(Online Course) Pub Ad for IAS Mains: Chapter: 1 Introduction - Evolution of Public Administration (Paper -1)

EVOLUTION OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

Public Administration is a very new discipline which is hardly 100 years. Old. It has evolved out of Political Science and public law with significant correlation with what we say management. The very evolution could be traced to 1887 the public Of an article. “The study of public administration”. In American Political Science Quarterly by Woodrow Wilson. That does not mean prior to this there were no initiatives.

• Valmiki’s ramayana.

• Vedavyasa’s Mahabharata

• Kautilya’s Athashastra

Richer in comparison to any other text on state.
Confucian philosophy (Philosophy of Confucius) details of remunoration, king & his responsibility.
Austrian or German cameralists (scholars)
Did research on: Maintenance of soldiers, Undertaking of warfare, Maintenance of Armed force.
France, Viven’s publication.
Germany – Bonnin’s publication.
Woodrow wilson’s 1887 article was not the first one.
Also there were events which symbolized advanced Public Administration techniques
(i) Egypt – Building of pyramids would not have been built without dealing with huge number of personnel & finance. Without administration. it is not possible.
(ii) India – management of Kumbh mela. Art of administration is not a latest development. It has been there for the time immemorial. But the emergence of Public Administration is credited to article of Wilson it marks the beginning of public Administration
Public Administration till today has gone through number of stages.
Accumulated, number of theories tools techniques. Huge vocabulary.
Now theorists are unanimous about the states of development.
III Stage – Human Relations. Elton Mayo and his human relation. Hawthorne studies.
IV stage – Behaviouralism
Two important Publications “Functions of the Executive” C.I. Bernard. Concrete shape was given by two more publications:
“Administrative behaviour – Simon.”
“The problem of science of public Administration: three problans” Robert Dahl.
He has outlined, relating to generating a science of public Administration There are three problems.
The impossibility of the exclusion of the normative concerns into the study of public administration fact is the basis of science but values const. be excluded.

(1) Impossibility of the exclusion of the Human Element from the study of public administration: Human element – Social, psychological element Inconcrete, variable. Thus it is difficult to derive scienticism.

(2) Science of public administration Can’t be built on a narrow historical experience: There can be science of

•  American administration

• German administration

• French administration

But on narrow historical experience these can’t be science of public Administration approach can’t be applied everywhere thus approach is parochial.
In want to bring about. General principle then study should not be narrow in terms of regional confinement, it should be studies have to be cross cultural trans-national.

(V) Stage: 1905s – Quantitative Approach (already was there in classical theory) Introduction of various advanced tools & techniques. Operational research, Information tech, critical path Method, data processing, they were useful in study of Public Administration
They were utilized in the study of Public Administration in background of generic management.
1905 also known for

SYSTEMS APPROACH: Grand approach that believes that everything is an system.
1905s – also known for introduction of approach that remains relevant even today. i.e., Public Policy Approach.
This believe the fusion between politics and Administration. It believes that both interpenetrate each other at many levels.

For politics – Policy making many things required (Information, designing, etc, these are part of Administration). When policy is converted into reality.

Politics – Constantly monitor manage and regulate the implementation of the policy by Administration

Administration – while implementing is adding value to the society through, education, Health, etc. employment.

        Adding value is going to bring about a change in existing frame, bringing about changes in social structure. Whenever any section gets negatively influenced they go on to affect the politics as well as the administration
        Reactions from society through pulls & pressure, demands etc. Both help each other & guide each other. This is one of the approach which deligitimised the politics – Administration dichotomy more strongly.
        1960s & 70s – known for multiple development. New public Administration, Comparative Public Administration, Development Administration.
Non-western studies started studying the developing systems also. It has found that the systems in developing countries was not efficient /effective Based on the studies they prescribe what is called development Administration. Concept derived by developed countries to explain the Administration system of developing countries.
        Development Administration is subset of Public Administration. Good Governance in the newest manifestation of Development Administration. 1970s & 80s is known for the developments like New Right philosophy/Public choice Approach. Critical theory, NPM, NPA II, New comparative Public Administration, Blacksburg manifesto. Philosophical aspect to NPM is provided through PCA as well as critical theory. German Frankfurt, school of theorists like G. Habermas, Clavs Office etc.
       These theorists are highly critical of weberian paradign of Administration They have negated a restrictive, topdown mgmt. They have promoted alternative approach. They have promoted the they have promoted the humanization, of organisation and free flow of communication. Those theorists argue that as against organizational rationality there should be systemic rationality.
Organisation is based on certain tools and techniques. There are certain principles the orthodox theorists have come out with, which they believe is important for organizational efficiency. It should be replaced by a new kind of system. The organisation rationality should be replaced with systematic rationality. Methods, means and medium are not sacrosanct it is the goal which is sacrosanct. Also there is referred to as the matisation of organisation (It should be goal oriented instead of means oriented.)
       These are certain characteristic which makes World Bank model unsustainable in current requirements. It should be flexible with humanization, decentralization & free flow of communication.
       Theories arguing – state should shrink. In practice marketization of state raises concerns about the future of Public Administration. In this scenario, two important developments

