Public Administration –Meaning, Nature, Scope & Importance Administration, Organisation And Management
S.No. | Topic | Notes Link |
---|---|---|
1. | Administration and Management - Meaning | Read Now |
2. | Administration and Management - Nature and Significance | Read Now |
3. | Role of Public Administration in The Developed and Developing Societies | Read Now |
4. | Development of Public Administration as a Subject | Read Now |
5. | Modern Public Administration | Read Now |
6. | Principles of Public Administration | Read Now |
7. | Concepts - Power | Read Now |
8. | Concepts - Authority | Read Now |
9. | Concepts - Responsibility and Delegation | Read Now |
10. | Theories of Organisation | Read Now |
11. | Steps and Area of Control and Unity of Command | Read Now |
12. | New Dimension of Public Management | Read Now |
13. | Management of Change and Development Administration | Read Now |
Read here some important topicwise notes for MPPSC exam preparation
Administration and Management - Meaning
PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION –MEANING
Some scholars have a different view about the administration and management. According to Peter Drucker management is associated with the business activity, which has to show economic performance, whereas administration is associated with the non business activities like activities of the Government. The other view is that administration is associated with performing routine things in known settings in accordance with certain procedures, rules, and regulations. The Management is associated with performing functions like risk taking, dynamic, creative and innovative functions.
Some scholars of Public Administration are closely associated with the first view that is, administration is a determinative function. Management, on other hand is an executive function that is primarily concerned with carrying out the broad policies laid down by the administration. Organization is the machinery through which coordination is established between administration and management.
DEFINING PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
L.D. White
"Public administration consists of all those operations having for their purpose the fulfillment or enforcement of public policy". As per White, this definition covers a multitude of particular operations in many fields the delivery of a letter, the sale of public land, the negotiation of a treaty, the award of compensation to an injured workman, the quarantine of a sick child, the removal of litter from a park, manufacturing uranium 235, and licensing the use of atomic energy. It includes military as well as civil affairs, much of the work of courts, and all the special fields of government activity-police, education, health, construction of public works, conservation, social security, and many others. The conduct of public affairs in advanced civilisations requires the employment of almost every profession and skill-engineering, law, medicine, and teaching; the crafts, the technical specialties, the office skills, and many others.
Percy Mc Queen
Public administration is related to the operations of government whether local or central.
Luther Gulick
Public administration is that part of the science of administration, which has to do with the government; it concerns itself primarily with the executive branch where the work of the government is done; though there are obviously problems also in connection with the legislative and judicial branches. "Administration consists of getting the work of government done by coordinating the efforts of people so that they can work together to accomplish their set tasks".
M. Ruthanaswami
"When administration has to do with the affairs of a state or minor political institutions like the municipal or country council (district board), it is called public administration. All the acts of the officials of a government, from the peon in a remote office to the head of a state in the capital, constitute public administration."
H.A. Simon, D.W. Smithburg and V.A. Thompson
"By Public Administration is meant, in common usage, the activities of the executive branches of national, state and local governments, government corporations and certain other agencies of a specialised character. Specifically excluded are judicial and legislative agencies within the government and non-governmental administration."
Corson and Harris
"Public administration … is the action part of government, the means by which the purposes and goals of government are realised."
Dwight Waldo
"Public administration is the art and science of management as applied to the affairs of State."
The traditional definitions of Public Administration, which are given above reflect the view that the Public Administration is only involved in carrying out the policies and programmes of the government. It reflect that it has no role in policy making and also locates the administration in the executive branch but today the term public administration is used in a broader sense that it is not only involved in carrying out the programmes of the government, but it also plays an important role in policy formulation and covers the three branches of the government. In this context, we may reflected on the definition offered by F.A. Nigro and L.G. Nigro. According to them Public Administration:
In sum, public administration:
Administration and Management - Nature and Significance
NATURE OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
There are two views regarding the Nature of Public Administration, that is, Integral and Managerial.
According to the integral view, "administration" is the sum total of all the activities – manual, clerical, managerial, etc., which are undertaken to realise the objectives of the organisation. In this view all the acts of officials of the government from the Attendant to the Secretaries to the government and Head of the State constitute Public Administration. Henri Fayol and L.D. White are the supporters of this view.
According to the managerial view of administration, the managerial activities of people who are involved in planning, organising, commanding, coordinating and controlling constitute Public Administration. This view regards administration as getting things done and not doing things. Luther Gullick, Herbert Simon, Smithburg and Thompson are the supporters of this view. The managerial view excludes Public Administration from nonmanagerial activities such as manual, clerical and technical activities.
The two views differ from each other in many ways. According to Prof. M.P. Sharma the difference between the two views is fundamental. The integral view includes the activities of all the persons engaged in administration whereas the managerial view restricts itself only to the activities of the few persons at the top.
The integral view depicts all types of activities from manual to managerial, from non-technical to technical whereas the managerial view takes into account only the managerial activities in an organization. Furthermore, administration, according to the integral view would differ from one sphere to another depending upon the subject matter, but whereas that will not be the case according to the managerial point of view because the managerial view is identified with the managerial techniques common to all the fields of administration.
The difference between the two views relates to the difference between management and operation or we may say between getting things done and doing things. The correct meaning of the term administration would however, depend upon the context in which it is used. Dimock and Koening sum up in the following words:
"As a study public administration examines every aspect of government"s efforts to discharge the laws and to give effect to public policy; as a process, it is all the steps taken between the time an enforcement agency assumes jurisdiction and the last break is placed (but includes also that agency"s participation, if any, in the formulation of the programme in the first place); and as a vocation, it is organizing and directing the activities of others in a public agency."
Also read: MPPSC Mains Paper - 1 Notes on UPSC World History French Revolution.
SCOPE OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
By the scope of Public Administration, we mean the major concerns of Public Administration as an activity and as a discipline.
Scope of Public Administration as an activity
Broadly speaking, Public Administration embraces all the activities of the government. Hence as an activity the scope of public administration is no less than the scope of state activity. In the modern welfare state people expect many things – a wide variety of services and protection from the government. In this context public administration provides a number of welfare and social security services to the people. Besides, it has to manage government owned industries and regulate private industries. Public administration covers every area and activity within the ambit public policy. Thus, the scope of public administration is very wide in modern state.
Scope of Public Administration as a Discipline
The scope of public administration as a discipline, that is subject of studies, comprises of the following:
The POSDCoRB view
Several writers have defined the scope of public administration in varying terms. Gullick sums up the scope of the subject by the letters of the word POSDCoRB which denote: Planning, Organization, Staffing, Directing, Coordinating Reporting the Budgeting.
According to Gullick the POSDCoRB activities are common to all organizations. They are the common problems of management which are found in different agencies regardless of the nature of the work they do POSDCoRB gives unity, certainty, and definiteness and makes the study more systematic. The critics pointed out that the POSDCoRB activities were neither the whole of administration, nor even the most important part of it.
The POSDCoRB view overlooks the fact that different agencies are faced with different administrative problems, which are peculiar to the nature of the services, they render and the functions they performed. The POSDCoRB view takes into consideration only the common techniques of the administration and ignores the study of the "subject matter" with which the agency is concerned. A major defect is that the POSDCoRB view does not contain any reference to the formulation and implementation of the policy. Therefore, the scope of administration is defined very narrowly, being too inward looking and too conscious of the top management.
The Subject Matter View
We all know that public administration deals not only with the processes but also with the substantive matters of administration, such as Defence, Law and Order, Education, Public Health, Agriculture, Public Works, Social Security, Justice, Welfare, etc. These services require not only POSDCoRB techniques but also have important specialized techniques of their own which are not covered by POSDCoRB techniques. For example, if you take Police Administration it has its own techniques in crime detection, maintenance of Law and Order, etc., which are much and more vital to efficient police work, than the formal principles of organisation, personnel management, coordination or finance and it is the same with other services too.
