal stage of policy formulation. It involves setting of the objectives,
identification of the input cost, exploring different possible course of action, selecting policy
instruments, projecting the outcomes, and selecting the suitable alternative as decision.
3. Policy legitimation
This involves ensuring that the decision which has been taken as suitable alternative should
have support and legal approval. The support included legislative support, support of
complete administration and consent of interest groups too.
4. Policy implementation
This is the very important stage of policy cycle which includes discharging duties to various
administrative units, making proper infrastructural arrangements for the smooth enactment of
the policies, and carrying out the decisions.
5. Policy evaluation
The final and one of the most important stage of overall policy cycle is policy evaluation in
which the results of the policy are evaluated, assessments are made about the success of
policy, achievement of the desired results and effects of the policy.

114
6. Policy maintenance, succession, or termination
The cycle is followed depending on the political setup, societal needs, budget commitments,
etc. and on the basis of these things, new polices are launched, many of the ongoing policies
are continued, discontinued or modified according to the present requirements.
Understanding Policy Formulation
According to Kingdon, “Formulation of policy consists of policymakers discussing and
suggesting approaches to correcting problems that have been raised as part of the agenda.
Effective policy formulation consists of analysis that identifies the most effective policies and
political authorizations”.
Policy formulation involves developing a plan, a method for achieving societal needs.
It involves:
● Research involves gathering and processing information,
● Review means exploring possible alternatives,
● Projection determines feasibility of each alternative and possible outcomes,
● Selection involves refining and selecting suitable alternative as possible course of action.
There are two types of formulation model.
1. Model based on rational planning which is systematic and well structured.
2. Model based reacting which is more spontaneous and unplanned. (Knoepfel et al
2007)
Actors involved in policy formulation
There are multiple actors involved in stage of policy formulation. Inside government, there is
executive which is identifying the problems, goals, prioritizing and making policy
alternatives.
Bureaucracy develop plan and proposal at this stage.
Legislature discusses the policy and seek answer and clarification concerning the policy
matter and after debate, discussion, policies are put for vote in houses and for President’s
final approval. The whole idea is to make the proposed policy relevant for the society.
Outside government, there are think tanks, policy networks, interest groups, civil society,
citizen organizations, private organization, international organization which influence the
policy formulation.
Various actors and their specific roles
Actor Role
Politician Power
Bureaucrat Institution

115
 Interest group Representation
Technocrat Knowledge
Donors Influence

Source: Walt and Gilson 1994

Formulation guideline:
● Formulation requires active participation of multiple actors and agencies.
● Formulation should be based on clear definition of problem and attached agendas.
● Formulation and reformulation happen before selecting a final policy proposal draft.
● The process of formulation itself never has any neutral impact.
● Efforts are made to formulate a more comprehensive and holistic policy proposal for
treating number of intertwined complex problems.
● Estimation of cost benefit analysis is done for a more pragmatic and realistic policy
proposal. However, welfare of all is the first priority with fulfilling financial
commitments.
Different ways of policy formulation:
● Routine formulation means formulating similar policy proposals.
● Creative formulation involves approaching the problem with a new insight, with an
unprecedented way.
● Analogous formulation uses past experiences and policy results, past problems for
treating the current, new problem.
● Policy maker should think of achieving legitimation. (Howlett and Ramesh 1995)
It is important to highlight here that each policy formulation involve these different ways.
In a democratic country like India, there are certain ways through which administration
can be made aware of the societal needs and problems. The elected peoples’ representatives
as Member of Parliament (MP) and Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) in Parliament
and in their respective state assemblies raise problems, issues and want action for those.
These issues vary ranging from government’s failure or inadequate policy or any new issue
etc. Then, several interest groups, pressure groups also influence government decision
making. Civil society organization, media, research groups are also active participants in the
process and influence or draw government’s attention to problems and area of concern.
Government itself also pays attention to the societal needs and take actions accordingly.
After this, once the problem is identified, then setting of agendas are done. Here three
important factors influence the whole process.

116
● The goals and objectives should be arranged in such a way that these should generate
holistic set of policy. For example, for eliminating illiteracy, it is necessary to understand
what all should be done to eliminate illiteracy, what are the main causes? On the basis of
that one broad policy should be formulated to tackle problem of illiteracy and has to be
made linked to other policies too like poverty alleviation and Midday meal schemes. This
is done because illiteracy is not a single problem rather it is linked to poverty,
unemployment, school dropout ratio, girl child enrolment to school, health parameters
etc. Proposals should also be based on long term and short term projections.
● Second factor is related to developing alternative possible strategies needed to enact the
policy. Like, direct benefit transfer or subsidy, deciding about the various ways of
providing goods and services to the beneficiaries. A strategy also is developed for
correctly identifying the beneficiary and gathering correct information of the
beneficiaries. Correct data helps the policy proposal to be more realistic and achievable.
● The third factor involves selecting the way through which policy would be implemented.
For example, setting up new institutional setting or working with existing setup. Like
Integrated Rural Development Programme (IRDP) was established for helping the poor
people for income generation, Anganwadi setup under Integrated Child Development
Scheme (ICDS) for providing pregnancy and maternity facilities, healthy food, primary
health care, immunization, primary education etc. to children under 6 years to poor and
malnourished beneficiaries. All the roles and functions of each and every administrative
units are clearly calked out in this stage itself.
The policy formulation clearly spells out the objectives, strategies, and mechanisms of
instruments. It is the significant stage as it leads the basic foundational structure and support
to whole policy, through this stage a coherent and realistic policy gets the needed base, it is
the stage which leads to better coordination between all agencies in an integrated manner. A
policy formulating needs expert knowledge and skill for which the government works with
non-governmental agencies also. For a better choice of strategy and enactment, multiple
partnership between different avenues are done to make the stage more impactful and
dynamic.
Policy Implementation
According to Thomas Dye, “policy implementation is a process of interaction between the
settings of goals and actions geared to achieve them. It is a dynamic conversion process of
policies and plans into specific programmes and projects”.
Approaches to policy implementation
● Procedural/managerial approach
This approach establishes appropriate processes, techniques for the management and
implementation of the policies.

117
● Structural approach
It involves selecting the most appropriate administrative form for achieving the outcome.
● Political approach
Political approach understands the challenges which a policy could face in environment or
within political system and look for its solution.
● Behavioural approach
This approach creates consensus and raises acceptability by eliminating the conflictual
interests between multiple stakeholders through stakeholder analysis, organizational
development method etc. (Howlett and Ramesh 1995)
This is a very significant stage in whole policy design. The relevance of policy
implementation stage are as follows:
● Information: it makes the citizen aware about the policy
● Inducement: help people and government both to adopt new approach
● Enforcement: seek compliance of the people under legal sanctity
● Benefaction: provides benefits to those who change their political behaviour and allow
the policy to be implemented and offer their compliance to the policy. (Anderson 1997)
It needs to be ensured that policies get proper flexibility and sufficient autonomy to be
implemented properly, implementation too needs sufficient power for its validation. The
effectiveness and efficiency of implantation hugely depend on proper policy design.
However, many a times policies, which are implemented, did not achieve required results.
There are many reasons for which an implemented policy might be unsuccessful.
● Policy failure
Policy failure is basically an implantation gap which forms between policy and
implementation.
There are two types of policy failure.
a) Non-implementation policy failure is the one the policy is not enacted as it was
described due to some reasons.
b) Unsuccessful implementation happens when a policy is enacted properly but
external factors are not complying to the policy.
● Complexity of technical features
The ground realities are completely different dominated by human behaviour, action, values,
traditions, and complex technical features make the policy too technocratic in its orientation
and thus it becomes extremely difficult to implement such policy in society.

118
● Multiple goal objective
As policies are solving complex problems, often these policies are multiple goal oriented. But
this strength can become the obstacle as the multiplicity of goals make the policy hard to
understand and non-achievable.
● Ambiguity and unclear policy design
Similar to above-mentioned point, the complex intertwining of problems and their related
goals can make the policy highly ambiguous and direction less.
● Unmatched preferences
The goods and services offered through policy does not match the local preferences.
● Disagreement to policy design and objectives
When the policy is implemented, many a times, it has been seen that implementation is not
going at par with policy objectives.
● Lack of proper infrastructure, wrong data, financial constraints, lack of expertise, time
limitations etc. serve as administrative obstacles to a successful implementation of policy.
The success of policy implementation depends on a sound setting of goals, proper allocation
and optimal utilization of the resources and achieving legislative legitimacy and people’s
approval to the policy.
Policy Evaluation
Thomas Dye mentions “Policy Evaluation is conducted for checking the effects of the policy.
The Policy Evaluation provides us direction for the evaluation programs, projects, and
strategies”. (Dye 2008)
As per the CDC guidelines, “Policy evaluation applies evaluation principles and methods
to examine the content, implementation or impact of a policy. It uses a range of research
methods to systematically investigate the effectiveness of policy interventions,
implementation, and processes, so that a sound policy can be achieved by improving the
social and economic conditions of different stakeholders”. (CDC policy briefing)
It is an activity which helps to understand three aspects of policy. These are:
● merit,
● worth, and
● utility
● According to Brownson et al (2009) “evaluation is an integral part of each step in the
policy process. Internally, evaluation happens at three stages in which each stage focuses
on a different phase of the policy process. Each type of evaluation can provide valuable
information for the planning and interpretation of the other types of evaluation (content,
implementation, and impact)”. These stages are:
119
● Evaluating Policy Content: focuses on articulation of goals and the framework it designed
for its implementation. Evaluation is done to understand the context of the policy design,
the very basic issues it is dealing with, the relevance, clarity of the content, and
implementation framework.

Image source: Brownson et al 2009

● Evaluating Policy Implementation: focus is on evaluating the policy implementation as it

was designed. This is crucial to understand the strength and weakness of the policy, the
obstacles policy faced and helps to compare policies and different alternatives and their
components.
● Evaluating Policy Impact: most important stage where policy as a whole and its impact is
evaluated to see that it has achieved what it is intended or not. It helps to realize the
perception of people and other agencies. It also helps to draw inferences about the
performance of each actor. Policy impact evaluation helps compare the various policy
results and helps the policy maker for future decisions.
Simply, policy evaluation is considered as a whole at the last stage of policy cycle to avoid
complexity. But, it remained the most crucial stage of policy cycle and without the policy
evaluation, the whole policy cycle remains incomplete and ineffective.
Daniel Lerner has summed up the evaluation stage as threefold process.
a) Process evaluation: policy is implemented on the basis of policy guidelines or not. It
takes into consideration two parameters: the target area and specific target groups.
The outcome of the policy is also analyzed.
b) Impact evaluation: both positive and negative impacts are evaluated. Changes which
happened after the execution are also considered for investigation.
c) Comprehensive evaluation: it is a mix of process model and impact evaluation
model. Both are combined to understand the positive points, the drawbacks, and
improvements can be implemented. (Brownson et al 2009)
From an overall public policy point of view, as mentioned above also, policy evaluation is
considered in totality and comprehensive evaluation is considered most for the practice and
thus useful.

120
Different agencies and their role in policy evaluation
● Administrative: concerned with evaluating administrative performance and budgeting
system.
● Judicial: involves judicial review and judicial discretion
● Political: comprises of creating consensus and consultation along with policy subsystem
and creating support base within public
Following reasons explain the usefulness of policy evaluation.
● Documenting the whole process of policy development
● Clearly reflects the outcome of a policy implemented
● Makes the citizen aware about the policy result and also keep the government informed.
● Helps and allow the citizens, government, and other participants to decide pragmatically.
● Through the documentation process, it helps to make a more informed choices regarding
policy making
● Creates compliance with running policies and serve as a support
● Helps for future policies
● Makes all the stakeholder accountable for their duty.
● Helps to evaluate specific performance and thus offers opportunity to learn and improve.
● Sets a direction for future policy making process
● The expected results and unexpected data, drawbacks are analyzed to make the policy are
effective.
● Help to understand the strength and weaknesses of the policy and creates room for
improvement.
There are some challenges to policy evaluation.
● Financial and other infrastructure limitation can hamper policy evaluation
● Scarcity of strong evidence to support policy evaluation
● Lack of policy evaluation methods
● Pressure of organizational, and external factors on policy evaluation process
● Lack of “control” over policy implementation
● Data constraints and lack of proper expertise to evaluation
● Lack of appropriate measures
Policy evaluation is a process in itself. It facilitates efficiency to the formulation and
implementation stages. Starting from planning to analysis of the effective ness of the policy,
121
evaluation plays a very critical role and sound policy depends on sound policy evaluation
along with effective use of rest two stages within policy cycle design.
Features of Good Policy
● The process of public policy is a complementary and interrelated process. All the stages
within the process are not separate event, these stages are leading to each other and
successful completion of one stage marks successful start of next stage and also ensures a
proper successful overall course of action.
● A good policy is knowledge based policy which is based on scientific evidence. This
means that policy design should be on correct and fact based information, the policy
decision should be designed keeping in mind the societal demands, financial
commitments and not on political biases, personal beliefs and faith etc.
● A policy is a good policy which is highly participatory, inclusive and involves people.
More the policy involves discussion, brainstorming, more participation of different
stakeholders, people, more the policy design would be able to understand the problem and
see possible alternatives. Also, inclusivity and more local participation makes the public
policy more effective and efficient.
● A good policy shows a strong and committed leadership towards the society. A good
policy reflects the aspirations and needs of the citizens getting transformed into policies.
● Gradual and incremental change are the good indicators of a good healthy policy.
● Democratic nature of the policy, proper consultation during policy making, transparency,
openness as information concerning policy is shared with people and other stakeholders
are the key ingredients of a good policy.
● A good policy must be consistent with the constitution and societal cultural settings.
● Policies must be inclusive. It should bring all the viewpoints, different knowledge system
of addressing the problem and solutions, the local people must be a part of whole policy
making process.
● A policy is good if it can be understood by everyone. It should be clear and based on
social and economic needs. It should be beneficial for society at large, for the welfare of
all.
● Policy should be stable without doing frequent changes in the nature of policy. That is
why careful study should be done while formulating and implementing policy.
● There should be sincere approach to policy design. It should adhere to ethics,
philosophical values of the nation and should keep intact the nation’s integrity and safety.
● A good policy is the one which is achievable. Realistic goals are important for a policy.
The objective should not be just ideal statements which can never be achieved. Rather
visioning a more realistic goals based policy is good for society.