(i) Blacksberg Manifesto (1983)
(ii) NPA – II (1988)

BLACKSBURG MANIFESTO:

 In 1983 scholars of the Virginian school of poly techniques led by John Rohr. Other scholars:

• John Rohr

• Walmsley

• Worlff

• White etc.

They prepared a manifesto which was referred as Blacks burg manifesto. This included the view of these scholars regarding role and status of state.
They argued, Public Administration should be treated as the fourth organ of the state. They wanted to emphasise that Public Administration should not be treated as sub-ordinate of agency to political executive rather it should be treated as an autonomous agency under the obligation to the constitution.
Bureaucracy has failed due to some deficiency. So, they advocated for reform than for replacement. Bureaucracy should be treated as an autonomous agency under obligation to constitution. Instead of rolling back of state they advocated for retention of the same state led bureaucratic paradigm with some reforms. But, it is hardly sustainable. NPA II (Minnowbrook conference Part II) has addressed the problem more effectively. In the initial stage it was fact oriented and close to behavioral science. Subsequently due to fact based approach and theory orientation its futility was established in late 60s & early 70s) 80’s efforts were made by scholars like F. heady, Good shell, O.P. dwivedi. Resurfacing of comparative Approach and referred to as New Comparative public Administration. (Will be dealt in CPA.)
1990s will be known for N.P.M. in developing countries and governance Approach. Towards emergence of 21st century emergence of

• New Public services Approach.

• New liberal pragmatic Development Approach.

State should be efficient primary focus should be towards constitutional values & ethos.
Role of state was sought to he refined from efficient state to an efficient state with constitutional values. Many developing countries were taking to fast growth. Divide between urban/rural and Poor/rich.
Towards mid of 90s growth was not carrying all the sections within it. Many were excluded, World Bank hence redefined its approach in the form of new liberal pragmatic Development Approach.

EVOLUTION OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

He has come out with 5 paradigms. Sought to explain the course of development of Public Administration as discipline. Taken help of two terms borrowed from golembwiski.

1. Locus

2. Focus

Locus – means institutional where
Focus – Subject matter what
As a discipline it studies which institution and What does it study
Paradigm I – Politics – Administration Dichotomy (1900 – 1926)
Paradigm II – Principle of Administration (1927-1936)
Challenges to these principles : (1973 – 1946)
Reaction to these challenges (1947 – 1950)
Paradigm III – Public Administration as political science (1950 – 1970)
Paradigm IV – Public Administration as Management science (1956 – 1970)
Paradigm V – Public Administration as Public Administration/Search for curricular Autonomy (1970 onwards)
Paradigm VI – Governance (1990 – onwards)
Publication of Goodnow (1900), for henry it starts his paradigm I.
Politics Administration dischotomy – major emphasis on establishing Administration as a separate discipline to look into government in action.
– Emphasis on administration being different from politics requires separate treatment.
– State in action is not covered in political science.
– Public Administration as a discipline has to focus on government in action.
– The very clarity, what to be studied was missing in paradigm I.
That is the reason – locus is there (government), which institutions To be studied is clear. Focus is missing – What to be studied exactly, within that government was missing. Discipline had no autonomous status.
Paradigm II: It includes within it three sub stages.
(1) Principle of Administration
(2) Challenges to principles of Administration
(3) Reaction to the challenges.
Political Science, encouraged Public Administration to flourish lots of papers & conferences of Political Science Along with journals.
In Paradigm II, Public Administration attained its reputational zenith. It acquired rich set of vocabulary. Body of knowledge into the fold of Public Administration. This body of knowledge into the fold of Public Administration. This phase started with the publication of Principles of Administration by a theorist “Willoughby”.
Paradigm II belongs to the era of principles. It achieved an enviable status for itself. First substage – very effort of scholars was towards principles of Administration Emphasis was to replace rule of thumb with science of Administration.
During this period there was huge development in tools, techniques, & principles. They did not distinguish between Public Administration Private Administration
“Administration is Administration nothing public about. It Publicness of Public Administration Was last during this period. Subject matter to be studies is there but which inotitution to be studied missed.
Second Sub-State: “The functions, of executive” (C.I. Bernard)
Simon – Administration Behavior. Period belongs to the behaviouralist theorists Challenged classical principles as proverbs, slogans suffers. They challenged principle ear theorists, and their view. They challenged the way the science is established in Administration The way the principles have been brought about (that is unscies tific). They challenged the name in which they came brought abt. The principle and also the subject matter. They were not clear about the institutions to be studied. They also believed that principle are generic in nature. Here also publicness of Public Administration is missing – locus.
Focus: During this period, late 30s & 40s idea prominent was fat based studies behavioural science.
There was vistic orientation towards public Administration. During later 1940s, certain thinkers rooted in Political Science Confronted with this view point.
Rigosour fact based approach is not possible. Bringing about a type of reactionary approach within Political Science
Paradigm III: Public Administration as Political Science, by later part of 40s, Public Administration had reached an enviable status Political Science; at that of time was going through a rough phase. Public Administration had built for itself a huge body of knowledge. Scholars of Public Administration started clearing that Public Administration was not a part of knowledge. Happing in the background that Public Administration has already achieved respectable status & Political Science In time of trouble. Reactionary response from scholars of Political Science By claiming its ownership over Public Administration.