We conclude the scope of public administration with the statement of Lewis Meriam: "Public administration is an instrument with two blades like a pair of scissors. One blade may be knowledge of the field covered by POSDCoRB, the other blade is knowledge of the subject matter in which these techniques are applied. Both blades must be good to make an effective tool".
IMPORTANCE OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
We will be discussing the importance of public administration as a specialized subject of study and later the role and importance of public administration in the modern society.
1. Importance of Public Administration as Specialized Subject of Study
2. Importance of Public Administration as an Activity
IMPORTANCE OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AS SPECIALIZED SUBJECT OF STUDY
The importance of public administration as a specialized subject can be attributed to the following reasons:
One of the important reasons is the practical concern that the government today has to work towards the public interest. The first and foremost objective of public administration is to efficiently deliver public services. In this context, Wilsonian definition of the subject as efficiency promoting and pragmatic field was the first explicitly articulated statement on the importance of a separate discipline of public administration. During the first half of the preceding century, a numbers of countries have appointed committees to look into the problems of administration and recommended suitable administrative machinery to respond to diverse public needs.
The Haldane Committee Report (1919) in Britain; the President"s Committee on Administrative Management (1937) in the United States; A.D. Gorwala Committee"s and Paul H. Appleby"s Reports in India are some of the examples of the efforts by various countries to make changes in public administration. During the last four decades also, a number of reports, produced by committees/commissions appointed by governments in various countries or multilateral agencies, and books published by scholars have enriched the discipline and provided new perspectives to public administration to tune it to the changing needs of the times.
They include: Report of the Committee on the Civil Services (Fulton Committee Report, U.K., 1968); various reports of the Administrative Reforms Commission (India, 1967-72); Reinventing Government (U.S.A., look by David Orborne and Ted Gabler, 1992), Governance and sustainable Development (UNDP, 1997) and World Development Report: Building Institutions for Markets (The World Bank, 2002).
Administration is looked at, in the social science perspective, as a cooperative and social activity. Hence the concern of academic inquiry would be to understand the impact of government policies and operations on society. What kind of society do the policies envisage?; To what extent administrative action is non-discriminatory?; How is public administration functioning and what are the immediate and long term effects of governmental action on the social structure, the economy and polity?; etc. are questions requiring careful analysis. From the social science perspective, public administration, as a discipline, has to draw on a variety of sister disciplines such as History, Sociology, Economics, Geography, Philosophy, Psychology, etc., with the objective to explain and not just to prescribe.
Public administration has a special status in the developing countries. Many of these countries, after independence from the colonial rule have stressed upon speedy socio – economic development. Obviously, these countries have to rely on government for speedy development. The later requires a public administration to be organised and effectively operated for increasing productivity quickly. Likewise, social welfare activities have to be effectively executed. These aspects have given birth to the new sub-discipline of development administration. The emergence of development administration is indicative of a felt need for a body of knowledge about how to study the third world administration and at the same time to bring about speedy socio-economic development with government"s intervention. Development administration has therefore, emerged as a sub-discipline to serve the cause of development.
Public administration, as witnessed holds a place of significance in the lives of people. It touches them at every step. For most of their needs, the citizens depend upon public administration. In view of the important role of public administration in the lives of people, the citizens of a country cannot ignore. Therefore, its teaching should become a part of the curriculum of educational institutions. People must get to know about the structure of government, the activities it undertakes and the manner in which these are actually performed. The study of public administration will contribute to the realization of the values of citizenship.
IMPORTANCE OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AS AN ACTIVITY
The contemporary age, which has witnessed the emergence of "Administrative State", public administration has become an essential part of society and a dominant factor. The functions it is called upon to perform, have expanded in scope and nature, and what is more, are continually increasing. Many of them are more positive in nature because they care for the essential requirements of human life, be it health, education, recreation, sanitation, social security or others. It is, therefore, a creative factor, with its motto being "human welfare". These functions are over and above its regulatory functions. The view points of eminent scholars, as referred to below, amply reflect the significance of public administration.
Woodrow Wilson: "Administration is the most obvious part of government; it is government in action, it is the executive, the operative and the most visible side of the government.
Brooke Adams: "Administration is an important human faculty because its chief function is to facilitate social change and to cushion the stock of social revolution".
W.B. Donham: "If our civilization fails, it will be mainly because of breakdown of administration".
Paul H. Appleby: "Administration is the basis of government. No government can exist without administration. Without administration government would be a discussion club, if indeed, it could exist at all".
Role of Public Administration in The Developed and Developing Societies
The role of public administration in various facets is noted below:
According Gerald Caiden public administration has assumed the following crucial roles in contemporary modern society:
The points mentioned below summarize the reasons for the growing importance of public administration:
Apart from the reasons cited the rapid growth of population, modern warfare, increase in natural and manmade disasters, decline in social harmony, increase in violence due to conflicts, communal riots, ethnic wars, terrorism, etc. have increased the importance of public administration. It goes without saying that public administration is not only the operative but also the most obvious part of the government. It is government in action and occupies a significant place not merely as an instrument of governance but also as an important mechanism for preserving and promoting the welfare of community. It has substantive impact upon the life of the people. It is a vital process charged with implementation of pre-determined, welfare oriented, and developmental objectives.
ROLE OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION UNDER LIBERALISATION,
PRIVATISATION AND GLOBALISATION (LPG)
Since the 1980s a number of countries, have been influenced by the concept of liberalization, privatization and globalization. In the 1980s India has also started the process of liberalization, privatization and globalization (LPG). One form of LPG has entrusted the management of public sector enterprises partially or fully to private companies. Another form of LPG is disinvestment in public sector enterprises, which is followed in India. As a result of this the public sector enterprises find themselves in a competitive and challenging environment. However, the role of public administration under LPG continues to quite significant. It requires dismantling of a regime of regulations, controls, restrictions, licenses, secrecy and delay. The bureaucracy has to play an investor friendly, responsive, transparent, open and competitive role.
So, this requires necessary administrative reform, which should aim at elimination of redundant practices, procedures, administrative laws and corruption. Thus, the policy of LPG affects the role, values and skills of public bureaucracy. It also decreases the scope of the functions of the state, resulting in minimum of state interference in the lives of the individuals. The state is called upon to oversee the operational side of the enterprises. This gives the state a new role as regulator.
Role of public administration
Public Administration - Challenges in a Developed Society
The developed countries are identified by certain parameters like highly developed economy, greater technical infrastructure, high GDP and net income per capita, level of industrialization and also the standard of living of the people. Development and modernization of a state has an obvious and significant impact on its politics, culture and society. Subsequently, these changes find their ways in several other important institutions like judiciary, executive and legislative. USA has been one of the nations, which have witnessed vast changes and reforms in its administrative history owing to the industrialization, two world wars and the various academic and experimental studies carried out in the areas of social and behavioral sciences.
Let us also look at the general features of the public administration in developed countries before we proceed to study about the challenges they face.
The government organizations are significantly differentiated and functionally specific. The bureaucracies are large and perform a myriad of specialized functions and are of the Weberian type. There is a lot of internal specialization within the roles and the selection of people is based on merit. The decision and law making process is largely rational. The government institutions are present in all spheres of the life of the citizens. Since there is popular interest in public affairs, there is a direct relationship between political power and legitimacy.
Now, the problems that the public administration of developed countries faces are also complex. The first problem which is kind of basic is the lack of coherence between numerous service providing agencies and regulatory bodies. The problem especially surfaces at the local levels where the authorities design their own programs and also run the programs funded by the national authorities. The other example can be dominance of politicians in the matters of specialized domains of bureaucracy.
Most of the developed states, especially of Europe are called Administrative States and their bureaucracies perform certain specific functions. Rumki Basu in her book Public Administration: Concepts and Theories explain these functions. According to her, the public administration in these countries performs regulatory functions while ensuring the enforcement of law and order, collection of revenues and the national defense against aggression.