122
● Policies should be future and purposive oriented. And should be interlinked around
shared goals and values.
Challenges Faced by Policy Cycle
● Because of the complexity of the problems and inherent tensions in the social and
economic front, policy cycle may face difficulty in addressing the problem,
● The inherent multidimensional can lead to overlapping and contradictions in the policy
cycle.
● The support and consensus on nature and strategies to achieve social goals can be
contested.
● The value preferences, political and social interests are affecting the various stakeholders
and decision makers which can often lead to more conflicts.
● The very definition of problem cannot be solely based on scientific analysis or socially
constructed. It should be balance of both. However, it becomes difficult to strike a
balance in real world administrative setup with conflicting interests.
● The objective and subjective dichotomy in one important challenge. There is sense of
objectivity in terms of classification, explanation attached to the problem whereas the
same problems can be interpreted differently based on value judgement and preferences.
● The policy problem can affect multiple entities as policies are interdependent.
● There can be multiple ways to solve a problem. However, this aggravates the problem
more as problem are not solved due to flux between problem and multiple solutions.
Significance of Public Policy
● Public policy is a specialized study which makes public administration more effective.
● Public policy is a basis of government. Understanding public policy helps us to
understand our government and their duties, responsibilities, and their challenges better.
● Public policy is a mechanism to provide services and bring social justice, protects weaker
section of the society, and achieve welfare for the society.
● Public policy helps in the making of a sound and well informed public opinion.
● Public policy is an instrument of economic development, sustainable growth, and social
change.
● Public policy serves as a stabilizing force within society as it creates an environment of
accommodation and co-option. It brings stability and order to the society.
Conclusion
In nutshell, for a democratic country like India, development of rational, goal oriented public
policy is extremely important. The whole policy cycle with proper coordination and

123
communication works to achieve the stated objectives. However, there are numerous
obstacles which it faces on its course. The challenge is to overcome those hindrances and
create effective and positive policy for the betterment of the society. Public policy helps the
government to aim for development and social and economic upliftment of the society. It
ensures the equity, effectiveness, and responsiveness of the government toward its own
citizens.
References
Anderson, J.E. (1997). Public Policy-Making: An Introduction 3rd ed. Boston: Houghton
Miffilin Company.
Brownson, R. C., Royer, C., Chriqui, J. F., & Stamatakis, K. A. (2009). Understanding
evidence-based public health policy. American Journal of Public Health, 99, 1576–1583.
Dye, T. R. (2008). Understanding Public Policy, 12th Edition, Upper Saddle River, New
Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Howlett, M., and Ramesh, M. (1995). Policy Cycles and Policy Subsystems, Canada: Oxford
University Press.
Kingdon, J. W. (2003). Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies, 2nd Edition, New York:
Longman.
Knoepfel, P., Larrue, C., Varone, F., and Hill, M. (2007). Public Policy Analysis, Bristol: The
Policy Press.

124
 Unit-4 : Major Approaches in Public Administration

(a) Development Administration: An Analysis

Bijendra Jha

1. Development Administration: An Introduction

2. Genesis of Development Administration
3. Conceptualizing Development Administration
4. Seven Decades of Development Administration
a) Evolution of Development Administration, 1950s-1980s
b) Globalization and Development Administration : 1990s onwards
5. Elements of Development Administration
6. FW Riggs’ view on Development Administration
7. Conclusion

1. Development Administration: An Introduction

The concept of ‘development administration’ is of relatively recent origin, and essentially
having western roots. It is exclusively used in the post-world war II period with reference to
the newly free (decolonized) nations of Asia and Africa. In addition, the evolution of the
concept had great influence of socialist revolution of the USSR that fostered universal socio-
economic rights, state-planned economic development and advocated against liberal
philosophy of free market capitalism. Responding to socialist policy, liberals revised their
theory of market and state relationships. The modern/positive liberals argued that the state
should plan/manage economic development. Jhon Maynard Keynes, a great British welfare
economist, was in favour of state regulation of the market and development for greater
growth and prosperity.
The developmental government has surfaced in the USA’s New Deal Act through the
effort of President Roosevelt in the 1940s and UK’s Beverage Report in early 1950s. In the
post second world war, the term ‘development’ gained momentum in order to implement
Marshall’s plan for reconstruction of socio-economic development programmes in the war-
torn Europe, and in initiating developmental programmes in newly free countries
(decolonized state) of Asia, Africa and Latin America. These third world countries preferred
the policy of state led command economic development to progress in their industries,
agriculture, universities, science and technology, communication, medical, art and culture,
and strive to wipe out existing extreme level of poverty, inequalities, ignorance, idleness,
diseases, illiteracy, and social maladies. In this light, ‘development administration’ emerged
as a branch of public administration to formulate national planning for all around

125
development and economic growth. Scholars and specialists of public administration took
interest in studying state roles (especially bureaucracy’s role) in development in third world
countries.
The ‘development administration’ had roots in an era characterized by ‘big government’,
national planning, and state-led command economic development strategy. It had given
opportunities to public bureaucracy to undertake developmental goals. The concept of
‘development administration’ is a programme of action-oriented and strategy of
development-plan implementation.
Let’s clear the terminology ‘development administration’. The first word ‘development’,
has broad dimensions as Milton Esman (1991: 5-6 quoted in Jreisat, 2011) has identified five
goals for national development a) economic growth, b) equity, c) capacity (cultivation of
skills), d) authenticity, and e) empowerment (equal opportunities for all citizens to
participate). State envisioned development to denotes modernization and nation-building, and
the process of development sought to endure on self-reliance rather than to take assistance
from foreign sources and support. Further, the word ‘administration’ means a collective work
for public purpose. It has to do with ‘getting things done with the accomplishment of defined
objectives.’ Taken two words together, ‘development administration’ refers to government
led accomplishment of developmental goals like economic growth, equity, cultivation of
skills and institutions, empowerment. This is a state led project of modernization and national
building in which bureaucracy, a steel frame of the government, is highly involved in
development strategy and its implementation. The objective is ‘maximum innovation for
development’ (Weidner, 399:1970 quoted in Rathod, 2010) intended to modernization of
industries and infrastructure and social change.
In the age of globalization, global civil society, and international non-governmental
institutions (INGOS) along with local community-based organizations (CBOs), civil society
groups, self-help groups have come forward enthusiastically in the field of ‘development
administration’. In this light, the role of United Nation Development Programme (UNDP) is
very important in working with developing countries especially formulating strong policies,
helping in skill development and providing institutional support for progress and
development. At the turn of 21st century, world leaders agreed to see a broad future of the
world through Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). MDGs, with eight developmental
goals within measurable time-bound targets, were a pledge to uphold the principle of human
dignity, and free the world from extreme poverty. The Sustainable Development Goals
(SDGs) replaced MDGs and set seventeen developmental goals to end poverty, protect the
planet and to ensure that all enjoy peace and prosperity. These sustainable developmental
goals along with economic development of the nation-state has transformed the development
administration altogether. India abolished the Planning Commission in 2015 and established
National Institution for Transforming India (NITI Aayog) to redesign national developmental
priorities as per contemporary development requirement.

126
2. Genesis and Evolution of ‘Development Administration’
The term ‘development administration’ had no existence before the second world war. Indian
scholar professor U L Goswami perhaps coined the term ‘development administration’ in his
research paper ‘The Structure of Development Administration.’ In the later decade, the
western scholars especially Americans conceptualized and elaborated the concept. Initial
attempts taken by Edward W. Weidner and later developed and elaborated by F W Riggs,
John D. Montgomery, Philip E. Morgan, George F. Gant, Lucian W. Pye and Ferrel Heady.
The summary of their work is as follows:
 Edward W. Weidner in his work ‘Development Administration in Asia’ in which
thirteen articles are devoted to aspects of Asian development administration.
 F. W. Riggs: his three classical work viz., ‘The Ecology of Public Administration’
(1961)’, ‘Administration in Developing Countries: The theory of Prismatic Society
(1964)’ ‘Thailand: The Modernization of a Bureaucratic Polity (1966) has contributed
in the evolution of ‘development administration.’
 Milton Esman: ‘Administration and Development in Malaysia: Institution and Reforms
in Plural Society (1972)’ described the development of administrative capacity of
senior managers through national institution building and administrative reform.
 Philip E. Morgan, ed. The administrative Change in Africa (1974) contains a collection
of articles on ‘development administration.’
 John D. Montgomery: Technology and Civil Life: Making and Implementing
Development Decision (1974), criticized the western pre-occupation of macro-
development and not linking technology for redistribution of power and to serving the
needy in the society.
 George F Gant: Development Administration: Concepts, Goals and Methods (1979)
provides comprehensive text on the subject.
 Lucian W. Pye: The Communication and Political Development (1963). The book
contains eleven articles focused on modernization of nation-state.
 Ferrel Heady: Public Administration: A Comparative Public Administration (1984)
demonstrated five salient features of public administration in developing countries and
carefully inquired the relationships between bureaucracy and politics.
These above works have made substantial addition to articulation of the development
administration and its implication, majorly as a result of comparative study of public
administration in developing countries of Asia, and Latin America.
The evolution of the concept of ‘development administration’ in post second world war
had following backgrounds:

127
 First, the rise of ‘development’ paradigm: The word ‘development’ has western origin
and global consensus. In the post second world war, the development discourse was so
strongly popular that it acquired power to seduce everyone to charm, to please, to fascinate
and, to dream, but also to abuse and to deceive (Rist, 2008:1). USA’s Marshall Plan to
reconstruct the socio-economic aspects of devastated Europe through economic aid that had
given impetus to academic scholars to formulate, articulate and elaborate the concept of
development. Exponents of development projected growth as a necessary condition of
development. Scholars like W. W. Rostow’s work (1960) ‘The Stages of Economic Growth:
A Non-Communist Manifesto’ has evolved five-stage model for economic growth, namely,
1) traditional society- agrarian society needs sufficient manual labour, therefore need to
develop technology, 2) transitional stage-involving precondition for take-off based on
technological development; 3) take-off- a stage of self-sustaining economic growth; 4) drive
to maturity- industrialization has started and due to technological development productivity
has risen; and 5) high level of mass communication- when society need to consume durable
goods. Another important scholar A F K Organski in his work (1965) ‘The Stages of Political
Development’ demonstrated that economic growth is an integral part of economic
development and suggested four stages of growth: a) primitive unification; b)
industrialization; c) national welfare and d) the politics of abundance. These theories of
development have advocated that the developing nation should follow the footsteps of the
capitalist model of development in order to secure growth and development in their countries.
Further, famous literatures on development, for example, G Almond and J S Coleman ‘The
politics of Developing Areas (1960)’ L W Pye, ‘The Communication and Political
Development (1963)’ and S Huntington ‘Political Order in Changing Societies (1968)’
advocated modernization in terms of comprehensive change from traditional society to
modern one (Jresait, 2011).
At the international level, the United Nations has recognized that economic growth is
necessary but not sufficient for the notion of development. It recognized that development
means growth plus social change. In the month of January 1961, the United Nations resolved
that the 1960s would be the ‘decade of development’. ‘The UN Development Decade
Proposal for Action’ maintained that ‘in the United Nations development decade, we are
beginning to understand the real aim of development and the nature of the development
process. Development is not just economic growth, it is growth plus change’ (The UN
Development Decade Proposal for Action, 1962: v).
Meanwhile, rapid decolonization of Asia, Africa and Latin America needed state led
planning for economic modernization and national building for their development. State
administration was deeply involved in taking development courses for socio-economic
change. The UN first approach to development strategy was ‘concept of national planning-
for social as well as economic development.’ These western models of modernization theory
of development as well as the institutional approach of the UN’s emphasis on the role of the
state in the process of development gave rise to ‘development administration.’