Public Administration Is at best an area of interest.

Political Science Deals with whole of state, and state in action in only a part of its which is studied by Public Administration.
1950 onwards

• Public Administration entered an era of crisis.

• no publication of Public Administration articles in journals of Political Science

• Papers & conferences discouraged

• Public Administration was taken under tutelage of Political Science back into its fold.

Subject matter was lost while the locus remained clear as to which institutions To be studied government in action. Political Science Started treating Public Administration with hostility. Many scholars of Public Administration searched for respectability, acceptability into the house of management.

Paradigm V (1956 – 70): Public Administration as Management science. Certain scholars who said that principles of management where generic in nature.

Palladium VI: 1990s onwards development came up which henry says as governance which is included through his VI paradigm.
Public Administration more & more focus on study in new type there is more of an institutional as well as networking approach. Collective goal has to be achieved.

21st Century Developments: NRP, PCA good governance etc. will cover the areas of Public Administration in first quarter of 21st century.
Nicholas Henry said: Three treads are visible today and expected to become more strong:
(1) Globalization.
(2) Redefinition
(3) Decentralization.
Increasing trend where Political, Social, economic & Administrative system across the world are coming closer.
Boundaries across the countries across the countries are vanishing both in terms of physical boundary and national boundaries. Role of state increasing redefined traditional state – power, hierarchy redefined in terms of collaboration, networking association and partnership.
Change from a state which used to have monopoly is terms of control over goods & services. This monopoly is being destroyed, increasingly being shared jointly. There are certain impacts over the state which is going to become visible and will become more strong in future.
Those are: Blurring, Flattening, Withering of state.
Increasingly becoming difficult to distinguish between state & non-state institution & their roles becoming similar. That is the reason for Blurring of state.
Traditional – strictly defined Superior & subordinate Government relation. Private more colleagive, State moving from vertical to flatter organization. Authority is going to be exercised by number of other organization.

• There is a process towards disintegration of state.

• It is going to play as an organization equal in terms of good & services in comparison to other organization.

• Character of the current character is vanishing.

• One acting among multiple other actors.

• They are going to become much more deepening in author

As Mohit Bhattacharya says, In 21st century Public Administration is going to be concerned with New Politics Agenda, Many opportunities which will be grabbed by those how are urban, educated, skilled, & economically well of . Neglected – Rural, Remote, unskilled uneducated, & poor. Unorganized labour, marginalized, sections are certain other areas which will escape the attention of current politics and nature of governance. It has become a challenge to address the needs of these people. 21st century focus of Public Administration will be towards the problems of these people. Increasingly embroiled on the strategy towards the consensus of the people who are facing the darker side of governance.

Post Materialism: As against quantity there is now increasingly, more & more emphasis on quality. Emphasis has been on green administration, gender administration concept of equity in becoming more and more debated.
In addition to giving basic needs the government should try to enable the marginalized to take advantage of the opportunities at par with all others.