The public administration provides a range of services like education, health, cultural, insurance, housing, unemployment benefits and communication and transport. They also play an important role in bringing about the economic growth of the country by operating industries, giving loans etc.
The present day challenges in the developed countries are primarily economic. The economic depression has put immense pressures on the services provided by the government. A lot of reforms have been proposed in which the state resources are being closely administered. The withdrawal of certain benefits has left the public administration of the countries exposed to a lot of criticism and flag from the common people. The regulatory role of public bodies has also come under scrutiny for their failure to prevent major upheavals from taking place. As things improve, the role and challenges of public administration shall change once again.
Role of public administration in developing societies.
Public Administration as an aspect of governmental activity which is very old. It is as old as human history. In European languages the term public administration began in 17th century. It was a period of when the Church was separated from the state and government. In every society there are some activities like maintenance of law and order and defense which have to be undertaken in public interest. Public Administration as an instrument of government is mainly concerned with the performance of these activities. The origin and evolution of public administration as a distinctive subject can be traced from 1887 onward.
Public Administration as a field of systematic study and it is as an aspect of governmental activity. According to Woodrow Wilson, "Public Administration is detailed and systematic application of law. Every particular application of law is an act of administration." In short, public administration is related with:
The developing societies has only 70 per cent of the world population and also 20 per cent of the world income. Economic and social forces, both internal and external are responsible for the poverty, inequality and low productivity that commonly characterize most third world nations. It also arises out of the political instability of numerous third world nations. Moreover, larger the group of officials affected by a change of power, the most difficult it will be to maintain any continuity in the formulation and execution of policy.
Common Characteristics of Developing Nations:
Size and Income Level: 141 developing countries that are permanent members of the United Nations, 72 have less than 15 million people and 51 less than 5 million.
Historical Background: The economic structure as well as their educational and social institutions,, have been modeled on those of their former colonial rulers.
Industrial Structure: The vast majority of developing countries are agrarian in economic, social and cultural outlook.
Low Level of Living: In developing nations, general levels of living tend to be very low for the vast majority of people. These low levels of living are manifested quantitatively and qualitatively in the form of low income, inadequate housing, poor health, limited or no education, high infant mortality, low life and work expectancy in many cases.
Development of Public Administration as a Subject
Development of Public administration as a subject
Stages in the Evolution
Public Administration has developed as an academic discipline through a succession of a number of overlapping paradigms which are as follows:
Stage I: Politics – Administration Dichotomy (1887-1926)
Stage II: Principles of Administration (1927-1937)
Stage III: Era of Challenge (1938-1947)
Stage IV: Crisis of Identity (1948-1970)
Stage V: Public Policy Perspective (1971-continuing),
Stage I – Politics – Administration Dichotomy (1887-1926)
This is the beginning of evolution of public administration as a discipline. The basic theme during this stage was the advocacy for the separation of politics from administration, popularly known as the ‘politics- administration dichotomy’.
This stage began with the publication of Woodrow Wilson’s essay The Study of Administration in the political science quarterly in 1887. This essay laid the foundation for a separate, independent and systematic study in public administration. Hence, Wilson is regarded as the ‘Father of Public Administration.’
Wilson separated administration from politics. He argued that politics is concerned with policymaking while administration is concerned with the implementation of policy decisions. In his words “…. that administration lies outside the proper sphere of politics. Administrative questions are not political questions. Although politics sets the tasks for administration, it should not be suffered to manipulate its offices”.
Wilson described public administration as a field of business. He observed, “The field of administration is a field of business. It is removed from the study of the hurry and strife of politics.” He further observed that “It (Administration) is a part of political life only as the methods of the counting house are a part of the life of society; only as machinery is part of the manufactured product.”
Wilson believed that administration is a science. Thus, he said that “the science of administration is the latest fruit of that study of the science of politics which was begun some twenty-two hundred years ago. It is a birth of our own country, almost of our own generation. We are having now, what we never had before, a science of administration.” He called for a separate study of public administration. His basic argument was that “it is getting to be harder to run a constitution than it is to frame one”. Hence, there should be a science of administration, which shall seek:
The Wilson line of thought was further continued by Frank J. Good now in his book Politics and Administration published in 1900. He made a sharp conceptual distinction between two functions of government, that is, politics and Administration. To quote Good now, “politics has to do with policies or expression of the state will”, whereas, “administration has to do with the execution of these policies.” The basis of this distinction was provided by the classic separation of powers. Like Wilson, Good now also argued for the promotion of public administration as an independent and separate discipline. He came to be regarded as the “Father of American Public Administration’.
In the beginning of the 20th century, the American universities showed much interest in the public services movement (movement for governmental reform). As a result, public administration received the first serious attention of scholars. The American Political Science Association in its 1914 report stated that one of the concerns of political science was to train specialists for governmental positions.
In 1926, L.D. White’s Introduction to the Study of Public Administration was published. It was the first textbook on public administration. With its publication, the subject picked up academic legitimacy, that is, the American universities began to offer courses of instruction in public administration.
Stage II – Principles of Administration (1927-1937)
During this stage, the scholars believed that there are certain principles of administration which could be discovered and applied to increase the efficiency and economy of public administration. They argued that administration is administration irrespective of the nature and context of work because the principles of administration have universal validity and relevancy. Hence, they claimed that public administration is a science.
This stage began with publication of W.F. Willoughby’s Principles of Public Administration in 1927. He asserted that, “in administration there are certain fundamental principles of general application analogous to those characterizing any science”.
The other important publications of this stage reflecting the principles approach to administration are:
This stage in the evolution of public administration reached its zenith with the appearance of Gulick and Urwick’s Papers on the Science of Administration (1937). Gulick and Urwick stated that “It is the general thesis of this paper that there are principles which can be arrived at inductively from the study of human organization which should govern arrangements for human association of any kind. These principles can be studies as a technical question, irrespective of the purpose of the enterprise, the personnel comprising it, or any constitutional, political or social theory underlying its creation.”
As rightly observed by Mohit Bhattacharya, “The ‘public’ aspect of public administration was virtually dropped at this stage and the focus was almost wholly on efficiency. This stage can be called the stage of orthodoxy, as efforts were underway to delineate firmly the boundaries of a new discipline of ‘management’. Public administration merged into the new science.” Public administration reached its reputational zenith during this stage.
Stage III – Era of Challenge (1938 – 1947)
The main theme during this stage was the advocacy of ‘human relations- behavioural approach’ to the study of public administration.
Both the defining pillars of public administration were challenged. It was argued that administration cannot be separated from politics because of its political nature and political role. Administration is not only concerned with implementation of political policy decisions, but also plays an important role in policy- formulation which is the domain of politics. In order words, the idea of politics – administration dichotomy was rejected.
Similarly, the principles of administration were challenged and criticized on the ground of lack of scientific validity and universal relevancy. Hence, they were dubbed as “proverbs” and “naturalistic fallacies”.
Moreover, the principles approach to organizational analysis was criticized as a mechanistic approach due to its emphasis on the formal structure of organization and neglect of socio-psychological aspects of organizational behaviors. The Howthorne studies (1924-1932) conducted under the leadership of Elton Mayo shook the foundations of principles approach to organisational analysis by demonstrating the role of informal organizations in determining organisational efficiency. These studies gave rise to ‘human relations’ theory of organization.
The important publications of this stage which challenged the classical public administration were:
Herbert A. Simon was the most important critic of principle of administration and described them as “proverbs”. He advocated the behavioural approach to public administration to make it a more scientific discipline. He focused upon decision making as the alternative to the principles approach. To quote Simon, “if any ‘theory’ is involved, it is that decision-making is the heart of administration, and that the vocabulary of administrative theory must be derived from the logic and psychology of human choice.”