128
 Secondly, the independence of the new nation-state in the third world: The age of
imperialism started diminishing and the decolonization process began in the post second
world war era that had given rise to newly independent nation-state in the continent of Asia,
Africa and Latin America. The international system shifted from a balance of power system
to bi-polar world where two super-power, opposed economically and ideologically, offered
their concept of development strategies. In both cases, the role of the state and its
bureaucracy were to be important in designing and drafting development strategies and its
implementation. ‘Development administration’ has to take all major steps in order to socio-
economic transformation in all these newly independent nation-states of Asia, Africa and
Latin America.
Thirdly, the emergence of Comparative Public Administration (CPA) in the United State
of America: In the 1950s and 1960s, scholars have started their research interest in
administrative structure and their functions in developing societies of Asia and Latin
America. In the field of comparative public administration, F W Riggs (1917-2008) was a
pioneer intellectual. As a chairperson of Comparative Administration Group (CAG) of the
American Society for Public Administration, Riggs gave intellectual and organizational
leadership to the comparative public administration (CPA) movement in the 1950s and
1960s. He focused on development administration and invented certain models and theories
that generated worldwide reaction from scholars in the field’ (Jreisat, 2011:155). His
empirical and comparative studies of the administration in his three classical work viz., ‘The
Ecology of Public Administration’ (1961)’, ‘Administration in Developing Countries: The
theory of Prismatic Society (1964)’ and ‘Thailand: The Modernization of a Bureaucratic
Polity (1966)’ have generated interest in comparative study of administration and made
research more analytical, scientific, critical and cross-cultural.
3. Conceptualizing ‘Development Administration’
The concept of ‘development administration’ is essentially contested. Edward W. Weidner, a
pioneer of the concept said that the ‘development administration’ as the ‘process guiding an
organization towards the achievement of progressive planning’, namely, ‘political, economic,
social objectives that are authoritatively determined in one manner or other’. In the 1960s, the
‘development administration’ emerged as a branch of public administration that involved the
state machinery, especially bureaucracy, in economic planning for socio-economic change. It
is more concerned with the task of development planning, projects, schemes, programmes,
and the ‘intention to develop, the mobilization of existing and new resources, and cultivation
of appropriate skills to achieve the developmental goals.’ According to Weidner, ‘the
development administration is basically action oriented and goal oriented administrative
system’.
These developmental goals are often referred to as nation-building, modernization and
intended to socio-economic progress. Swerdlow (1975: 324) has identified twin tasks of
development administration: institution building and development planning. He maintained
that development administration, like public administration of which it is a part, ‘a subject

129
matter in search of a discipline.’ Indeed, the concept of ‘development administration’ is not
well described and accepted in a precise theoretical and analytical manner.
Nevertheless, overall literature on the subject matter, the concept of development
administration refers to two interrelated terms ‘administrative development’ and
‘development administration’. The first term administrative development denotes
‘development and enhancement of the administrative capability and skill in such areas like
finance, personnel, accounting, management, taxation, and organizational development for
carrying out development plans and achieving developmental goals in rural as well as urban
areas’ (Farazmand, 2001: 16). Explaining the second concept ‘development administration’,
Farazmand notes that ‘development administration is concerned with national development
plans and achievements of their goals and objectives. Both reinforced each other and both are
considered important.’ While administrative development is more concerned with traditional
functions of government, for example, like how to maintain law and order effectively and
efficiently, the ‘development administration’ is concerned exclusively on development
planning, its inputs, outputs, and feedback.
4. Seven Decades of Development Administration
In the initial stage of ‘development administration’ the entire focus was on modernization
(westernization i.e. taking the path of Western model of development particularly USA and
UK model of development). Therefore, prime goals of development were diffusion of
western technology and values. Along with it, economic development was defined in terms of
growth (that is, expansion of Gross National Product per capita over a period of time);
quantitative economic changes that may bring corresponding changes in quality of life for the
masses. It was expected that economic growth would lead to social change and that would
pave the way to political development. As a discipline, development administration has
started its journey to make national planning and do away with under-development and now
it has focused on goals of sustainable development. O P Dwivedi in his work ‘Development
Administration: From Underdevelopment to Sustainable Development (1994) outlined the
subject-matter of the development administration. It has started its journey from
underdevelopment-development debate to sustainable development in the last seven decades.
However, we can divide these seven decades of development administration in following
way:
4a) Development Administration in First Four Decades: 1950s-1980s
First three decades of development administration are characterized by big-government, state
led command-economic planning and involvement of state bureaucracy and development
strategist in designing the path of development. The goals were twins: economic progress and
social change. To achieve the desired ends/ viz. economic progress and social change, state in
developing countries assigned this job to western modernized and well-trained bureaucracy.
The USA’s New Deal Act came as a result of liberal welfarism philosophy during the
administration of F D Roosevelt and reached its zenith in the 1960s with the ‘New Frontier’

130
policies of John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society Programme. In the UK, the
Beveridge Report had initiated state led development welfare in the early 1950s. The United
Nations declared the decade of the 1960s as ‘decade of development’ and it was emphasized
that the goals of the development should be economic growth plus change. The philosophy of
state led command economy continued till 1970. There was huge criticism from the free
market thinkers like Fredrick Hayek, Milton Friedman, Ayn Rand and Robert Nozick. They
criticized state control of the economy and planning. In the USA, Ronald Regan in the 1970s
and in UK Margret Thatcher 1980s revised the development planning strategies. They
followed the policy which is popularly known as ‘rolling back of the state’.
The decade of the 1980s is known as a crisis in the development administration. Many
deficiencies appeared in the development path that had started in the 1950s and 60s. The state
led planning development could not fostered the desired result. There was a rise of corruption
in which bureaucracy and the political elite were directly involved. In the developing
countries, there were rises of black economy, inflation, fascial deficit that was making state-
panning and welfare developmentalism unsustainable. In 1989, the International Monetary
Fund, the World Bank and US department of Treasury agreed on a new economic order
popularly known as Washington Consensus that prescribed a ten-point economic policy
prescription as an economic reform package for developing countries of the third world. This
was a landmark revision and top-down model of development dictated by the IMF and World
Bank. The neo-liberal economic order employed worldwide and the market connected to
each-other globally is better called by the term’globalization’.
4b) Globalization and Development Administration: 1990s onwards
In the 1990s, there were many changes at international level as well as at the national level
globally. Fall of Berlin Wall (1991), disintegration of USSR (1989), abrupt regime change in
Eastern Europe, and Washington Consensus (1989) all happen simultaneously and these all
influenced the thinking on development as a model and its implementation and output.
Francis Fukuyama’s work ‘The End of History and the Last Man’ (1993) demonstrated
victory of the liberal political and economic order and the arrival of the post-ideological
world. The neo-liberal political philosopher advocated for a ‘minimal state’ and free market
model of development. They advised that the state and bureaucracy should limit their role in
the development process. Washington Consensus (1989) advised third world countries to opt
‘Structural Adjustment Programme’ (SAP) and accept its economic reform package to
resolve the issue of inflation and fiscal deficit. For free marketeers, it would lead to better
economic growth and development. In other words, free-market led development becomes
global development strategies for all countries except few one.
The World Bank document titled as “Governance and Development’ emphasized on the
few measures necessary for a new model of development. In 1992, the World Bank came
with the proposal of ‘Good Governance’ as an agenda of development. It defined
‘governance’ as the ‘manner in which power is exercised in the management of a country’s
economic and social resources for development.’ For the World Bank, the term ‘Good

131
Governance’ means ‘sound development management’. Although it emphasized on
participation of the people, decentralization of authority, accountability, deregulation, legal
framework for development, information, transparency and economic efficiency but accepted
the fact that the state has to play a key role in the new agenda of development. The document
has recognized many actors of development along with the state. For instance, it has
recognized the role of community-based organization, political parties, civil society groups,
community leaders, international non-governmental institutions, activists and, it has
recognized that development is a collective effort for amelioration of life-standard.
David Osborne and Ted Gabler’s work ‘Reinventing Government: How the
Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector’ (1993) emphasized that the state
should reinvent itself from bureaucratic government to entrepreneurial government. He
suggested ten major reforms that the state should opt for better public sector performance.
The West free market model of development countered by the concept of ‘Human
Development’ developed by economist Mahbub ul Haq and Amartya Sen. Dr. Haq argued
that the present model of development has failed to deliver the true purpose of development
that-to improve human life. Amartya Sen in his work ‘Development as freedom’ (2002)
focused on a few essential elements that everyone should possess i.e. ability to read and
write, healthy life, participation in public life and argued that the real aim of development is
realizing freedom. Therefore, the nature of development administration has shifted from
central planning to democratic decentralization, bureaucratic led development to community-
based development, and it emphasized on working with seventeen developmental agenda set
up by United Nation Development Programme ‘Sustainable Development Goals’ in 2015.
5. Elements of Development Administration
P B Rathod, a noted Indian scholar of the ‘Public Administration’, in his work ‘Elements of
Development Administration’ (2010) has identified following elements of Development
administration:
i) Change-Oriented: The central concern for the development administration is social
and economic change.
ii) Result Oriented: Public administration has to be result-oriented, socio-economic
change need to realize within a time-bound period.
iii) Communication, Devotion and Dedication: An administrative commitment is
necessary to bring change. Development administration should not focus only to
planning and its implementation of developmental programme but should focus on
transformation of entire society.
iv) Client-Oriented: Development administration has to be client-oriented. It has to satisfy
the aspirations and urges of the client i.e. people living in the particular area. The needs,
requirements and wants of the people in underdeveloped areas has to be satisfied in a
strategic manner.

132
v) Temporal Dimension: Development administration has one fundamental constraint i.e.
time. It has to focus on how aspiration of the people can be fulfilled within a specific
time.
vi) Planned and Coordinated efforts: development administration refers to an organized
and planned development strategies. It needs co-operation among bureaucrats and
people’s participation.
vii) Goals oriented administration: Development administration has to be goals oriented.
The primary goals of development administration are economic growth plus social
change.
viii) Management Capacity: Development administration needs capacity to manage the
affairs of developmental process from start to ends. It should create and enhance
capacity to achieve the targeted goals of development.
ix) Progressivism: This is an important task of development administration. It prepares to
achieve a distant future for human progress.
x) Participation: people are not merely beneficiary of the development programme, they
are active participants in developmental processes. They are not mere means in order to
achieve development but ends of development. Therefore, development administration
requires greater participation of the people.
xi) Creativity and Innovation: These are two basic elements of development
administration. It must be creative and innovative in the entire development process.
xii) Responsiveness and Accountability: Development administration is required to be
responsive and accountable. It needs a highly motivated and energetic administrator to
follow the aims of development.
xiii) Overlapping: In following the process of development, there are multiple institutions,
formal and informal, overlaps each-other. For example, often bureaucracy overlaps with
caste, class, community and region. Therefore, overlapping is elements of development
administration.
6. F W Riggs and Development administration
F W Riggs (1917-2008) was a pioneer intellectual and chairman of Comparative
Administration Group (CAG) of the American Society for Public Administration. He had
selected three models viz., United State of America, Thailand and Philippines to illustrate
different models of administration. He illustrated the typology in comparative public
administration as Agraria (Thailand) and Industria (The United State of America), and
developed an intermediary model of what Riggs calls ‘Prismatic’ model (Philippines). It must
be noted that ‘prismatic’ societies are the post-colonial societies who have received
independence from imperial power in the 1940s and 1950s. Western power ruled these
societies and imposed a modern bureaucratic system to govern these societies. Riggs was