EVOLUTION OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

Post Weberian Development

While contradicting weberian characteristics which were predominant in government administration

Weberian Bureaucracy – means orientation. Impersonal

Theoretical developments which have rejected this weberian character. Weberian vision of bureaucracy has been rejected and come out with alternative view points and these in combination is referred to as post – weberian development.
E.g: Humanistic viewpoint etc.

New Right Philosophy/Public choice Approach.

Critical Approach: Weberian model being based on top-down hierarchy, means oriented is not fit to address to the needs of changed scenario. In place of organizational rationality, systematic rationality.

Governance Approach: World Bank promotes state led bureaucratic approach institutional Approach. Governance approach is both institutional as was as networking. Promotes partnership, Collaboration.
Marxist Interpretation of Bureaucracy: (More detailed in state theories and public policy) Karl marx as a theorist prior to Weber. Marx being a mono causal theorist believes that super structure is handmade institutions Which protects and promotes the interest of economically dominant class.

Capitalist society – dominant class – bourgeoisie

Bureaucracy: It is the coercive area of the state through which economically Dominant class protects & perpetuates their own interest. Thus Marx is particularistic in nature. Karl Marx’s theories have been further taken up by other theorists who have criticized Karl Marx’s idea of bureaucracy and further interpreted and re-interpreted by these theorists.
Bureaucracy in not captured by the dominant class because in reality in society there are multiple groups. Bureaucracy enjoys relative autonomy from economically Dominant class. Since there are multiple groups, No single group is in a position to capture the bureaucracy, state has relative autonomy.
But the state does not come out with policies which are against the interest of capitalists.

Weber’s Bureauracy – is universalistic in nature.

Marx – advocates for communism & stateless society he says State is a coercive instrument & calls for Breaking the infrastructure of exploitation.

1960s – 70s among scholars of developing countries, took up Marxist philosophy into the analysis of public Administration. (North-South Divide increasing)

Phenomenology

Rationalisation is not considered as completed act but an act in progress. This theory has rejected weberian paradigm which is deterministic.
Traditional Bureaucracy – hierarchy of post & authority.

• independence do not have discretion responsibility not decided by them.

• Responsibility is defined by the occupant not by position it is according to the perception of

the individual Occupying the position that is delivered. Job in organisation are created and re-created. Rejects a deterministic approach.
Responsibility focusus not only on legal aspect but also focusus on moral, social, ethical dimension of the individual.
They are not only vulnerable to legal code but also to multiple codes.

Bureaucracy, Democracy Debate

Democracy requires equalitarian treatment, Bureaucracy being based on impersonal laws, & democracy requires equalitarian treatment both are compatible.
Some theorists: Bureaucracy democracy are contrary & not complementary.

Bureauracy – Hierarchy
Democracy – Equality
Bureauracy – to – bottom approach
Democracy – Bottom up
Bureauracy – standardization/uniformity
Democracy – Diversity
Bureauracy – inequality
Democracy – equality
Bureauracy – exclusive approach
Democracy – Inclusive.

Normative concerns
New public Administration, New Public Service Approach. Weber’s emphasises on impersonal rules an regulations. Bureaucracy emphasizes on scientific tools & techniques. Does not take into account, ideal of constitution, larger goal of society, equity. Absence of normative consensus or value concerns.
New public Administration, New Public Service Approach – it has certain goals catering to economic as well as social & political needs.

Weber’s idea – mechanistic, efficiency oriented.

Post Weberian Structures

Some of the organisation which come up late. These organisation are nevertheless legalization organisation but not bureaucratic. Project organization, matrix organisation virtual type of organisation, boundary less organisation

(1) Project Organisation: World Bank is ill equipped to deal with contemporary environmental conditions. More rule bound. Reactionary. It becomes unviable as a structure to deal with contemporary conditions, in the later part of 20th century, Environment is dynamic, fast changing, turbulent. World Bank is a static state organisation organisation theory which do not recognizes environmental changes. Thus it has become reactionary structure other than being anticipatory. Being rule bound it reacts slowly. Intensity of problem has become very high so, World Bank has become inefficient in dealing with these problems. There has been number of improvements in the form of structure.

Theme: Many problems are of emergent nature & have has to be dealt by such a structure which is goal oriented. It should be having limited functionaries with all the expertise and have sufficient authority. One of such organisation is project organisation

Project Organisation: It is small flatter, autonomous and specialized organisation specifically created to cater to problems at hand. Here group leader is merely designing officer for coordination. Specific reference in term of the goals. It is not a permanent organisation The moment problem is resolved the organisation is dismantled. It is post bureaucratic, post Weberian.