Simon rejected the idea of politics-administration dischotomy and recommended an empirical approach logical positivism in the study of policy-making and the relation of means and ends. Reflecting the perspectives and methodology of ‘behaviouralism’ in psychology and social psychology, administrative Behaviour pleaded for the raising of scientific vigour in public administration.”
Robert Dahl argued that the evolution of science of public administration (or development of universal principles of administration) was hindred by three problems.
Stage IV- Crisis of Identity (1948-1970)
With the rejection of politics-administration dichotomy and principles of administration, public administration suffered from the crisis of identity. Consequently scholars of public administration reacted in two ways:
However, in both cases (i.e. either towards political science or administrative science), public administration in the evolution of public administration is called as the ‘stage of crisis of identity’.
Various developments took place during this phase of the evolution of public administration. They are:
Stage V – Public Policy Perspective (1971- continuing)
The main theme in this final stage of evolution is the concern for public policy analysis, Public administrationists are showing much interest in the related fields of policy-science, political economy, policy-making, policy analysis, and so on.
Public policy approach got acceptancy in administrative analysis as the traditional idea of politics- administration dichotomy was abandoned. Dwight Waldo concluded that the separation between politics and administration had become an “outworn credo”.
According to Robert T. Golembiewski, the public policy approach stage in the evolution of public administration is built upon two basic themes-
With the adoption of public policy approach, public administration has becomes inter-disciplinary, gained in social relevance and expanded its scope.
Study of Public Administration in India
The following points can be noted with regard to the rise and development of teaching and research in public administration in India:
Modern Public Administration
MODERN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Modern Public Administration is an anti-positivist , anti-technical, and anti-hierarchical reaction against traditional public administration . A practiced theory in response to the ever changing needs of the public and how institutions and administrations go about solving them. Focus is on the role of government and how it can provide these services to citizens who are a part of the public interest, by means of, but not limited to, public policy.
Modern Public Administration traces its origins to the first Minnowbrook Conference held in 1968 under the patronage of Dwight Waldo . This conference brought together the top scholars in public administration and management to discuss and reflect on the state of the field and its future. The 1960s in the USA was a time of unusual social and political turbulence and upheaval . In this context, Waldo concluded that neither the study nor the practice of public administration was responding suitably to the escalating turmoil and the complications that arose from those conditions. Part of the reasoning for this Waldo argued, was the general mistrust that had become associated with public administration itself. A call to revamp the ethical obligations of the service sector was necessary in rebuilding the public's trust of government and bureaucracy in which had been plagued by corruption and the narrow self interests of others. Moving toward a more ethical public service, then, required attention to the underlying values that support public service-and public servants-in any sector.
The Modern public management did not offer public servants an alternative model to help them to resolve emerging conflicts and tensions. Concepts of citizenship, democracy or public interest have evolved over time and they are continuing to evolve. Consequently, the role of government and the role of the public service are being transformed in ways that push beyond the constraints of the Classic model the lenses of varying perspectives can challenge, clarify, and create a history that boasts enough depth to serve as not only a history in a traditional sense but also an interactive timeline that ignites constant improvement. At its core, public service requires a vision that extends beyond narrow self-interest. Waldo sees public administration and bureaucracy as integrally bound to civilization and to our culture in two senses: the evolution of civilization itself was dependent upon public administration and related concepts are constitutive elements within our specific civilization and culture.
Modern Public Administration theory deals with the following issues:
First, a ‘Modern’ theory should start with the idea of democratic citizenship. The public service derives its true meaning from its mandate to serve citizens to advance the public good. The source of motivation and pride of all those who choose to make it their life, whether for a season or for an entire career.
Main Features of Modern public administration.
These are:
Themes
NPA provides solutions for achieving these goals, popularly called 4 D's i.e. Decentralisation, Debureaucratisation, Delegation and Democratisation.
Criticism
Though Modern Public Administration brought public administration closer to political science, it was criticized as anti-theoretic and anti-management. Robert T. Golembiewski describes it as radicalism in words and status quo in skills and technologies. Further, it must be counted as only a cruel reminder of the gap in the field between aspiration and performance. Golembiewski considers it as temporary and transitional phenomena. In other words, we can say that the solutions for achieving the goals and anti-goals were not provided by the NPA scholars explicitly. Secondly, how much one should decentralize or delegate or debureaucratize or democratize in order to achieve the goals? On this front NPA is totally silent.
As said in A Modern Synthesis of Public Administration, governments have always been called upon to make difficult decisions, undertake complicated initiatives and face complex problems characteristically of the period. This is not in dispute. Nonetheless, the current circumstances are to determine what can be handled in the traditional way and what must be done differently.
Governments have always been called upon to face difficult problems. Setting priorities and making choices have always been difficult. For example, eliminating a sizable deficit is “merely” a difficult problem, although it is hard to believe when one is in the middle of such a heart-wrenching exercise. This entails making choices among equally deserving public purposes and making tough decisions about what should be preserved for the future. It requires reconciling future needs with what could garner a sufficient degree of public support in the short term to move forward. Academic public administration has lagged considerably behind practicing public administration. Improved curricula and a refocusing of emphasis upon the policy dynamics of government administration will be important factors in enticing more students to study of public administration. It is more important to increase the number and improving the geographic spread of universities with public affairs programs, integrating public affairs components into the curricula of other graduate and professional programs, developing many more in-service, mid-career educational programs for public servants, and utilizing existing resources to strengthen public affairs programs.
The motives behind the promotion of Modern Public Administration are also in question in the case of Hong Kong. As Anthony Cheung argues, officials often employed the rhetoric of Modern Public Administration to roll back public expenditure and decrease welfare provision in the 1990s. Governors at that time used the excuse of administrative efficiency to curtail the power of the bureaucracy.
Principles of Public Administration
PRINCIPLES OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Fayal specified fourteen principles of administration. They are-
However, Fayol agreed that this is not a complete or exhaustive list of principles of administration. They can be added or subtracted according to the need. Thus, he wrote, “There is no limit to the number of principles of administration. Every administrative rule or device which strengthens the human part of an organization or facilitates its working takes its places among the principles for so long as experience proves it to be worthy of this important position.”
Fayol also stated that his principles of administration are not rigid rules but are flexible and capable of adaptation to every need. He wrote, “The soundness and good working order of the corporate body depends on a certain number of conditions termed indiscriminately principles, laws, rules. For preference I shall adopt the term principles while dissociating it from any suggestion of rigidity, for there is nothing rigid or absolute in management affairs, it is all a question of proportion. Seldom do we have to apply the same principle twice in identical conditions; allowance must be made for different changing conditions.”
Further, Fayol stated that the codification of principles in indispensable. He emphasized, “Without principles one is in darkness and chaos; interest, experience and proportion are still very handicapped, even with the best principles. The principle is the light house fixing the bearings but it can only serve those who already know the way into port.”
The fourteen principles of Fayol are explained below:
Division of Work Specialization belongs to the natural order. The object of specialization is to produce more and better work with the same effort. It is applicable to technical work as well as to other work which involves a number of people and demand abilities of various types. It results in specialization of functions and separation of powers.
Authority and Responsibility Fayol defined authority as “the right to give orders and the power to exact obedience”. According to Fayol, authority and responsibility are interrelated and commensurate. In his words. “Authority is not to conceived of apart from responsibility, that is, apart from sanction-reward of penalty which goes with the exercise of power. Responsibility is a corollary of authority, it is its natural consequences and essential counterpart and wheresoever authority is exercised responsibility arises.”
Fayol made a distinction between a managers: official authority and personal authority. The former is derived from the office and the latter is compounded of intelligence, experience, moral worth, ability to lead, past services and so on. He believed that in the making of a good head, personal authority is the indispensable complement of official authority.