133
curious to look into the relation between western imposed administrative system and their
social, cultural environment in prismatic society. Public administration in most developing
nations falls under the category of prismatic systems. In his work ‘Thailand: The
Modernization of Bureaucratic Polity (1966)’, Riggs demonstrated how weak political
structure is unable to control the administrative system. In ‘The Ecology of Public
Administration (1961), Riggs demonstrated, after a comprehensive fieldwork in Southeast
Asia and in the United State of America, that how administration is facing challenges in
developing countries.
Riggs has identified heterogeneity (co-existence of modernity along with traditional),
formalism (gap between envisaged vision and actual practice) and overlapping (newly
created highly modern structures are paid only lip-service and overlooked widely in favour of
traditional social structures). Overlapping has several important dimensions like nepotism,
favouritism, poly-communalism (hostile interaction among different groups), poly-
normativism (existence of several norms rational as well as irrational/traditional), existence of
clects (interest groups based on communal identity), poly normativism (various norms for
various group depending on group’s social status, and bargaining capacity) and modern
administrative system co-exists with traditional administrative structures. He concluded that
the western bureaucratic and political structures have been created for administrative
purposes but often ignored in favour of traditional social structures. Thus, modern structures
co-exist with traditional but traditional structures continue to dominate in actual practice.
Riggs notes that in a prismatic society, nepotism or patronize bestowed or favouritism
based on family relationship and kinship is prevalent. In fact, nepotism or favouritism plays a
very significant role in selection in various administrative offices and performance of
administrative functions. Family lineage, kinship and traditional law prevailed and
universalization of rule of law was lacking in practice or infect disregarded. The
administrative official, what Riggs called as ‘sala’ official gives priority to social structure
while dealing with administrative matters. They prioritize family/kinship and social ascriptive
identity of the individual rather than to common citizens their political equality. They
increase personal power, wealth, and prosperity rather than to social welfare. The
administrative behaviour and performance are highly influenced by his socialization and
parochial character
F W Riggs described the economic subsystem of the prismatic society as a bazaar-
canteen model. In prismatic society one can witness equality in urban areas while services in
rural areas are based on patronage and favouritism. But in prismatic society the relationship
between bureaucratic (the Sala) officials and their clientele is like buyer-seller. The price of
service depends on the nature of the relationship between the ‘Sala’ official and their
clientele. The price of the commodity or service varies from place to place, time to time and
person to person. It also depends on the family contact, social status, bargaining capacity,
individual relationship and power politics. Services are guaranteed to the socially dominant
class/caste and at lower prices but the marginal caste/class has to pay heavy charges

134
 The fluctuation of price in prismatic society creates more problems and it encourages
black marketing, hoarding, adulteration, and ultimately leads to high inflation in the
economy. It has a direct impact on common people. In such a situation, the ‘sala’ official in
prismatic society tries to develop contacts with business groups, foreign business clubs and
institutions, and misuse foreign exchange for private purposes. It would often lead to large
corruption, exploitation of the common people, poverty and decline of life standard of
common people in prismatic society. In prismatic society wage depends on political
influence. There is a great divide between higher wage and lower wage in the economy and
that results in high economic inequality and social injustice. Thus, exploitation, poverty, and
social injustice become the major features of the bazaar canteen model. Thus, Riggs
demonstrated deep problems faced by development administration in developing societies of
Asia.
7. Conclusion
Development administration has started its journey as part of comparative public
administration and remains always in search of its own identity. Parallel to the subject
‘developmental economic’ established itself but development administration always faced
crisis for its own identity. It was philosophically and methodologically imposed on a newly
independent third world in Asia and Latin America but the socio-economic difference as
shown by Riggs posed a huge challenge for everyone to achieve the goals of development
and it is a distant dream. In addition, it has given birth to many intra-community and inter-
communities conflicts along with conflict between human and nature. We need to relook
afresh at the concept of development and development administration.
Bibliography
Dwevedi, O P (1994). Development Administration: From Underdevelopment to Sustainable
Development. London: Macmillan.
Farazmand, Ali (2001). Handbook of Comparative and Development Public Administration.
Switzerland: Marcel Deccer.
Fukuyama, Francis (1992). The End of History and The Last man. New York: The Free Press.
Jreisat, Jamil (2011). Globalism and Comparative Public Administration. London: CRC
Press.
Rathod, P B (2010). Elements of Development Administration: Theory and Practice. Jaipur:
ABD Publisher.
Rist, Gilbert (2008). The History of Development: From Western Origins to Global Faith.
London: Zed Books.
Sen Amartya (2002). Development as Freedom: New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
World bank (1992). Governance and Development. New York: World Bank Publication.
United Nations. 1962. The UN Development Decade Proposal for Action. United Nations.
135
New Public Administration, New Public Management, New Public Service
Dr. Devarati Roy Chowdhury

New Public Administration

 Introduction
 First Minnowbrook Conference, 1968
 Goals of NPA
 Focus of NPA
 Criticism of NPA
 Significance of NPA
New Public Management
 Second Minnowbrook Conference, 1988
 Definition and Principles of NPM
 Focus of NPM
 Problems of NPM
New Public Service
 Theory and principles of NPS
 Focus of NPS
 Themes of NPS
 Conclusion

(b) New Public Administration

Introduction
Towards the end of 1960s, New Public Administration (NPA) is developed as a new and
more inclusive theoretical approach of public administration. New public administration was
designed to meet the new and complex challenges of the society. Specially the American
society was facing extreme challenges in terms of citizens satisfaction and was in dismay.
New public administration was the outcome of these upheavals and it was the path breaking
approach in the development of Public Administration as a discipline which changed the
whole discourse altogether and led to the establishment of modern Public Administration.
The public administration needs to find new methods to resolve the issues of
inefficiencies, ill-effects and mal practices of administration and needs to find ways to keep

136
the change compatible with the society. 1960s and early of 1970s witnessed the instability
and confusion within the discourse of public administration.
The main objective of the traditional public administration was to inquire on the
questions of efficiency and effectiveness. Traditional public administration dealt with the
questions of government providing quality service with available resources which highlights
the concern of ‘efficiency’ or about maintaining the level of services by being ‘economical’.
The main objective of economy, and efficiency were found to be inadequate and incomplete
to address the pressing concerns of the time. In such scenario, young scholars under the
patronage of Dwight Waldo came together to meet in conference held in Minnowbrook to
reduce the administrative deficit in the theoretical and practical perspective of public
administration. The main objective of conference was to explore ways that would be capable
of dealing with contemporary changes that creating more obstacles in administration.
Minnowbrook Conference happened in 1968 in Syracuse University and led to the
emergence of “New Public Administration”. New Public Administration presented the
alternative normative paradigm of administration highlighting the lacunas and orthodoxies of
traditional public administration and led to the beginning of modern phase of administration.
The traditional public administration gave more importance to administration rather than
public, principles and procedure rather than values and to efficiency and being economic
rather than effectiveness and in such way, the discipline was losing its relevance. New Public
Administration challenged the basic principles of traditional public administration like
politics administration dichotomy, sciences of administration etc.
The Minnowbrook conference highlighted the need of restoring values and purpose in
the governance. It is a public policy and social equity oriented based on post behavioral and
post positivist approach.
The emergence and growth of New Public Administration: important landmarks
I. The Honey Report on Higher Education for Public Service, 1967 (USA); John Honey
of Syracuse University begun an evaluation of discipline as a field of study and highlighted
the shortcomings institutional shortcomings in the area of public administration and lack of
communication between scholars and practicing administration. The report highlighted four
problems which needed action:
 Lack of funds
 Confusion regarding the nature of the discipline, uncertainty about the discipline as a
science, as a profession
 Inadequate institutional and departmental networking
 Inadequate communication between public administration scholars and practitioners.
This honey report aroused much debate across academics however, it did not say anything
concerning the role and nature of public administration as a discipline in the societies which

137
are facing governance crisis. However, this report became the base for the wider and
comprehensive discussion on the role of discipline in resolving the basic tensions.
II. The Philadelphia Conference: the Theory and Practice of Public Administration,
1967 (under the Chairmanship of James C. Charlesworth); It expressed the view that as
the state has changed from a police state to a welfarist state, acquiring more administrative
responsibility and reduction of social inequalities.
Major viewpoints expressed in the deliberations of the conference are:
 Subject should be flexible enough to facilitate growth. The growth of the function and
dimension is a continuous process. Creating a rigid boundary by demarcating the
discipline is highly disadvantageous for the discipline of public administration.
 The scope of public administration should be extended to achieve public policy making
process. And, for that the dichotomy between the policy and administration that is
between the study of government and study of public administration should not be
considered. Too much emphasize on the sciences of administration and internal
processes is making the whole public administration highly rigid. Organizational
innovation and flexible administration incorporating people centric approach should be
given more appropriate. Public Administration should be given more attention to social
problems like poverty, unemployment, social security, environmental sustainability etc.
III. Dwight Waldo’s article on Public Administration in a time of Revolution, 1968.
VI. The First Minnowbrook Conference, 1968.
V. Toward a New Public Administration: The Minnowbrook Perspective, 1971
(edited by the Frank Marini).
VI. Public Administration in a Time of Turbulence, 1971 (by Dwight Waldo); and
VII. New Public Administration, 1980(by George Frederickson).
First Minnowbrook Conference 1968
The origin of New Public Administration is in the first Minnowbrook Conference which was
held in 1968 under the leadership of Dwight Waldo. Major themes discussed in the
conference are:
 Contemporary relevance and significance of Public Administration
 Social equity
 Balance between public administration and democracy
 Ethics and morality of Public Administration
 Anti-Positivism

138
In first Minnowbrook conference, the participants addressed the ways and problems of
institutionalized changes and offered solution of the bureaucratic tendencies and related
issues.
Features of NPA:
 3 E’s of ‘economy, efficiency. Effectiveness’ and social equity, responsiveness,
inclusivity and representation.
 Making the dimension of rationality broader by not only focusing on the
administrator’s action from the only government point of view but also from
perspective of citizens and society at large.
 As the societal problems are highly complex, emphasis of NPA is to make the subject
more multi-disciplinary in its approach. A better and broad understanding of problems
and related various approaches including political science, economics, laws, history
political management, psychology human relation is essential for not only subject’s
growth but also help to resolve the societal problems in a more effective manner.
 Bringing positive change and creating responsiveness: more flexibility and enhancing
adaptability to deal with constantly changing environment.
 Structural changes should be in tune with current and relevant contexts and should be
responsive to environmental needs.
Goals of New Public Administration
Relevance
The theme of relevance is more of an interpretation. Whereas the original quest of public
administration is conventionally efficient and economy, NPA discovered that the subject
matter of public administration is less concerned about contemporary challenges and societal
concerns. It questioned the relevance and usefulness of management studies and science
influenced public administration and sought to make public administration more dedicated to
resolve the grievances of the society.
“Important questions which were discussed in the conference concerning relevance are:
 Public administration knowledge is for what? The knowledge should be used to address
the problems of the people.
 Is it the purpose of public administration to facilitate use of administrative knowledge
for perpetuation of political power?
 What standards of decisions do we use to select which questions ought to be studied and
how to study them?
 Who defines out questions and priorities for us?
 To what extent are we aware of the social and moral implications of knowledge in
Public Administration?

139
  What are the uses of Public Administration as a social and political science”? (Marini
1971)
NPA focused on radical curriculum transformation to initiate meaningful studies directed
towards the realities of society.
Values
NPA rejected value neutrality in administrative process because according to NPA the public
administration discipline should highlight and address the concerns of the marginalized,
disadvantaged sections in society.
NPA openly condemned the value neutral and limited stand taken by behavioral
approach dominated political science and management and rigid technocratic ideas oriented
public administration. NPA highlighted the fact that Political Science and Public
Administration in order to become more rational and scientific, remained adhered to value
neutrality which had not only made the disciplines highly narrow and exclusive but also has
proved to be dysfunctional to both the disciplines as well as to society.
Social equity
NPA established the social equity as the most significant and main instrument for the human
development. NPA favoured that administration should treat and provide services to people
on the basis of equity and fairness. Public Administration should be more proactive to social
issues and the concerns should be properly addressed through policy process. The aim of
Public Administration should be to make a more egalitarian society.
Change
The main purpose of NPA is to focus on transforming Public Administration merely from a
theoretical discipline to a more practical change-oriented discipline. By attacking the status
quo and rigidity of the institutions and dominating scienticism in the discipline, NPA sought
the discipline to be more responsive to change occurring in the society.
Anti-goals of New Public Administration by Golembiewski
 Anti-Positivist
NPA rejected the ‘value free’ approach of traditional Public Administration (TPA)
NPA rejected rationalist view of administration.
NPA highlighted the issues with rigidities in administration and explored ways to make it
more adaptable, inclusive, and problem solving
 Anti-technical
It addressed the inherent problem with the discipline of being highly scientific, technical, and
thus rejecting creative and emotive aspects of society being sacrificed to safeguard the logic
and domination of the machine and the system. NPA condemned ignorance of non-technical
aspects for the logic of science and system.
140
 Anti-bureaucratic and anti-hierarchical
NPA rejected the rigid top-down administration, bureaucratic domination and replaced it with
broader yet inclusive and more decentralized approach. NPA showed that how bureaucratic
hierarchy creates obstacles for creativity, innovation and sensitivity of the system to the
people’s concerns and bring rigidities.
 Rejection of value neutrality
NPA rejected the value neutrality of discipline stating that as Public Administration deals
with public and public issues, one cannot detach the value aspects from the discipline. The
subject should always be concerned with value-based matters of society, culture, social
justice and equitable empowerment.
 Rejection of determinism and rationalism
NPA highlighted the problems of being highly deterministic and rationalistic in
administrative process and favoured a more flexible, inclusive and equitable approach for
Public Administration.
 Rejection of Politics administration dichotomy and
NPA explored the dimension of politics administration dichotomy and suggested that there
should a balance of both rather than rejection. According to NPA approach, politics and
administration are interrelated and both together with a proper coordination can address the
societal problems in a more relevant manner.
 Rejection of rigidity of sciences of administration
According to NPA approach, sciences of administration is making the discipline highly
technical, rigid and less people centric. Therefore, the discipline should focus less on sciences
and more pro people approaches.
NPA according to Frederickson:
 “NPA is less generic, more public,
 NPA is less descriptive, more prescriptive,
 NPA is less institutional oriented, more client impact oriented,
 NPA is less neutral, more normative,
 NPA is less scientific”. (Henry 2004)
Focus of NPA

 The focus of NPA is on the broad problems of society. The questions and relevance of
value, ethics are raised by NPA. The challenges of technology, urbanism and social
conflicts should be addressed with amore broad and inclusive approach.