Functional Organisation

Matrix Organisation: A similar type of organisation with slight change in project organisation is referred to as matrix organisation
It is a grid like organisation where project organisation has been superimposed over the functional organisation.
For
By being member of a matrix organisation the member drawn from different specialized functional organisation do not cease to be the members of their respective functional organisations or functional hierarchy.
They are used to maximize the potential of the resource.
Because of grid like structure, it comes out with increasing conflict, because they have dual responsibilities.
It is also a legal and post bureaucratic and post weberian organisation

(2) Free-form Organisations: This is an organizational form discussed by theorists like warren Bennis, (organic Adaptive strucrure). Alvin (Adhocracy) Toffler, Hannen, (Population ecology organisation) Forrester etc. They have rejected the permanent structure i.e. bureaucracy. Dynamism in an environment requires similar type of dynamism in the structure, process & value of organisation. Bureaucracy is a closed form of organisation Structure. They have advocated for open, flexible and organic structure.
Structure, function, form, process, and values have to change according to the ecological changes.

(3) Virtual Organisation: It is a type of organisation which is effective but not material, which is real but difficult to ascertain the reality.
It is a type of organisation based on technology opportunism, and trust.

Maximum utilization: Practical linkage in terms of authority, office, material or product is difficult to ascertain in terms of the boundary., E.g: World – dynamic, Problem – multiple fluidix.

So, goods & services provided are also fluidic in nature.

Single organisation is not equipped to provide the goods & services.

Because globalization & liberalization and because of IT, different organisation collaborate and work in diverse areas when the final product comes up. Final product is the product of the efforts of different organizations, huge tools and techniques of huge no. of org, are involves. So, it is difficult to ascertain who is the final producer of the goods or servies, reality in terms difficult to certain.
That is why, it is referred to as virtual organization. The final product is the product of this virtual organisation Involving efforts of no. of organisation
Among all the post bureaucratic organisation. Virtual organisation is the only centralized organization.

(4) Boundary Less Organisations: The traditional boundary in terms of unity of command, span of control etc. are not recognized in these type of organisation
May be corss–hierarchic. Does not fixes the boundary in respect of services to be taken from individual.
Services of members of other organisation are also availed. The traditional boundaries in an organisation are smashed. Lot of freedom in terms of communication, etc. Unlike the virtual organization, it is decentralised.
There may be overlapping between the categories of organisation on type of organisation might overlap with other type of organisation An organisation might be matrix at the same time boundary less organisation

(5) Theory Z: Willian Ouchi, American with Japanese origin. Successfully outlined the reason for comparative efficiency of Japanese organisation. Comparative note was take of both organisation certain characters which the compiled all through a philosophy which is known as theory Z.
In the context of American organisation. Requirement is based on merit, they at middle level allow entry of managers. Then promotion based on performance Faster promotion in American organisation. Within a short time, managers reach the top at a faster rate. As a result of which they stagnate there after. Monotony boredom. Philosophy followed is Hire & Fire. Source of alienation. They enter and work for the organisation where they derive benefit.
These organisation & experience fall in their productivity as compared to Japanese organisation Japenese. Recruitment based on merit. “ Done at lower hierarchy of the organisation, Promotion based on performance but on prolonged process of evaluation.
Nature of promotion is different slow promotion ensures that members of these organisation have opportunity of promotion throughout their career which make them motivated through their career.

(2) Permanent recruitment: Psychological attachment with the organisation decision is based on Ringi system which in the context of Public Administration collective is system referred to as Phillip 66. Interpreting the performance of industrial within organisation through some extra-organizational arrangement to enhance performance for social networking.
Only those members are allowed to participate who perform well while those who do not engage in corruption etc are ostracized & barred for such facilities.

Theory W & Theory O: Are yet to be fully theorized certain ideas subdued in humanist the theory W-winner individual within organisation should realize that success of an individual Depends on to what extent he makes other industrial Winner.
Me to become a winner it is I make others becomes winner. Mutualhelp. Mutual trust, mutual promotion. Independence Work upon his strengths and contribution as well as that of others. Indulging in others responsibility also. Act as promoter, facilitater. Highly collective and associative

Theory O Ownership: It contradicts theory X, Y & Z. These theorists say that an organisation becomes successful when an organisation & individual have maximum attachment. Though by being participative does not bring about sense of attachment. Effort should be taken to bring about sense of ownership. Emotional feeling of being an owner brings maximum sense of attachments. Most of above post weberian structures are legal structures as they are imbibed by government of today is various forms.

  Go Back To Main Page