Discipline
Discipline is respect for agreement which are directed at achieving obedience, applications, energy, and the outward marks or respect. It is incumbent upon managers at higher levels as much as upon lower level employee, and the best means of establishing and maintaining it are:
Unity of Command
By this Fayol meant that, “For any action whatsoever, an employee should receive orders from one superior only.” He further added that, “Should it be violated, authority is undermined, to dual command. The two superiors issuing orders in a sphere which each thinks his own constitutes dual command. According to Fayol, the following factors results in dual command:
Unity of Direction
Fayol expressed the unity of direction as “one head and one plan for a group of activities having the same objective.” According to him, it is essential for unity of action, coordination of be confused with unity of command. According to him, “Unity of direction is provided for by sound organization of the body corporate, unity of command turns on the functioning of the personnel. Unity of command cannot exist without unity of direction, but not flow from it.”
Subordination of Individual Interest to General Interest
The interest of one employee or group of employees should not prevail over that of the organization. These two interests must be reconciled. The means of effecting the reconciliation are: (a) Firmness and good example on the part of superiors. (b) Agreements as fair as possible. (c) Constant supervision.
Remuneration of Personnel
It is the price for services rendered. It should be fair and afford satisfaction both to employee and employers. The rate of remuneration depends on
Foyal Suggested a variety of modes of payment such as
Centralisation
Centralisation, like division of work, belongs to the natural order. Thus, Fayol wrote, brain or directive part orders are sent out which set all parts of the organisms in movement.” He stated that centralization is present to a greater or lesser extent in all organization. The question of centralization or decentralization is a simple question of proportion…… Everything which goes to increase the importance of the subordinate’s role is decentralization; everything which goes to reduce it is centralization.”
Scalar Chain
Foyal defined scalar chain as the chain of superiors ranging from the ultimate authority to the lowest ranks. The line of authority is the route followed (via every link in the chain) by all communication which start from or go to the ultimate authority. According to him, this path is dictated both by the need for some transmission and by the principle of unity of command. This path is at times slow and lengthy, especially in a large government organisation. Hence, suggested an alternative route known as “gang plank” which involves short circuiting the procedure to speed up the communication.
Order
Fayol talks of two types of order:-material order and human or social order. The formula in the case of material things is ‘A place for everything and everything in its place’. The formula is the same for human order ‘A place for everyone and everyone in his place’ (The right man in the right place).
Equity
The results from a combination of kindness and justice. He says that people should be treated with kindness so as to encourage them to carry out their duties with all the devotion and loyalty. The head of the organization should strive to instill a sense of equity through all levels of the organization.
Stability of Tenure of Personnel
Time is required for an employee to get used to new work and succeed in doing it well. Fayol stated that instability of tenure or personnel is both the cause and effect of bad running, that is, inefficiency.
Initiative
Initiative means the power of thinking out a plan and executing it to ensure its success. It augments zeal and energy on the part of employees at all levels of the organisational ladder. Thus, it is a great source of strength for business. However, it must be encouraged only within the limits imposed by respect for authority and discipline.
Esprit de Cops
It means, harmony or union among the personnel of an organisation. It is a great source of strength in an organization. Fayol stated that, for promoting esprit de corps, the principle of unity of command should be observed and the dangers of divide and rule and the abuse of written communication should be avoided.
Concepts - Power
POWER
Power is the ability or capacity to influence decision. In other words, power refers to a capacity that one has to influence the behavior of other so that other does something he or she would not otherwise to.
The sources of power can be explained as follow:
Concepts - Authority
AUTHORITY
Authority is a constant and recognized phenomenon of considerable significance in an organisation. Organisation cannot survive without authority and each organisation has its own structure of authority.
According to Fayol, “Authority is the right to command and it is a prerogative of a manager.”
A manager without authority can be compared to a doctor without stethoscope. Authority is vital, it avoids uncertainty and disorder in the organisation. An unorganized group hierarchy gets effectively transformed into an orderly one through the exercise of authority by the Manager and it is probably the most important method of obtaining compliance. Authority is the power or right to enforce obedience.
According to Allen, “Authority is the sum of the powers and rights inter-related to make possible the performance of the work delegated.
There are three sources of authority in public administration :
(a) Law
(b) Tradition
(c) Delegation
There are two theories of authority :
(a) Positional Theory – Supported by the classical thinkers.
(b) Acceptance Theory – Advocated by the behaviouralist.
(a) Positional Theory of Authority : Max Weber and Fayol view authority as an attribute of a position in the organisation and not of an individual member. In other words, authority lies in the formal position and whoever occupies it, shall exercise authority and issue orders and commands. It is the duty of subordinates to obey those orders and commands.
(b) Acceptance Theory of Authority : It was advocated by Barnard (A behaviouralist). According to this theory, the basis of legitimacy of the superiors authority is the acceptance landed by the subordinate. A superior can exercise authority only when it is accepted by the subordinate.
According to Barnard, a subordinate will accept a communication as authoritative only when –
This term Authority is coined by Chester Barnard. He says that orders will be accepted by the subordinates so long as they fall within this zone. Hence, the executives should issue only those orders which fall within this zone. The extent of the zone of indifference is determined by the contribution – satisfaction equilibrium.
Simon presented the “zone of acceptance”. He said that when the superior exercises authority belong this zone of acceptance, the subordinate disobeys it.
Authority can be classified into the following three types :
Concepts - Responsibility and Delegation
RESPONSIBILITY
The word authority and responsibility are so often used together and individual is given responsibility to achieve certain objective and he is also given authority in the right amount to achieve those objectives.
Responsibility is the task to be done while authority is the tool needed to perform the task. Authority should be carefully tailored to fit the responsibility in word, failure to comply with this will result in maladministration and frustration of the people charged with the responsibility.
Responsibility denotes an obligation of an individual to carry out his duties. G.R. Terry says, “Responsibility is the obligation of a person to achieve the results mutually determined by means of participation by his superiors and himself”. It is different from accountability, which denotes answerability to the superiors regarding completion of the job in according with the directions.
Responsibility is of two types, viz operating responsibility and ultimate responsibility. The former can be delegated to the subordinates, while the latter cannot be delegated.
According to Fayol, authority and responsibility are inter–related and commensurate. In his words, “Authority is not to be conceived of apart from responsibility, that is, apart from sanction – reward or penalty – which goes with the exercise of power. Responsibility is a corollary of authority, it is its natural consequence and an essential counterpart, and wheresoever’s authority is exercised responsibility arises.”
Similarly, Urwick said “to hold a group or individual accountable for activities of any kind without assigning to him or them the necessary authority to discharge, that responsibility is manifestly both unsatisfactory and inequitable. It is of great importance to smooth working that at all levels, authority and responsibility should be coterminous and coequal.” This is what he called the ‘principle of correspondence’. In administrative process, responsibility is of three kinds, that is, political, institutional and professional. Political responsibility denotes the responsibility of the executive to the legislature which is, in turn, responsible to the people.
Institution responsibility denotes the responsibility of the administrative agency towards public welfare that is, being responsive to the public interest.
Professional responsibility denotes the responsibility of the civil service to the professional standards and ethics and codes of conduct. It is also known as ethical responsibility.
DELEGATION
The principle of hierarchy (scalar principle) binds together the different units and levels of the organization with a continuous chain of authority. The essence of this principle is the delegation of authority.
Definition
The following definitions bring out the meaning of delegation
Mooney: “Delegation means conferring of specified authority by a higher to a lower authority”
Terry: “Delegation means conferring authority from one executive or organizational unit to another.”
Millet: “Delegation of authority means more than simply assigning duties to other in more or less detail. The essence of delegation is to confer discretion upon others, to use their judgement in meeting specific problems within the frame work of their duties.