141
  Frederickson argued that “social equity should be the guiding force in political and
administrative decision-making process. It is incumbent on the public servant to be
able to develop and defend criteria and measures of equity and to understand the
impact of public services on the dignity and wellbeing of citizens well-being citizens”.
 NPA highlighted the fact that there was need to revisit the traditional hierarchical
model of bureaucratic organization which is leading to depersonalization and
obejectification of people within the administration.
 Administration should be based on the principles of openness, inclusivity, transparency
and proper communication.
 Fredrickson concluded that “main agreements of the new public administration are 1)
public administrators and public agencies are not and cannot be either neutral or
objective. 2) technology is often dehumanizing. 3) bureaucratic hierarchy is often
ineffective as an organizational strategy. 4) bureaucracies tend toward goal
displacement and survival”.
 Modern concepts of NPA focused on consensus building, democratic administration
and better cooperation and highlighted the fact that administration cannot be confined
to simple administrative authority and bureaucratic rigidity.
 According to Frank Marini, “modern concepts of public administration must be built
on post-behavioural and postpositivist logic- more democratic, more adaptable, more
responsive to changing social economic, and social, economic political
circumstances”. (Marini 1971)
 George Frederickson, in his work ‘Toward a new public administration’, (1977)
mentioned that “the overriding spirit of the new public administration was a moral
tone. Tone the new public administration can be viewed as a call for independence
from both political science (it was not, after all, ever called the new politics of
bureaucracy) and management (since management always had been emphatically
technical rather than normative in approach)”.
 NPA accepts the complexity of society and therefore want a more interdisciplinary
approach of Public Administration.
4 D’s of New Public Administration
 Democratization
 De-bureaucratization
 Decentralization
 Delegation

142
Criticism of NPA

 Many ideas of NPA were repackaging of older ideas with new terminology.
 No defined and structured solutions to problems
 4 D’s largely remained unexplored
 Being too much anti-positivist, and anti-theoretical
 Quickly replaced by newer and modern paradigms like New Public management. New
Public Services, New Public Governance.
Significance of NPA

 It challenged the dominant older concepts and paved the way for modern Public
Administration.
 Established the connections with society,
 Focused on making the discipline more pro people and society centric.
 Highlighted the importance of equity, relevance and positive change of the
administration.
 Created new focus of ‘public administration’

143
 (c) New Public Management (NPM)

2nd Minnowbrook Conference, 1988

The second Minnowbrook conference held in 1988. The major works of the conference
propounded more technology driven, market-oriented ideas should be infused with
administration to make it more efficient and effective in cost effective manner, keeping a
balance with 3E’s. The major idea which came out of the conference was New Public
Management (NPM).
Major themes of Minnowbrook conference were:
 ‘Scientific approach’ vs art of administration
 Offered challenges to the governmental legitimacy by highlighting the problems of
corruption, infrastructural and financial crisis etc.
Regarding the problems of traditional models of administration and inadequacies of NPA, a
new managerial approach emerged in Public Administration which is known as New Public
management (NPM). NPM sought to bring revival and relevant changes in public sector by
bringing the private sector managerial reforms. It maintained that private sector is more
equipped and efficient to bring changes in the static administration in public sector by solving
the problems of old paradigms.
Shortcomings of old paradigms:
 Hierarchical, single, rigid organization
 Inflexibility and delay in service delivery,
 Dominating bureaucratic structure and culture
 Trust deficit on governance
 Financial instability and recurring fiscal crisis
 Inability to match effects of Globalization
NPM highlighting the above-mentioned issues, introduced the principle of ‘management’ as
more dynamic, and efficiency, economic and effectiveness as fundamental domain of
management.
The idea of NPM was first developedby David Osborne & Ted Geabler in the book
‘Reinventing Government’. NPM as a term was first coined by Christopher Hood in 1989 to
define distinctively the administrative structures of Australia, New Zealand, the United
States, Canada, the United Kingdom, in 1970s -1980s.

144
Definitions and Principles of NPM
According to Osborne and Geabler “New Public Management refers to a cluster of
contemporary ideas and practices that seek, at their core, to use private sector and business
approaches in the public sector. The basic idea is to run government like a business”.
Christopher Hood (1991), characterize NPM’s principal themes to include:
 “A shift away from an emphasis on policy toward an emphasis on measurable
performance.
 A shift away from reliance on traditional bureaucracies toward loosely coupled, quasi
quasi- autonomous units and competitively tendered services.
 A shift away from an emphasis on development and investment toward cost-cutting.
 Allowing public managers greater “freedom to manage”; according to private sector
corporate practice; practice and
 A shift away from classic command-and-control regulation toward self-regulation”.
(Hood 1991)
According to Christopher Hood, the 7 points of NPM are:
1. “Hands on professional management
2. Implicit standards and measures for performance
3. Emphasize on output controls
4. Disaggregation of units in the public sector
5. Greater competition
6. Private sector styles of management practices
7. Greater discipline and parsimony in resources use, cutting direct costs, raising labor
discipline, limiting compliance costs to business- doing more with less”. (Hood 1991)
NPM suggested the private sector managerial models, style, managerial processes to bring
reform in public sector. NPM sought to improve the service delivery and efficiency of public
institutions by shrinking the role of the government and more services were being advocated
by the private sector. NPM highlighted the shortcoming, and failures of public sector
performance, and addressed the issues by locating the issues in the processes of public sector
governmental works and thus, public administration.
Lemay mentioned that “it starts from the premise that traditional, bureaucratically
organized public administration is ‘broke’ and consequently the public has lost faith in
government”. Lemay defined “managerialism as refers to an entrepreneurial approach to
public management, one that emphasizes the rights of managers to run the organization and
the application of reinvigorated scientific-management techniques”. (Lemay 2002)

145
According to Osborne and Geabler, the main features of NPM are:
 “Based on New institutional economic theory.
 Efficiency orientation; Use of markets, competition, contracts and privatization.
 Based on management theory; “let or make the managers manage”,
 Combination of centralization & autonomy”. (Osborne and Gaebler 1992)
On the basis of these features, David Osborne and Ted Gaebler made a proposal for NPM as:
1. ”Government must promote competition among service- providers.
2. It must empower citizens by pushing control out of the bureaucracy into the
community.
3. It must measure the performance of their agencies focusing on outcomes, not on inputs.
4. It must be motivated by goals, not by rules and regulations.
5. It re- defines its clients as customers and offers them choices.
6. It must prevent problems before these emerge, rather than simply offering them services
afterwards.
7. It must direct its energy towards earning money not simply spending it.
8. It must decentralize authority and promote participative management
9. It must prefer market mechanisms to bureaucratic mechanisms.
10. It must focus on providing public services but on catalyzing all sectors in the society-
public, private, voluntary-into action to solve the community’s problems”. (Osborne
and Gaebler 1992)
“Reinventing Government: ten principles to bring massive governmental reform
principles
 Catalytic government: steering rather than rowing
 Community-owned government: empowering rather than serving
 Competitive government: injecting competition into service delivery
 Mission-driven government: transforming rule-driven organizations
 Results-oriented government: funding outcomes, not inputs
 Customer-driven government: meeting the needs of the customer not their
bureaucracy.
 Enterprising government rather than spending
 Anticipatory government: prevention rather than cure
 Decentralized government: from hierarchy to participation and teamwork

146
  Market-oriented government: leveraging change through the market”
(Osborne and Gaebler 1992: 35-282)
NPM reforms shifted the focus from traditional public administration to modern public
administration in the light of public management reforms. The principles of management
reforms are guided by political, social, economic, and technological factors. The countries
which went through NPM route have experienced fiscal and governmental crisis and thus
ways were adopted through NPM to bring more cost effective and efficient government
delivery. A. Nasrullah mentioned that “most of developing countries, reforms in public
administration and management have been driven more by external pressures and have taken
place in the context of structural adjustment programmes. NPM-type reforms include the
ascendancy of new liberal ideas from the late 1970s, the development of information
technology, and the growth and use of international management consultants as advisors on
reforms”. (Nasrullah 2005)
According to Kickert, NPM has following characteristics:
 “Strengthening steering functions at the center.
 Devolving authority, providing flexibility.
 Ensuring performance, control and accountability.
 Improving the management of human resources.
 Optimizing information technology.
 Improving the quality of regulation.
 Providing responsive service.
 Developing competition and choice
 Emphasis on increasing adoption of managerial practices of private sector in public
administration.
 Promotion of competition within public sector.
 Greater use of contract arrangements within the government as well as outside it.
 Emphasis on results rather than procedures.
 Formulation of explicit or definite standards and measures of performance.
 Emphasis on separation of administrative units.
 A shift away from policy to management.
 Encouragement of lack of wastefulness in public expenditure”.
According to Nicholas Henry some more ideas of NPM are:
 “Putting customers first,
 Making service organizations first compete,

147
  Creating market dynamics,
 Using market mechanisms to solve problems,
 Empowering employees to get results,
 Decentralization decision making power,
 Streamlining the budget process,
 Decentralization personnel policy, and
 Streamlining procurement” (Henry 2004)
According to Nicholas Henry (2004), “the new public management is an expanded view of
reinventing entrepreneurial government”. He, like many other scholars, maintained that rise
of NPM movement has led to the rise of entrepreneurial governance.
According to Henry, “the root the NPM is composed of the following six ideas:
 Government should be entrepreneurial and improve the quality of its service.
 Government should collaborate and work with other government and the nonprofit
and private sectors to achieve social goals.
 Government should judge its performance with measurable result.
 Government should improve its accountability to the public interest, which should be
understood in terms of law, community, and shared values.
 Government should empower citizens and public employees alike.
 Government should anticipate and solve problems”. (Henry 2004)
Focus of NPM
 Scaling down the public sector in order to properly allocate the available resources for
optimal utilization. The range of the public sector is too extensive and comprehensive
and this makes it hard to manage scare resources.
 Understanding and streamlining the governmental activities. One most suitable way is
to contracting out.
 Reengineering the administrative and bureaucratic structure on market principles for
making it more relevant and pro people.
Problems of NPM
1. Too much importance to economic theory and market principles is creating more
complexity. Citizens, clients, or consumers, the public private dichotomy is keeping the
inherent tension intact.
2. Complex results are difficult to be measured.

148
3. Focus on Neo-Taylorism is making the subject away from people and social centric
issues.
4. Reducing the accountability
5. Implementational problems with management pertaining to performance evaluation.
6. Ambiguities related to thematic interpretation of NPM.

