(Online Course) Pub Ad for IAS Mains: Chapter: 2 Administrative Thought - Criticism of Thinkers (Paper -1)

Paper - 1
Chapter: 2 (Administrative Thought)

Criticism of Thinkers


Classical theories in general: But more particular to Fayol.

1. Peter Drucker

Says that an idealistic or an universal organisation has been superimposed over as living organization. Classical theories has treated the organisation as a machine, there is no dynamic perspective within the organisation. Organisation is an assemblage of socially interacting individuals.
Classical theories of administration believe in principle of administration by treating organisation as a machine & treating human being as merely a cog is the wheel fayol has come out with universal principles of concerning functional aspects totally neglecting the human element.
These views have been contrasted by the humanist theorists Elton Mayo human approach.
Individual within the organisation has Irrespective of the fact that classical theorist has been rejected by the humanists they have provided a basis for the science of administration.

2. Gulik & Urwick

When the principle of hierarchy is strengthened through principle of unity of command chief executive is overwhelmed with the problem of co-ordination.

  1. For any conflict common superior is there. For any conflict the top-executive is required to resolve.

  2. Unity of command more number of supervisor thus more number of different of opinions thus lack of units thus again top executive is over whelmed

  3. Fayols principle of Administration are full of overlapping

Equity & remuneration

Instead of going for two principle could be included in equity. Sub ordination of individual interest to general interest & centralization. Scalar chain relating to two principle

  1. Unity of command.

  2. Responsibility & authority.

But that does not undermine the importance of these principles as these deal with 14 distinct principles

4. Criticism relating to max Weber.

They are known as displacement or dysfunctional theorist in terms of their analysis they find webcrian theory as dysfunctional Weber has taken functional view of bureaucracy.

Dear Candidate, This Material is from Public Administration Study Kit for Civil Services Main Examinations. For Details Click Here

R.K. Merton, Alvin Gouldner, Phillip Sclznick

Merton says, Weberian bureaucracy is typically a victim of formalism and ritualism and this flows from the displacement of the goal.
A study relating to bureaucracy mentioned in “Reader in Bureaucracy”. By merton. Bureaucracy of Weber gives preference to the law and not towards achieving the goal. The law becomes the end in itself rather than being the means to achieve the goal. Thus goal has been displaced as the final objective by the rule and laws which become the end in itself.
Follow the letter of law rather then the spirit of law. Their primary goal becomes following the rule rather then achieving the goal. Ritualism – following some pre-established ways formalism. Same idea is referred by peter Drucker-Red Tapism
Alvin Gouldner: He in his book “Patterns of industrial bureaucracy” has undertaken empirical study & come out with specific term to describe Weberian Bureaucracy as “punishment – centered bureaucracy”.
With in the organisation superior in order to ensure higher productivity on part of subordiante Go on regulating the behavior of the subordinate by framing more and more rules and laws. Since it is classical it is mechanistic thus superior defines everything outing more & more rule.
Sub-ordinate always find the ways to escape andad here to only minimum acceptable performance. To again enhance productivity superior goes on making more rules & regulation.
Highly restrictive, directive since subordinates produce with restriction rather than with freedom and thus it restricts & reduces the productivity.
This type of bureaucracy instead of enhancing the productivity it restricts & reduces productivity to minimum acceptable production and thus makes the organisation inefficient.
These are not abstract ideas but done through empirical method.
Phillip Selznick
Also undertook empirical study at Tennessee valley corporation. In Weberian Bureaucracy there is general tendency toward centralization and general dislike towards decentralization but due to increasing complexities & size of operation, some functions to be transferred towards various other hierarchies.
Every sub-goal should be linked to the higher goal. Assumed in bureaucracy. He found, individual Working in sub-units have loyalty towards their sub-goal even if sub-goals at times goes contrary to the final goal.
In order reutilization of charisma to happen the non-economic characteristics of the charismatic authority is to be replaced.
Reutilization: efforts that have been taken to convert charismatic authority into legal rational authority.
Economic characters: Rationality, Standardization, Means-end correlation.

Non-economic characters: Something which lacks means-end correlation rationality & standardization lack of expertise and scienticism.
Charismatic authority functions through whims and fancies, and emotions and not on rationality standardization and scienticism.

Lawrence J. Peter & Raymond Hall: They have provided a principle “Peter Principle” They say, individual within bureaucracy rise to the level of incompetency. Weberian bureaucracy monocratic, meritocratic, within organiation many personnel aspects are organized according to the skill and expertise. Not necessarily within the organisation, The individual is not promoted merely based on expertise rather by group of individual in hierarchy.
Rises to his level of incompetency rather than occupying his position of competence. An individual is promoted because he is found most competent within his own hierarchy at his previous position and not for his competency for the position in the higher hierarchy.

C. North cote Parkinson: “law of Rising Pyramid” also known as “parkinson’s law”.

This is an individual Who has studied department in government of Britain dealing with the colonies of Britain. Study in (1936 – 1954) Affairs of colonies that is a period of decolonization. Administration dealing with colonies instead of decreasing in size was increased. This law explained the increase (bureaucracy) in size of administration in colonies.
He came out with conclusion “size of organisation increases according to the time available for the completion of the job”
Bureaucracy has a natural tendency towards empire building. Bureaucracy instead of simplifying the complex things, complicates the simple things. Technisizing the affairs.
There is a tendency of self importance. Superior has tendency to extend his jurisdiction and also does not want to take responsibility, within the organisation in size to ensure completion of job in time.
Weber’s bureaucracy is referred to as “Bentham’s Dog law”, State is expected to be proactive not reactive.”
Rather than making the people aware of the laws that is to say proactive measures bureaucracy relies on punishment to maintain the law.

About Elton Mayo, Carey Says: Hawthorne studies lack in experimental/scientific basis.

  1. Studies were taken with those who knew that they are being observed.

  2. Number of people being observed (sample) was very small.

  3. To conduct an experiment certain steps: required

    • Preliminary experiment
    • Hypothesis
    • Verification
    These are merely based on observation

    • Many times conclusion was not matching with the finding
    • Focus only on psychological aspect ignoring all other mechanical aspects.

    • They have studied limited aspects of human behavior.

    That is why: United Auto Association of U.S regarded Elton Mayo as being a cow sociologist. Detailed aspects of social psychological basis of behavior has not been dealt.
    • Social psychological aspect was very shallow.
    • Only considered impact of group hence referred to as “herd psychology”.
    • Many factors can be there family self but not been discussed.
    Elton Mayo – human ration theorist.

    Behavioral theory : more detailed theory descriptive, more empirical, experimental more scientific. Preliminary conclusion erified so, more empirical.
    Not different in terms of type but in terms of degree

General criticism

Dwight waldo

  • He criticized classical theory as being unscientific.
  • Classical principle of administration are not universally applicable more over in non-western system bureaucracy does not come out with same consequences as that in western countries.
  • Simon has criticized the classical principle of administration As being unscientific.
  • Another view point taken by Chris Argyris.

Organisation has two dimensions

  1. Formal dimension
  2. Informal dimension which was avoided by classical theorist.

Principles of administration have to be scientifically established. Conclusion should have higher amount of accuracy.

Deceive cause effect relationship with high amount of accuracy only when we have more amount of information a maximum information More & more information leads to scienticism.
Classical theory is order to establish principle of administration Have considered only formal aspect, thus they have limited the amount of information (more could be derived form informal aspect)

Not only rational factor but also based on some irrational factor which were not taken up by the classical theorist that is the reason classical theory is not scientific.

https://static.upscportal.com/images/promo/Arrow.gif  Go Back To Main Page