Features
As excellently analyzed Mohit Bhattacharya, a scheme of delegation has four features:
It must be clarified here that a scheme of delegation is subject to the supervision and control of the delegator. Further, the delegator neither transfers his final authority nor abdicates his ultimate responsibility. To sum up, delegation stands for the grant of authority by a superior to a subordinate for the attainment of a specific assignment. The delegator still retains the delegated authority but its exercise is permitted to the delegate. Thus, delegation has a dual character. In this context, Terry observes, “it is something like imparting knowledge you share with others, who when possess the knowledge; you still retain the knowledge too.”
However, M.P. Follet considered the concept of delegation as a mere myth of organisational (administrative) theory. She believed that “authority belongs to the job and stays with the job.” Hence, one who does the job, must have the authority whether his superior likes it or not. As authority belongs to the function (job), it cannot be delegated. The term ‘delegation of authority’ is thus an ‘obsolete expression’. She asserted “Authority must be functional and functional authority carries with its responsibility.”
Related concepts
Delegation is different from decentralisation, devolution, and deconcentration, which also imply transfer of authority. In the words of Muttalib, “Deconcentration is based on administrative action, devolution on political and legal and decentralisation on political, legal and administrative action.” For example, Panchyati Raj signifies decentralisation while, the office of District Collector deconcentration. The transfer of authority from the Centre to the States implies devolution.
Types :-
Downward, Upward and Sideward According to Terry, delegation is not necessarily downward; it can as well be upward or sideward. It is further explained below:
Conditional and Unconditional Delegation is conditional when the decision and action of the delegate is subject to control and confirmation by the delegator while it is unconditional when the delegate is free to take decision and act without any reservation.
Formal and Informal Delegation is formal when based on written rules and orders, while it is informal when based on customs and conventions.
Direct and Intermediate Delegation is direct when no third person is involved, while it is intermediate (indirect) when it is made through a third person. Usually, delegation is direct (immediate) and intermediate (indirect or mediate) delegation is rather rare. But, Mooney gave two instances of such delegation: the election of the President of USA by the people through Electoral College and the election of the Pope by the congregation through council of cardinals.
Advantages
Delegation is functional imperative for all kinds of organisation. It is needed for the following reasons.
Limits
Even though delegation is essential and advantageous, no superior can render himself superfluous by delegating entire authority vested in him. He has to retain some important powers to exercise effective control over the functioning of the organisation. Thus, the extent of delegation depends upon the nature of the case, the Circumstances, and the responsibilities involved. As identified by M.P. Sharma, the following powers are usually not delegated:
Hindrances
Hindrances to delegation can be grouped into two kinds, viz. organisational and personal.
Organisational Hindrances
Personal Hindrances
Principles
The observance of following principles makes delegation of authority effective.
Theories of Organisation
THEORIES OF ORGANISATION
Administration is a cooperative effort of a group of people in pursuit of a common objective. It is necessary that this group should be organized in order to attain the desired goal. In other words, organisation is an essential element of administration. It facilitaties the proper utilization of men, material, and money for the accomplishment of the defined purpose. Hence, there can be no administration without organisation. Dimock stated: “Organisation is the basic tool by means of which the administrative process is kept operating.”
Definition
The term ‘organisation’ is derived from the word ‘organicism’ which means an organized body of interdependent parts sharing common activity. The various definition of organization are:
The term organization connotes different things to different people. It is used in three different senses, that is, the act of designing the administrative structure, both designing and building the administrative structure, and the administrative structure itself. These three views represent a mechanistic (structural) view or organisation in the sense that they do not convey the idea of human relationship (informal relations). However, an organization is both a structure and a set of human relationships.
Characteristics
Nicholas Henry has summarized the characteristics of the organization in the following manner:
According to L.D. White, an organization has three primary elements viz., persons, combined efforts, and a common purpose. The elements of an organisation, according to C.I. Barnard, are:
According to Herbert A. Simon, the functions of an organisation includes dividing work among the members formulating standard practices, providing a communication system, transmitting decisions, and training the members.
Bases
Luther Gulick identified four bases of organization, namely, purpose, process, prersons, and place. These are explained as follows:
It means the function performed by the organization. The example of organizations based on the purpose (function) is: Defense Department, Health Department, Labour Department, Human Resource Development Department and so on.
The demerits of purpose principle for functional principle are:
The Haldane Committee of Britain (1918-1919), the First Hoover Commission of USA (1949-1950), and the Study Team of Administrative Reforms Commission of India (1966-1970) recommended these principles.
It means the technique or specialized skill used by the organisation in the performance of work. The examples of organisation based on the process are: Space Department, Law Department, Ocean Development Department, Electronics Department and so on.
The merits of process principle are:
The demerits of process principle are:
It means the group of people (clientele) served by the organization. The examples of organization based on clientele are: Rehabilitation Department, Tribal Welfare Department, Women Welfare Department and so on.
The Merits of clientele principle are:
The demerits of clientele principle are:
It means the territorial area covered by the organisation. The examples of organizations based on place are: External Affairs Department and territorial division within it, Damodar Valley Corporation, Zonal Offices of Railways and so on.
The merits of place principle are:
The demerits of place principle are:
HIERARCHY
Hierarchy was emphasised by all the classical thinkers like Weber, Fayol, Gulick, Urwick, Mooney and Reliley called it the ‘scalar process’. Mooney stated that hierarchy is a universal phenomenon.
Meaning
The term ‘Hierarchy’ is derived from the Greek term for a ruling body of priests organized into ranks. The word ‘scalar’ is derived from ‘scale’ which means ‘ladder’. With several steps.
Literally, the term “hierarchy” means the control of the higher over the lower. In administrative phraseology, it means an organisation structured in a pyramidical fashion with successive steps interlinked with each other, from top to bottom.
Mooney has explained the scalar chain or scalar process in the following way: “The scalar principle is the same form in an organization that is sometimes called hierarchical. A scale means a series of steps, something graded. In an organization it means the grading of duties, not according to the different functions, but according to the degrees of authority and corresponding responsibility. For our convenience we shall call these phenomena of organization the scalar chain”.
While highlighting the universality of the scalar chain in the organization, he (Mooney) asserted that “Wherever we find an organization even of two people, related as superior and sub-ordinate, we have the scalar principle. This chain constitutes the universal process of co-ordination, through which the supreme co-ordination authority becomes effective throughout the entire structure”. According to him, the scalar process has its own principle, process and effect. These are: (i) Leadership, (ii) Delegation, and (iii) Functional Definition.
The scalar system denotes that every employee is bound in a single chain of command. In the words of Stephen Robbins, “the chain of command is an unbroken line of authority that extends from the top of the organisation to the lowest echelon and clarifies who reports to whom”.
Definition
Principles
There principles are followed to organize functional units in a pyramidical form. They are:
The following diagram illustrates the principle of hierarchy in administration:
FIG. 2.1 Principle of Hierarchy
In the above diagram, A is the head of the organisation. The immediate subordinate of A is B and the immediate subordinate of B is C. But C is also Subordinate to A through B. This is true of all the other levels in the line, that is D, E, F and G. Hence, orders flow from top to bottom, that is, from A to B, B to C, and so on, and communication flow from bottom to top, that is, from G to F, F to E and so on. The same is true on the other side, that is, A to Q. The communication between G and Q takes place through A, that is, it ascends to A from G and descends from A to Q in a step by step manner. This is called communication ‘through proper channel’. The line of authority (the chain of command or line of command) linking the entire organisation is represented in the above diagram.
Advantages
The advantages of the principle of hierarchy are:
According to Paul H. Appleby, hierarchy “is the means by which resources are apportioned, personnel selected and assigned, operations activated, reviewed and modified.”
Disadvantages
The disadvantages of principle of hierarchy are:
Fayol’s Gangplank
To speed up the flow of business and avoid delay in disposal of cases, Henry Fayol suggested an alternative route called ‘gangplank’. He illustrated it in the following way.