149
 (d) New Public Service (NPS)
Over a period of time, a new paradigm in public administration has emerged where focus
have been shifted to making people the central of all governance and administrative activity.
The call is to involve public more in the government and trying to transform the government
to be “by the People, for the People”.
New Public Service (NPS) by Denhardt and Denhardt
The model of New Public Service has been developed by Janet V. Denhardt and Robert B.
Denhardt, with public as the center of all activity. The basic idea of NPS is to serve the
citizens in a more responsive manner based on the community needs, societal issues and
citizens’ expectations. The idea of NPS is to treat ‘public as citizens in a democracy, and not
as clients or customers’ as with the case with NPA and NPM respectively.
According to Denhardt and Denhardt, “public administrators are not simply in it for a
paycheck or to find efficiencies in government – or due to an ideological desire to reduce the
size of government. Instead, New Public Service administrators do it because they have a
desire to contribute to society – to assist the public by facilitating democracy and ensuring an
active role for the community in preserving, enhancing and, most of all, defining the public
interest”. (Denhardt and Denhardt, 2014 p. 29)
NPS theory is based on the principle of leadership and management which is
contextualized and driven by local specific issues focusing on citizens/voters.
Focus of NPS
Denhardt and Denhardt postulated “that while the new public management has been touted as
an alternative to the old public administration, it actually has much in common with the
mainstream model of public administration, administration specifically a dependence on and
commitment to models of rational choice. So, while there are clearly differences between the
old public administration and the new public management, the basic theoretical foundation of
these two ‘mainstream’ versions of public administration and public policy are in fact very
much alike”.
Denhardt and Denhardt offered “a synthesis of the ideas that are opposed to NPM, and
their model for governance expanded the traditional role of the policy administrator as lone
arbiter of public interest to a key actor within the larger system of governance”. (Denhardt
and Denhardt, 2014)
NPM was based on the idea of rational choice, Denhardt and Denhardt revamped seven
principles, namely:
(1) “serve citizens, not customers
(2) seek the public interest,
(3) value citizenship over entrepreneurship,

150
 (4) think strategically, act democratically,
(5) recognize that accountability is not simple,
(6) serve rather than steer, and
(7) value people, not just productivity” (Denhardt and Denhardt, 2014)
Theme of NPS
The whole theme of NPS was based on:
(1) theories of democratic citizenship.
Beyond the idea of self-interest, the NPS adopts a broader and more comprehensive, people
centric approach. It requires a better understanding of public matters and creates a sense of
trust and belongingness. It develops a more community specific approach by developing a
bond with public.
In this regards, King and Stivers (1998) propounded that “administrators should see
citizens as citizens (rather than merely voters, voters’ clients, or customers), should share
authority and reduce control, and should trust in the efficacy of collaboration. In contrast to
NPM based managerialist calls for greater efficiency, king and stivers suggest that public
managers should seek greater responsive-ness and a corresponding increase in citizen trust”.
(2) models of community and civil society
NPS focused on the fact that often citizens felt high level of frustration, trust deficit and
discouragement that they had been gradually becoming distant from the administrative
system by a well-structured, networked professional high level of politicians, powerful
corporates, professional managers, lobbyists, media, and corporate elites. Often citizens saw
within the system as that unit whose votes and voices have no value and no longer make any
difference. NPS highlighted the issue of voters’ lack of trust in the system and gradual
alienation. Therefore, the whole approach of NPS is to really make. the people centric
service-oriented machinery work
(3) Effect of humanism in orhanization and the new public administration, and
Denhardt and Denhardt in their article suggested that “over the past twenty-five years public
years, administration theorists have joined other disciplines in suggesting that traditional
hierarchical approaches to social organization are restrictive in their view of human behavior,
and they have joined in a critique of bureaucracy and a search for alternative approaches to
management and organization organization. Collectively, these approaches have sought to
fashion public organizations less dominated by issues of authority and control and more
attentive to the needs and concerns of internal and external constituents”.
The NPS focused on:
 the issue of organization humanism
 More attention to the needs and concerns of external.

151
  More comprehensive efforts in civic engagement by developing a better
understanding between government and the community.
 Enhancement of social cohesion and trust among citizens within the society.
 Creating strong networks based on social capital to build even stronger networks,
more debates and dialogue process by educating the citizens about the contemporary
issues, challenges of democratic governance, more citizens’ participation in the
governance
(4) postmodern public administration.
NPS focused on creating the idea of discipline where the problems are more tend to be
resolved through dialogue, communication etc. than through ‘scientific objective’ parameters
or rationality based public administration and policy analysis’.
Conclusion
To sum up, as there are constant changes which is happening, the government will also be
affected by the same as it was in past. Therefore, new ways of proper steering with more
participation of citizens, more localized and more people centric governance needs to be
sought after. More democratic, welfare oriented and social equitable approach has to be
associated with NPS to make it realistic and viable. In the words of Denhardt and Denhardt
“While it’s important to maintain a concern for legal and political standards and economic
criteria, it is imperative that we place at the center of our work a concept of the public service
based on and fully integrated with citizen discourse and the public interest. We should put
democracy first”.
References
Hood, Christopher. (1995) “The ‘New Public Management’ in the Eighties.” Accounting,
Organization and Society 20(2-3): 93-109.
Denhardt, Janet V. and Robert B. Denhardt. (2003) The New Public Service. Amonk. NY: M.
E. Sharpe.
Henry, Nicholas (2004) Public Administration and Public affairs, Prentice Hall, NY.
Kristen Norman-Major (2006) Balancing the Four Es; or Can We Achieve Equity for Social
Equity in Public Administration? Hamline University. JPAE 17(2), 233–252
Osborne, David, and Ted Gaebler (1992) Reinventing Government. Reading, MA: Addison-
Wesley.
Osborne, David, with Peter Plastrik (1997) Banishing Bureaucracy. Reading, MA: Addison-
Wesley.
Pollitt, Christopher (1990) Managerialism and the Public Service. Cambridge, England:
Basil-Blackwell.

152
 (e) Good Governance: Concept and Context
Bijendra Jha

1. Good Governance: What is the Concept?

2. How to get rid of Poor Governance? Few Suggestions of the World Bank
3. Context for Good Governance: Theoretical Roots
4. Features of Good Governance
5. New Trends
6. Conclusion

The World Bank report of 1989 first time mentioned challenges of development, economic
crisis and public sector performance in the Sub-Saharan African countries. The report titled
as ‘Sub-Saharan Africa: From Crisis to Sustainable Development’ cited that ‘underlying the
litany of Africa’s development problems is a crisis of governance’ (World Bank, 1989). The
report has observed that the Sub-Saharan African countries was characterized by the
centralization of power, corruption, unresponsive governmental bureaucracy, self-serving
politicians, absence of countervailing power, personalized and patronized politics,
unaccountability and opaqueness in developmental processes, controlled information, lack of
free press, authoritarian centralized political regime, and coercive and arbitrary state power
structures all contributed in the crisis. The report had emphasized that these crises must be
resisted and it can be resisted through focusing on governance.
Emphasizing on urgence of governance, the report (1989) on Good Govrnance had noted
that better governance needs political regeneration that can attack corruption from the highest
to the lowest levels. To promote governance, it is an urgent requirement to strengthen
accountability, to encourage public debate and to nurture a free press. In addition, governance
can be realized through empowering women’s groups, farmer’s associations, non-
governmental organizations (NGOs), co-operatives as well as by fostering grassroots and
local democracy for sound development management (World Bank 1989). The report had
noted that there is only one motive behind the concept of governance that is development.
The World Bank expected broad major structural reforms viz., political reform, judicial
reform, bureaucratic reform, and finally market reform to bring governance as a reality. In
addition, it focused on decentralization, accountability, participation, legal framework for
development, institutional arrangement to crack corruption, people’s participation especially
women in the decision-making process, inclusion of co-operative associations, non-
governmental organizations, farmers’ association and women’s groups in the development
process.

153
 Linking with the West promoted neo-liberal market, it has noted that ‘market mechanism
is important, but they must go hand in hand with good governance.’ Good governance had
been explained as ‘a public service that is efficient, a judicial system that is reliable, and an
administration that is accountable to its public’ (World Bank, 1989). Further, the concept of
good governance evolved in the next report of the World Bank titled as ‘Governance and
Development’ in 1992 that elucidated what is good governance. The report ‘Governance and
Development’ (1992) noted that ‘good governance is an essential complement to sound
economic policy.’ The report has given responsibility to the government of the third world
countries for ‘efficient and accountable management’ in order to execute sound economic
development. For the World Bank, good governance is ‘synonymous to sound development
management’.
It was equated with the term sound economic management for better development
characterized by an institutional framework conducive to growth, poverty alleviation and
environmental protection, public accountability, citizens’ participation, adequate access to
legal remedies, transparency and role of the government in ensuring sound development
management (World Bank 1992). It has noted that it is poverty, illiteracy and weak
institutions that makes sound economic development more complicated and problematic in
the third world countries. Citizens need to ask for good governance and the government
needs to be responsive to the citizens’ demand.
World Bank report (1992) ‘Governance and Development’ had identified four features of
good governance viz., first, public sector management, secondly, accountability, third is legal
framework for development, and fourth is transparency and information. In addition, the
report had recognized a participatory approach to public policy, programme and its
implementation, military expenditures and human rights.
The Bank report contrasted good governance with ‘poor governance’ that is held
responsible for the lack of sound development management in third world countries. Poor
governance includes corruption, weak public institutions, and opaque system. It has also
noted that arbitrary policy making, corrupt bureaucracy and legal system, excess of executive
power, lack of countervailing power, and corruption are major causes of poor governance.
According to the World Bank salient features of poor governance are as follows:
1. Failure to make a clear separation between what is public and what is private,
hence, a tendency to divert public resources for private gains;
2. Failure to establish a predictable framework of law and government behaviour
conducive to development, or arbitrariness in the application of rule of law;
3. Excessive rules, regulation, licensing requirements, and so forth, which impede the
functioning of markets and encourage rent seeking;
4. Priority inconsistent with development, resulting in a misallocation of resources;
and

154
 5. Excessively Narrowly based or nontransparent decision-making.
1. How to get rid of poor governance? Few suggestions of the World Bank
To get rid of the poor governance, The World Bank report (1992) had suggested four areas
need to be looked at afresh viz., i) public sector management, ii) accountability, iii) legal
framework for development, and iv) transparency and information.
a. Refining Public Sector Management: The WB report 1992 observed that the
development is always poor when capacity of the public sector to manage the
economy and to deliver public services is weak
The WB (1992:13) emphasized on multiple reforms like civil services reform, legal
reform, investment reform, and it suggested the third world countries to ‘rationalized
the size of public sector enterprise; privatized, restructure, and liquidate public
companies. Decentralization and tax reforms are the additional majors that the WB
suggested to opt for an effective and efficient public sector.
b. Accountability: Accountability refers to holding public officials answerable for their
action. The WB has noted that accountability is found where rulers readily delegate
authority, where subordinate officials exercise their autonomy. Political leaders are
responsible for their action to the governed. Accountability is necessary throughout
the entire system including government, economy, and administration.
The WB (1992:13) emphasized on three features of accountability: i) the micro-level
accountability as role of the state has expanded; ii) the focus of public accountability
should be on inputs rather than outputs or effects; iii) Legal accountability for all
actions of the political leaders, bureaucracy, and government agencies. It has noted
that without financial and overall economic accountability, the government efficiency
is poor and a greater chance for corruption. It sought greater financial accountability
in all development and investment projects.
c. Decentralization: Decentralization is one of the measures to ensure accountability.
The World Bank report (1992:21) has observed that decentralization is a common
phenomenon in countries of eastern Europe, Asia, and Latin America for sharing
power. It has noted the important role of the citizens participation, increasing role of
voluntary organizations and non-governmental organizations in policy making and its
implementation for better governance. The WB had emphasized a decentralized and
participatory model of development instead of centralized planned development.
d. Legal-Framework and concept of Development: It had focused basically on two
components of rule of law: first, instrumental that means formal legal system must be
functional and secondly, substantial that means content of the law like justice (for
example, due process), fairness (the principle of equality), and liberty (civil and
political rights) must prevail. In the WB’s views, a fair legal system is always
conducive for balanced development.

155
 e. Information and Transparency: The World Bank (1992: 39) had noted that the
‘competitive market economy requires that economic actors have access to relevant,
timely and reliable information.’ The report has recognized that in all countries, the
government is the primary source of information. Information related to the market
economy and its current situation, and about government policies and intentions is
central. Although the government has legitimate reasons to withhold certain important
information like information related to security of the state, it needs to provide all
kinds of governmental information for greater transparency. Information and
transparency are important for economic efficiency and to curb corruption.
In the last four decades, there is emergence of many principles of good governance. Henk
Addink (2020) in his work ‘Good Governance: Concept and Context’ has explained six core
principles of good governance viz., i) properness; ii) transparency; ii) participation; iv)
effectiveness; v) accountability and vi) human rights. Addink argued that ‘good governance
has raised the third dominant concept in the modern state’, the first is rule of law and second
is democracy that have become ‘important for the legitimacy of the state authorities.’
Context for Good Governance: Theoretical Roots
In the developing countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America, state led planned economic
development dominated in the first four decades, 1950s-1980s. In these four decades, the
State initiated the process of development, modernization and nation-building. Although state
led planned developmental strategies did not deliver expected results, it gave many
unexpected economic problems like black economy, opaque governmental administrative
processes, rise of administrative corruption and sluggish process of progress. Responding to
the sluggish process of planned development, there were emerging voices from many corners.
a. In the 1970s and 1980s, Ronald Regan and Margret Thatcher’s neo-liberal economic
policies, New International Economic Order (NIEO), the World Bank (WB) and
International Monetary Fund (IMF) call for economic reform especially the Washington
Consensus (1989), the decline of socialist economic policies, all gave impetus to rethink
on agenda of development.
b. The well-known free market economists and political philosophers (the New Right
theorists) like Friedrich Hayek, Milton Friedman, Ayn Rand, and Robert Nozick
attacked over-centralization of economy, welfareism and planned development, and
argued in favour of market-led development. They strongly advocated in favour of
privatization, spending cuts (especially cuts in welfare programmes and schemes), tax
cuts (especially in the direct taxes), and opening and freeing the economy.
c. Later, the public choice theorists like Vincent Ostrom advocated for de-
bureaucratization, institutional pluralism and participatory decision-making. The well-
known theorist of reinventing government, David Osborne and Tad Gabler (1993) in his
work ‘Reinvesting Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the

156
 Public Sector’ advised how the public sector can perform better by reinvesting
government from bureaucratic to entrepreneurial.
d. In the1980s and 1990s, the environmental movement moved the idea of ‘sustainable
development’. In addition, there were several parallel movements like human rights
movements, women movements were going on in various parts of the world. It had
greater influence on formulation and articulation of the idea of good governance.
Features of Good Governance
There four salient features of the concept of Good Governance given below:
1. Participation: Strengthening democratic institutions and participation of women,
poor, tribes, aboriginal groups and disadvantaged groups are very important
components of good governance. Participation can be ensured through local self-
government and devolution of power and responsibility to the local levels. The
representation of each group is important for inclusive development and their
participation in decision-making processes and its implementation is always desirable.
Participation needs to be informed and organized. This means civil and political rights
must be ensured so that individuals and groups can participate in the development
process.
2. Rule of Law: Good governance requires fair legal approach for conducive balanced
development. Rule of law as a procedure as well as philosophical aspects like justice
and fairness require for sound and inclusive development management. In addition, it
also requires protection of human rights particularly for minorities and vulnerable
groups. Impartial enforcement of rule of law requires an independent judiciary and
incorruptible police force. OECD has noted the characteristics of good law as clear,
coherent, effective and accessible.
3. Transparency: Transparency means decision taken and it has been implemented as
per rules and regulations. All information regarding the decision-making process and
its implementation are open to all. It also means that information is freely available and
directly accessible to those who will be affected by such decisions and their
enforcement. It also means that enough information is provided and that it is provided
in easily understandable forms and media.
4. Responsiveness: Good Governance requires that institutions are ready to serve all
stakeholders within a stipulated time. By responsiveness means government
institutions are responding citizens and stakeholder demand in order to be effective.
New Trends in Good Governance
In the neo-liberal globalized world, good governance is focusing on many ideas like
corporate governance, poverty reduction, and human rights. Here, the paper will focus on
relationships between good governance and poverty reduction and concept of human rights.

157
Focus here on strengthening the institutional measures to reduce poverty and protect human
rights.
The World Bank first report in 1989 had recognized that protection of human rights is
salient for good governance. The UN approach to protect human rights is part of the agenda
of development, therefore, it is an integral part of the notion of good governance.
Conclusion
The dimension of the concept of good governance has become so broad that it has lost its
shape. It is the idea that is being accommodated in all conceptual ideas viz, democracy,
development, administration, corporate ventures, and list goes on. However, it has a focus
theme as time to time reflected in various international agencies reports. Every year, there are
more than thousands of reports related to good governance issued by various national and
international agencies. In third world countries, politicians advocate minimum government
and maximum governance. It means incorporation of various agencies like civil societies
groups, non-governmental organization (NGOs), private organization, voluntary
organization, community-based organization, women’s group, farmers’ group, religious
groups etc. in order to pursue development. Emphasizing on the importance of good
governance, Henk Addink (2020: 24) has maintained that ‘good governance norms are
necessary to prevent maladministration and corruption’.

Bibliography
Addink, Henk (2020). Good Governance: Concept and Context. London: Oxford University
Press.
United Nations Development Programme (1997). Reconceptualizing Governance. Discussion
Paper 2, New York.
United Nations (2007). Good Governance Practices for the Protection of Human Rights.
Geneva: UN.
United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and The Pacific (UNESCAP).
World Bank (1989). Sub-Saharan Africa from Crisis to Sustainable Development: A Long-
Term Perspective Study. November, Washington DC: WB.
---. (1991). World Development Report: The Challenges of Development. New York: Oxford
University Press.
---. 1992. Governance and Development. Washington, DC: WB.
---.1994. The WB in Governance: The WB Experience. Washington, DC: WB.

158
 (f) Feminist Perspective in Public Administration
Dr. Rinki and Dr. Devarati Roy Chowdhury

 Introduction
 History of Feminism: “the three waves”
 Feminist approach in governance
o Gender of Governance
o Governance of Gender
 Feminist perspective in Public Administration
 Conclusion
Introduction
Feminist perspective is one of the most prominent perspective which examine the power
dynamics of the society based on gender and analyse the position and functions of women
and men in society. It focuses on giving space and voice to women and highlights that how
men and women both play a crucial role and thus should be treated equally.
As social movement and as an ideology, feminism investigates women’s inferior
position, and the discrimination and subjugation women face because of the gender biases.
‘Feminism’ has been derived from the Latin word ‘femina’ which means female. Ferguson
writes that “feminism aimed at defining, establishing and sustaining the gender equality in all
spheres of life which includes equal rights and equal opportunities for women and men in
political, economic and social realm to overcome the discrimination against women.
Feminism as an ideology has never been subscribed to women only. There are women who
are not feminist and men who are, so feminism should not be remained identical to ‘for
women’ only”.
Feminist perspective uses gender as a lens to understand the social dynamics and existing
differences and discrimination arising out of it. Gender grows from cultural ideas which
stipulates social meaning, connotation and expectations. It a complex combination of society
defined roles, social identities, performances, expressions leading to a gendered meaning.
Gender is a social fabric which is based on the preconceived notion of differences based
on sex and assumptions of power derived from such unequal values. Sex refers to the
biological definition of being male or female according to one’s reproductive organs and
functions based. Whereas gender, as described above, is shaped and produced by social
environment and experiences. According to Metcalfe “the main focus of gender is not on
women per se but on power relations between men and women, their access to resources and
decision-making power”. This shows the various ways in which the gender identities are
constituted differently according to social and historical context. A study of gender relations

159
and organization in the context of globalization is also political since feminist modes of
inquiry rest on transformative agendas for social development and change (Metcalfe, Rees.
2010).
Feminism highlights and investigates the power dynamics in the structural gender
inequality created by the public private sphere. Through the gender analysis, the perspective
examines the ‘connects’ present in the mainstream concepts and help realize the marginalized
women’s voices and spaces and how these can be heard and presented as mainstream theory.
Feminism considers position of women as primary focus. Patriarchy, male domination
present in the social relationships is historically has remained main reasons for the
disadvantageous position of women. Gilligan maintains that “patriarchy leads to the
systematic discrimination, exploitation and multiple deprivations of women, when they
practice and assert their free will, rights, power and economic self-reliance”. Systematic
difference in family contributes to gender inequality as stereotypically public sphere is for
men and private for women.
Thus, feminism is considered as an intellectual investigation and a political movement
that seeks equality for all and justice for women and promotes social justice. Feminist inquiry
provides a very comprehensive and dynamic range of analysis on social, cultural, and
political phenomena.
History of Feminism: “the three waves”
The ‘first wave’ of feminism gradually evolved with the suffrage movement of the 1800’s.
The fast mobilization of the women suffrage in whole Europe and the beginning in US led to
the growing concerns of equal rights for women, particularly the right of suffrage that is right
to vote.
It focused on mandated inequalities specifically, women’s lack of voting rights, equal
access, equal rights and equal opportunities etc. The first wave of feminism, feminists sought
to pursue their goals within the existing social structures and didn’t address inequalities
present in the society.
The “Second Wave” had begun with the publication of Betty Friedan’s book, The
Feminine Mystique (1963) which talked about ‘the problem that has no name’. The problems
women were facing in a marriage, inside the household, domestic violence started getting
highlighted. According to Moore “the wave was centred around women’s inequality
concerning family, sexuality and work along with political rights. It emphasized the full
gender equality and attempted to abolish the systematic inequalities that create discrimination
between the sexes”. This wave dealt with wider range of issues such as family life, the
workplace, sexuality, reproductive rights, rape, and other unofficial inequalities, civil rights,
health, welfare etc. Moore further explained that “the personal is political’ caught the
attention of the world that signifies the first attempt to break down the gendered division
between the private sphere attributed to women and the public sphere of men in order to

160
create equality between the sexes. In doing so, the gendered spaces of men/women in the
public/private sphere respectively can get blurred”. (Moore 1994)
The “third wave” had begun as early of 1980s. A new feminist movement as the
postmodern feminism has being recognized. The third wave extended the feminist movement
in understandings and experiences of the world that are shaped by where individuals are
situated within it in terms of class, gender, race, sexual identity, etc. and creating new ideas,
action across race, ethnicity, class, culture, community. It generated the much consciousness
that how to deal with differences among women who are placed differently. This wave argues
that the hegemonic culture of patriarchy is not only hiding but also increasing the differences
that are present among women with the differences with men. It also maintains that one
should identify, understand and embrace the differences, the situations, the locales in which
the women are positioned and different ideas, dialogues must be exchanged amongst the
different groups and these diversities must be accepted. Third wave feminism engages with
issues and concerns of oppression, such as workplace sexism, sexual harassment, body
shaming. It has also tended to be more diverse by addressing the specific concerns of people
of colour, sexuality, queer ideas, LGBT social movements.
Feminist Approach in Governance
The feminist perspective uses the gender analysis category to understand the gender issues
and related problems in governance. Public administration theory and practice is considered
to have masculine bias and feminist perspective promotes the gender equality by highlighting
the systematic difference of men and women in work opportunities, work standards and
theoretical approach. In the words of Gerda Lerner feminist perspective in administration
“believes in a system of ideas and practices which assumes that men and women must share
equally in the work, in the privileges, in defining and dreaming of the world. Feminism is all
about creating a space for heterogeneous gendered perspective; about perceiving and working
to change gendered power relations”. (Lerner 1984)
Gender of Governance
Since history, one can see that the private and public domain is dominated by men. The
sphere of administration too has the same patriarchal mindset and driven by masculine
hegemony and have led to the institutionalized exclusion of women from administration and
women from politics. In this regard, Sheila Rowbotham mentioned that ‘how women are
‘hidden from history’ and exactly the same is getting produced in public and private sphere.
And politics being in the domain of public were always have restricted women at bay.
The main argument which is given here is that politics and administration is male centric
and basically related to male activities and women completely lack the basic skills, expertise
and knowledge which is required for proper governance and politics.
Subsequently, theories and methods developed out of such understanding assume a
masculine standpoint and understand the male dominated governance sphere as very
universal and normal.
161
 Gradually, feminist scholars like Kate Millet, Carole Pateman not only challenged the
public private dichotomy as baseless and the private is the first place from where all the
power and gender inequalities begin but also highlighted the importance of gender equality in
governance issues. Gender is all about power and through the use of power only the
inequalities and masculine hegemony is created and reinforced.
The politics, the administrative state and its governance also are dominated by the
masculine hegemony and prefers men over women and restricting women to domestic chores
(cooking, clothing) thus devaluing the presence, contribution and issues of women.
Governance of Gender
Feminist perspective through the gender analysis is highlighting that how the masculine
domination is not only prevalent in administrative theoretical understating but also it is
evident in practice. It assesses the effect of such understanding on men and women work
culture, state policies and government measures.
Neglecting women’s role, their contribution, devaluing the leadership qualities of
women, unacceptance of women in positions of authority are getting questioned. From the
embedded gender inequality in the structure of organisation (gender of governance) and
getting highlighted in the administration (governance of gender) has focused on systematic
exclusion of women from the administration. The works of feminist scholars show that only
highlighting the inequalities and discrimination theoretical would not change the condition of
women for better rather the very basic assumptions and system in which these theories are
getting evolved has to be questioned.
That is why a new theoretical lens, a more dynamic paradigmatic shift is required so that
without any hegemonic biases the administrative theory and practice can be analysed, and a
more inclusive and equitable just approach can be created to not only understand the
administrative world and politics and also a more balanced politics can be practiced.
Feminist Perspective in Public Administration
The feminist theories in public administration can be broadly categorised into two types. First
is descriptive theories which focus on the discrimination against women and study the
comparative difference between male and female experiences in public sphere and promotes
women’s right in public sphere like better job facility, equal treatment, career growth,
elimination of sexual harassment etc.
The second category is of conceptual theories which question the gender biases in public
administration by examining the methods, concepts, fundamental theoretical features.
Camilla Stivers defined that feminist perspective in public administration as “it raises the
crucial questions regarding position, power, inequalities of gender and its relevance in public
administration. It seeks to research that how and to what extent gender defines and informs
the theory and practices in public administration in the light of the fact that women are
unequally represented and the integration of the gender analysis into the public policies are