Following the line of authority (scalar chain), F to communicate with P, has to go through E-D-C-B-A-L-M-N-O and back again. On the other hand, it is much simpler and quicker to go directly from F to P by the concept of gangplank stands for establishing a communication channel with an employee of the same level, than is, a horizontal communication system.
Fayol asserts. “It is an error to depart needlessly from the line of authority, but it is an even greater one to keep to it when detriment to the business ensues.”
Similarly, Lyndall Urwick observes, “Every organisation must have its scalar chain just as every house must have its drain but it is unnecessary to use this channel frequently as the sole means of communication, as it is unnecessary to pass one’s time in the drain.”
Due to inherent defects in the hierarchical organizations, the modern administrative thinkers like Chris Argyris have suggested the matrix organization (also known as fan-like organisation). This form of organisation is free from the rigid superior-subordinate relationship.
Finally, it should be noted here that John Priffiner and Robert Presthus have studied the impact of computers (information technology) on the hierarchical pyramid of an organisation.
Steps and Area of Control and Unity of Command
UNITY OF COMMAND
Meaning
Unity of command means that an employee should receive orders from one superior only. In other words, it means that no employee should be subjected to the orders of more than one superior. Thus, it stands for single boss for each person or mono-command.
Definition
Arguments “For”
The observance of the concept of unity of command is essential to avoid confusion and manipulation in organisation. Duality or multiplicity of command keeps an employee under confusion and conflicting situation, for instance, ‘whom’ to follow and ‘what’ to follow. Further, a subordinate can also evade orders by playing off one superior against another, which undermines the organisational purpose.
Henry Fayol is the most important advocate of the principle of unity of command. He asserted that, “Should it be violated, authority is undermined, discipline is in jeopardy, order disturbed and stability threatened…., As soon as two superiors wield their authority over the same person or department, uneasiness makes itself felt and should the cause persists, the disorder increases, the malady takes on the appearance of an organism troubled by a foreign body, and the following consequences are to be observed; either the dual command ends in disappearance or elimination of one of the superiors and organic well-being is restored, or else the organism continues to wither away. In no case is there adaption of the social organism to dual command.”
According to Fayol, the following factors result in dual command.
Gulick and Urwick have also supported the principle of unity of command. They believed that, “a man cannot serve two masters.” Hence, they concluded that, “well-managed administrative units in the government are almost without exception headed by single administrators.”
Gulick explains the importance of these principles, “any rigid adherence to the principle of unity of command may have its absurdities. But they are unimportant in comparison to the certainty of confusion, inefficiency and irresponsibility which arise from the violation of the principle.”
Arguments “Against”
The concept of unity of command has been opposed by many writers. Seckler-Hudson argues. “The old concept of one single boss for each person is seldom found in fact in complex governmental situations. Many interrelationships exist outside the straight line of command which require working with, and reporting to many persons for purpose of orderly and effective performance … the administrator in government has many bosses and he can neglect none of them. From one he may receive policy orders; from another, personnel; from a third, budget; from a fourth, supplies and equipments.”
J.D. Millet advocates the theory of ‘Dual Supervision’ in place of unity of command. He argues that the concept of unity of command needs to be reconciled with the recognition that supervision of any activity may be dual-technical (professional) and administrative. These two types of supervision may be exercised by different individuals. The former may be concerned with the professional competence in the performance of a job, while, the latter may be chiefly interested in the efficient utilisation of men and material resources available for the job. He concludes that “it should be kept in mind that under no circumstance an employee is subject to conflicting commands”.
According to Herbert Simon, the principle of unity of command conflicted with the principle of specialization. He says, “One of the most important uses to which authority is put in an organisation is to bring about specialization in the work of making decisions, so that each decision is made at the point in the organization where it can be made most expertly. If an accountant in a school department is subordinate to an educator, then the finance department cannot issue direct orders to him regarding the technical accounting aspects of his work. Similarly, the director of motor vehicles in the public works department will be unable to issue direct orders on care of motor equipment of the fire-truck driver”. He continues: “The principle of unity of command is perhaps more defensible if narrowed down to the following: In case two authoritative commands conflict, there should be a single determinate person whom the sub-ordinate is expected to obey, and the sanctions of authority should be applied against the sub-ordinate only to enforce his obedience to that one person.”
F.W. Taylor has also rejected the principle of unity of command. In its place, he advocated the concept of ‘functional foremanship’, under which a worker receives orders from eight supervisors, or functional foremen. This ensures specialization and expert supervision.
Factors Affecting
Moreover, the concept of unity of command has been affected by the following two factors which are the result of growing size and complexity of modern organizations.
Other Meanings
In addition to the above, the concept of unity of command is also interpreted in two their ways:
In the first sense, unity of command is incompatible with the independent or autonomous units of organizations like the public corporation or constitutional bodies in India or the independent regulatory commissions in USA and so on. In the second sense, it is incompatible with Commission type or Board type of organisations like the Election Commission, the Union Public Service Commission, the University Grants Commissions, the Railway Board, the Flood Control Board and so on. Hence, the most widely accepted interpretation of unity of command is the one given above.
New Dimension of Public Management
New Public Management (NPM)
The term New Public Management (NPM) emerged in the beginning of the 1990s in response to the challenges of globalization, international competitiveness, and technological change. It is argued that it represents a paradigm shift from a traditional model of public administration, dominant for most of the 20th century to managerial-ism or what is popularly known as the New Public Management.
NPM seeks to adopt various techniques and practices used by private sector management. E.g. zero based budgeting (ZBB), Total quality management (TQM), Human Resource Management (HRM), Networking, Human Resource Accounting (HRA), Social Accounting, Operational research technique (OR), Management by objective (MBO) etc. NPM has also common roots and combined the public choice theory and Neo-Taylorism. (Neo-Taylorism introduced the managerial methods and techniques of private sector into the public sector).
LIMITATIONS OF TRADITIONAL PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION SYSTEM
The major dysfunctions found in the existing public administration system were:
Because of these dysfunctions in the working of traditional public administration during the last decade or so, the simmering dissatisfaction of the people has led to new paradigm of public administration which is termed as NPM.
The term ‘New Public Management’ was coined by Christopher Hood in 1991 in his paper entitled ‘A New Public Management for all seasons’. It is also termed as ‘Managerial-ism’, ‘Post-Weberian Administration’, ‘Post-Wilsonian Administration’,‘Market-based Public Administration’, etc.
BACKGROUND
The Public Choice New Rights Group argued that a decentralized strategy is superior to centralized structure. The questions have been raised why the bureaucratic form of organizations should have the monopoly to provide public goods and services. There are various options available for the delivery of public goods and services, and society may benefit from the many suppliers syndrome. It is not necessary that government should always assume the role of a direct provider of goods and services; instead governments may operate indirectly, allowing non-government agencies to operate directly in a wide range of social activities.
Margret Thatcher (UK) and Reagan (USA) were at the fore-front to bring about a synthesis of the public administration & business management. It takes ‘what’ and ‘why’ from public administration and ‘how’ from private administration. In fact, UK was the first country that initiated the privatization of public enterprises. With their effort, remarkable changes took place in public sector management practices in most advanced countries: Structurally, the change was from rigid, hierarchical and bureaucratic form of public administration to a flexible, market-based form of public management. There was change in the role of government in society, and government-citizenship relationship. These objective conditions created opportunities for the emergence of almost a new paradigm in public sector analysis.
NPM connotes organizing and running public organizations in a more management- oriented way as that of private organizations, so as to achieve more citizen satisfaction and societal welfare. The basic theme of NPM is to allow public managers manage. There is a greater emphasis on:
REASONS FOR EMERGENCE OF NPM
The years of late 1980s and early 1990s witnessed tremendous changes the world over necessitating changes even in the paradigm of public administration. The various factors behind the emergence of NPM are:-
Thus, the NPM philosophy was basically triggered by a combination of economic issues and geopolitical changes resulting in reduced financial resources for governments. This demanded efficient utilization of available resources. For coping up with these challenges, traditional bureaucratic administration was highly misfit. Managerial rethink, therefore, became imperative.