162
highly undermined. It seeks to capture the relation between structure and practices of
administration, the interplay between the structure and gender”. (Stivers 1990) Few
prominent feminist scholars in Public Administration are Camilla Stivers, Delysa Bernier,
Mary E. Guy, Joan Acker, Carol Gilligan, Hutchinson, Kathy Ferguson etc.
The most recognized, discussed and significant contribution came from Camilla Stivers
who dealt with questions of women’s issues in the administration discourse in her path
breaking work ‘Gender Images in Public Administration: Legitimacy and the Administrative
State’ which has provided a broader perspective which would legitimize gender dimension in
the discourse. Camilla Stivers encouraged the ‘’study of the problematic aspect of gender
issues in public administration by focussing on history and current distribution of women in
public sector roles. She studied “glass ceiling” issues, leadership and gender biases and
gendered administrative reform approach’’. (Stivers 1993)
Guy (1994) mentions that “women have remained disadvantaged in the workplace by
unequal power dynamics best explained through metaphors of glass ceilings, glass walls,
sticky floors, and trap doors. Glass ceilings and glass walls refer to job segregation ways
between men and women. Glass ceilings highlights invisible, non-tangible (think cultural)
factors which cause women to be disproportionately neglected and overlooked when it comes
to job promotion into powerful decision-making positions. Glass walls refers to the intangible
barriers (women lacking the skill) that make it difficult for women to move ahead in jobs
traditionally supposed to be men’s forte. On similar line, Sticky floors refers to those factors
which make it difficult for women to move up the career ladder. For example, women having
maternity leave, childcare responsibilities etc. are often overlooked for promotion. Trap doors
means obstacles which cause women to “fall through the floor” in terms of career
advancement”.
Stivers wrote that “public administration is structurally male despite its apparent
neutrality. The state depends on the household but hardly acknowledges the political
relevance of domestic issues. Women are “citizens” but in reality, their participation in public
and political life is relatively less”. She calls it a ‘gender paradox’ that “constitutes the
dilemma for women in public administrative state. These paradoxes devalue women’s
contribution and concerns and limit their political and social freedom”. She also highlights
that examining gender implies not limited to gender per se but also taking into account other
factors as well like race, class etc. Stiver explains that “the gender lens encourages us to see
the underlying assumptions that shape concepts and conclusions. This lens tells us that the
public dimensions in this discourse are gendered rather than neutral. Public administration
involves exercise of public power which has to justify itself too. But this publicness is
problematic as it is a product of the historical understanding of public as male preserve which
is far distinct from private space which is for women exclusively. Women’s domestic chores
are not of political concern, not of public interest”. (Stivers 1993)
The masculine character of the administrative state gives minimal attention to the
women’s concerns and remained insensitive to gender which is a systemic problem sustained

163
by power relations in society. These masculine features also provide political, economic
advantage to men. That is why is so important to bring out new ideas, new actors, new
agencies of leadership, virtue professionals, ideas of ethics and normativity in administration,
as all suffer from cultural masculinity, highlighting the women and overall marginalized
sections contribution and significant presence in politics and society at large.
Stivers maintains that “leadership is a function of hierarchy and merely increasing the
numbers of female leaders is not going to change the situation is not enough. We have to
think the ways by which we can enhance the image of leadership as a facilitator of share for
agency clients, for citizens, and for other lower rank officials in organizational decision
making”. (Stivers 1993)
Thus, according to Stivers, “the virtuous public administrator must be the administrator-
as-citizen who will see herself or himself as “partner with” rather than “guardian over”. The
idea is to have a comprehensive horizontal rather than vertical relation between administrator
and citizens and the conceptual division between public and domestic sphere as permeable
and mutually supportive”. (Stivers 1993)
Camilla Stivers showed that how feminist interpretation can examine the realities of
women’s position in administrative state, in bureaucracy and the obstacles women face. She
highlights that public administration literature lack consciousness about the unequal
experiences two sexes witness and therefore she promoted the concepts like ‘the existence of
the sexual dynamics’, ‘depersonalized power in bureaucracy’, and ‘diverse workforce’ etc.
(Stivers 1993)
Janet R. Hutchinson, one of the leading scholars in the discipline has described that there
are public administration suffers from gendered masculinity resulting into male biased
theories, actors and agencies creating challenges for women centric issues to get a place in
mainstream discourse. She suggested a multiple strategy in public administration which can
be identified that helps to create a more coherent, regular feminist public administration
perspective. Few of the strategies are participation of women in administration, politics,
knowledge production and work leading to the equality. She also points out that one has to
make a very conscious effort to overcome and not fall for the systemic process where women
themselves have created a very exclusive category of ‘working women trying to fit in the so-
called mainstream category of male workforce’ which once they have tried to eliminate. One
another important strategy Janet focuses on incorporating the dynamic ‘feminist lens’ to the
discipline so that a new paradigm could emerge in the knowledge production process leading
to a more radical and neutral subject matter of public administration. A comprehensive lens
of studying public administration is prerequisite of a healthy participatory democracy. Janet
mentions that “this shift is necessary as the current public administration is highly masculine
in nature and systematically gendered. Thus, seeing through a feminist angle will lead to the
widening up of the horizons of administrative approaches making it more reliable and
assimilative in its scope”. (Janet 2002)

164
 The idea of introducing a multi-gendered approach in the feminist understanding of
public administration is very crucial as it not only highlights the serious problems within the
discourse but also helps to widen the concept structure from masculinity to a more equitable
based approach highlighting the issues of marginalized, shifts to non-masculine knowledge
production making the inquiry and images of the society, administrative state create an
informed and conscious knowledge system. The gradual change from first wave focusses on
political rights to women, to entry of women leaders, women bureaucrats, and better
representation of women in politics, the 50% women reservation in local self-government
panchayat in India are the example of changing the approach.
According to Dolan (2002) “these shows the potentiality of the administrative state as the
representative state for the women and other minority groups in seeking social justice and
equality”. Further, “the Public administration is also full of practical examples where women
are getting representation in newer concepts, as theorists, in public management, state affairs,
bureaucracy etc. Further, the queer theory, whose basic premise is that the gender, sexuality
and sex are variable across time and space (Bernstain 1994, Butler 1999), has opened up a
completely new and relevant subject of multi-gendering in public administration”.
Kelly (1998) mentioned that “initially Public administration was first established as a
matter of technical implementation where the values of efficiency and effectiveness were
paramount. This upside-down priority meant that the principles of social equity, protection of
minority rights, and equal opportunity, took a back seat to administrative science”. Brush
(2003) suggested that “gender and diversity within public administration are, indeed,
necessary themes. Public Administration is a discipline combines institutions like state,
agencies like bureaucracy and people through policies, implementation, maintenance,
evaluation, modification etc and that is why the public administration discourse must be
responsive to women and other diversity issues. It will make everyone feel they have a
personal stake in processes and outcomes”.
According to the Classic public administration theory N. Morton and S. Lindquist
(Morton, 1997) “Mary Parker Follett, a classic writer in public administration theory, may be
considered a precursor of feminist theories of public administration. Follett studied that how
cultural norms render women’s voices silent which has a strong theoretical link to
contemporary feminism and public administration”.
Grogan have argued that women role and historical contribution to public administration
needs to assess more carefully and women play a very critical role in transforming and
channelizing the public-sector leadership roles in the path of greater equitable social
commitment. (Grogan 2000)
Delysa Burnier said that in Public Administration “[human]-made and [human]-serving
contexts remain open to redefinition and reconstruction, and most important, have no
meaning independent of the individuals and communities whose action define them. (Kariel
1981) In other words, the bureaucratic method of organisation should not be viewed as the

165
fixed (if flawed) reality of administrative life”. (Burnier 1994) She further highlighted that
where feminist scholars have provided much needed alternatives to traditional bureaucratic
state, in the same place, the theory of entrepreneurial government overlooked the feminist
concerns making it a peripheral and much narrower idea. According to Delysa, “feminist
approach of ‘interpretative-critical framework’ should be incorporated to re-invent the
government for a more inclusive approach and for that more research and analysis needs to
be developed within the discourse. Where the interpretative turn leads to systematic analysis
of the meaning, symbols, actions in the discourse, the critical turn leads to shift from
individual case study to more broad interface between gender dynamics and context”.
(Burnier 1994) She highlighted the importance of ethics, organisational behaviour, interactive
and participatory leadership styles in discourse to make it more pragmatic and equitable.
Kathy Ferguson seeks “a new approach based on the historical cultural experiences of
women which have real transformative values and will redefine the notions of power,
rationality and leadership. She envisions a non-bureaucratic collective life where bureaucratic
discourse would be replaced within feminist discourse centered on individual human
development and community needs”. (Ferguson 1983)
Franzway, Court and Connell proposed that “bureaucratic state is an agent in sexual
politics maintaining the gender biases and gives supremacy to the interests of men over
women which shows that no theory of state is void of sex and gender biases and this becomes
one of the primary limitations of the administrative state to flourish democratically in real
sense”. (Franzway, Court & Cornwell 1989)
Cynthia Cockburn discusses “the behavioural problems women face in organisations and
illustrates through her study that women find themselves defined by men as the
organisation’s ‘other’. Men have identified the situation, definition for women in a way that
asks women to be just like men and not like herself”. (Cockburn 1991)
Conclusion
Advancing the feminist understanding, new variants of gender, sex, and sexual preference,
including transgender, bisexual concerns are getting prominent place in the discipline. This is
a very new entrant in public administration. Many studies are highlighting the multigendered
concepts, asserting legal identities and creating their scope within administrative state as the
head of various states, highlighting the basic issues of discrimination against gays, lesbians
and the very absence of legal protections in terms of employment echoes the pressing need of
more non-discriminatory, inclusive approach.
An alternative perspective, as discussed by Hutchinson, is the “theorization of new
administrative paradigm, which is intersectional, multi gendered, more inclusive in its
approach”. Butler pointed out that “gender is something that we are becoming in every
moment. Sex and gender are at the same time multiple, even evolving”. (Butler, 1999) This
kind of a wide understanding can offer much wider possibilities for the discourse where
multi-gendered nonbiased approach of feminism would be able to contribute in real sense.

166
 It remains a challenge to understand the ‘otherness’ existing due to power dynamics and
thus accepting the ‘otherness’ in totality which would lead to the end of masculine hegemony
and create a more pro people Public Administration in real sense.
Another significant challenge is that how in long run feminist perspective through a
multigendered approach can keep itself a strong and firm theoretical framework in long run.
Feminist perspective holds a different idea, different viewpoints together and keeping all the
voices speaking and heard, safeguarding the minorities (third world women, black women,
LGBTQ actors) are very important.
The feminist perspective contributes significantly and also determines the scope and
purpose of Public Administration by highlighting who are the real ‘public’ in Public
Administration. A very strong knowledge system of feminist theories within the discipline is
required for making the discipline and practices of administration more multifaceted,
inclusive and pro people.
References
Butler, J. (1999). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity (2nd ed.). New
York: Routledge.
Bornstein, K. (1994). Gender outlaw. New York: Vintage Books.
Cockburn, C. (1991) In a Way of Women: Men’s Resistance to Sex Equality in Organisation.
London: Macmillan
D’ Agostino, Maria J. and Levine, H. (2011) Women in Public Administration: Theory and
Practice. (ed.) New York: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Dolan, J. (2002). Representative bureaucracy in the federal executive: Gender and spending
priorities. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 12(3), 353-375.
Ferguson, K. E. (1983). Bureaucracy and public life: The femininization of the polity.
Administration & Society, 15(3), 295-322.
Franzway, S., Court, D., Connell, R.W. (1989) Staking a Claim: Feminism, Bureaucracy and
the State. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.
Grogan, M. (2000). Laying the groundwork for a reconception of the superintendency from
feminist postmodern perspectives. Educational Administration Quarterly Vol. 36. Nr. 1.
Guy, M. E. (1993). Three steps forward, two steps backward: The status of women's
integration into public management. Public Administration Review, 53(4), 285-292.
Hutchinson, J. (2002) Engendering democracy. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 24(4) 721-
738.
Kariel, Henry, (1981) Perceiving Administrative Reality, Journal of politics.43, 728.
Kelly, R. M. (1998). An inclusive democratic polity, representative bureaucracies, and the
New Public Management. Public Administration Review, 58(3), 201-208.

167
Moore, S. (1994). Sociology. Great Britain: BPP (Letts Educational)
Stivers, C. (1990). The shape of the stone: A feminist reflection on practical wisdom in public
administration, The Public Administration Theory Network Workshop, American Society for
Public Administration Annual Conference. – Los Angeles, California, April.
- (1993). Gender images in public administration: Legitimacy and the
Administrative State. 2nd edition. California: Sage Publications, Newbury Park.

168