IDEOLOGICAL AND THEORETICAL BASIS
The core themes for the New Public Management were:
With changing times newer aspects were included in the NPM model mentioned above as well and what the scholars term as NPM model 2 was brought in. The critical aspects of this new model were:
Now, as more and more work was done in the areas of Human Resources and Relations and popular texts which stressed on the need of excellence, the importance of organizational culture, values, vision and the concept of Learning Organization introduced by Peter Senge (1990) influenced the new public management as well and therefore suitable changed were also suggested in the theory by the scholars.
Management of Change and Development Administration
MANAGEMENT OF CHANGE
while it is sometimes called the soft side of change, managing the people side of a change is often the most challenging and critical component of an organizational transformation. Take a merger or acquisition for example. The technical side of the change, or the hard side, if you will, will most certainly be complex. Issues surrounding the financial arrangements of the deal must be worked out. Development will have to take place to integrate the business system. Decisions will be made about the physical arrangements of the newly formed organization.But getting people on board and participating in the change will make the difference. Individuals will have to do their jobs differently, and it is the degree to which they change their behaviors and processes that will make or break the merger or acquisition. The soft side of change is many times actually the harder side of change. Learn the what, why and how of managing the people side of change with a structured approach to change management.
Change management takes care of the people side of change. It does little good to create a new organization, design new work processes or implement new technologies if you leave the people behind. Financial success of these changes will be more dependent on how individuals in the organization embrace the change than how well you draw organization charts or process diagrams.
Change management is the process, tools and techniques to manage the people side of change to achieve its required business outcomes. It is the systematic management of employee engagement and adoption when the organization changes how work will be done. Ultimately, change management focuses on how to help employees embrace, adopt and utilize a change in their day-to-day work. Change management is both a process and a competency:
From a process perspective, change management is the set of steps followed by a team member on a particular project or initiative. For the given transformational effort, it is the strategy and set of plans focused on moving people through the change. Prosci’s research-based methodology includes three main phases:
Change competency is a leader or manager’s ability to effectively lead their people through change. The notion of a leadership competency is universal, but what that competency entails depends on a person’s relationship to change. For senior leaders, change management competency means being an effective sponsor of change and demonstrating their own as well as the organization’s commitment to the change. For frontline supervisors, competency is related to coaching direct reports through their own change journey. While competency varies depending on one’s relationship to change, organizations are more effective and successful when they build change management competencies throughout their ranks.
Change management is not just communication or training. It is not just managing resistance. Effective change management follows a structured process and uses a holistic set of tools to drive successful individual and organizational change.
There are numerous reasons to employ effective change management on both large- and small-scale efforts. Here are three main reasons to employ change management:
It is easy to fall into the trap of thinking about change exclusively from an organizational perspective. When one thinks about a merger or acquisition, they can focus on financial structuring, data and system integration and physical location changes. However, organizational change of any kind actually occurs one person at a time. Success of an organization effort only occurs when Adam and Betty and Charles and Deborah (for example) do their jobs differently. Organizations don’t change; people within organizations change. It is the cumulative impact of successful individual change that results in an organizational change being successful. If individuals don’t make changes to their day-to-day work, an organizational transformation effort will not deliver results.
There are countless consequences of ignoring the people side of a change:
Projects also suffer as due to missed deadlines, overrun budgets and unexpected and unnecessary rework to get the effort back on track. In some cases, the project itself is completely abandoned after large investments of capital and time. All of these consequences have tangible and real financial impact on the health of the organization and the project. And each of these consequences can be addressed and mitigated if a project includes a structured approach to the people side of change.
There is a growing body of data that shows the impact that effective change management has on the probability that a project meets its objectives. Prosci’s longitudinal benchmarking studies show a strong correlation: Data from the 2013 benchmarking study showed that 96% of participants with excellent change management met or exceeded objectives, while only 16% of those with poor change management met or exceeded objectives.
In other words, projects with excellent change management were six times more likely to meet objectives than those with poor change management. Regardless of the change at hand, focusing on the people side of change increases the likelihood of being successful. Additionally, Prosci’s research shows a direct correlation between effective change management and staying on schedule and on budget.
Effectively managing change requires two perspectives: an individual perspective and an organizational
perspective.
The individual perspective is an understanding of how people experience change. Prosci’s ADKAR
Model describes change as successful when an individual has:
If an individual is missing any of these five building blocks, then the change will not be successful. The goal, then, in leading the people side of change is ensuring that individuals have awareness, desire, knowledge, ability and reinforcement.
The organizational perspective of change management is the process and activities that project teams utilize to support successful individual change. If ADKAR describes what an individual needs to make a change successfully, then organizational change management is the set of actions to help build awareness, desire, knowledge, ability and reinforcement across the organization. Based on over a decade of research, Prosci’s organizational methodology utilizes readiness assessments and strategy development to support the creation of five targeted plans:
Each of the plans has a specific ADKAR element as its focus.
While the change management resource on a project can work to develop the strategy and plans, much of the work of change management is done by senior leaders, managers and supervisors throughout the organization. Benchmarking data shows that in times of change, employees have two preferred senders of change messages:
Change management practitioners are enablers of these employee-facing roles. And, in times of change, it is the effectiveness of senior leaders as sponsors of change and of managers and supervisors as coaches of change that will determine if a project succeeds or fails.
So what can you do to become a more effective change leader? The bottom line is this: begin applying change management on your projects and begin building change management competencies in your organization. These are the first steps to ensuring projects deliver their intended results.
The people side of change is not the soft side of change; in reality it is the harder side of change. Investing the time and energy to manage the people side of your organizational efforts pays off in the end – in terms of success of the effort and avoidance of the numerous costs that plague poorly managed change.
DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION: CONCEPT AND FEATURES
The essence of development administration is to bring about change through integrated, organised and properly directed governmental action. In the recent past the governments in most of the developing nations have shifted their focus on development by means of planned change and people’s participation. With this shift of administrative concern towards developmental objectives the researchers and practitioners of Public Administration have been forced to conceptualise the developmental situation and to bridge the gaps in administrative theory. The growing welfare functions of the government have brought into limelight the limitations of the traditional theory of administration.
The essence of administration in the present conditions lies in its capacity to bring about change in the structure and behaviour of different administrative institutions, to develop an acceptance for the change and to create a system which can sustain change and improve the capacity of institutions to change. All this calls for renewed efforts on the part of institutions engaged in the tasks of development. Thus development administration as an area of study and as means to realise developmental goals assumes importance.
There is no uniform definition of development administration which is agreeable to all. But we can atleast arrive at certain basic features and characteristics of order to understand the concept of development administration, we should try to understand the meaning of the concept viz., administration of development and development of administration.
There is no uniform definition of development administration which is agreeable to all. But we can atleast arrive at certain basic features and characteristics of order to understand the concept of development administration, we should try to understand the meaning of the concept viz., administration of development and development of administration.
Administration of Development
Development is integral to the aims and activities of the government especially in the developing countries. Because of paucity of resources, human and material in their counties, the need for making optimum utilisation of available means and augmenting new means assumes a great importance. Development administration thus becomes a means through which the government brings quantitative and qualitative changes in an economy. Government is engaged in not only fixing priorities but also making efforts to realise them. Hence, we can say that development administration is an effort towards planned transformation of the economy involving not only the sphere of administration but also formulation of policies and indeed the society as a whole. It is an effort at the synchronisation of changes in all spheres of development-economic, political, social and cultural. Thus development is not only viewed in terms of growth process, but it includes a process of social change.
It concentrates on the needs and desires of the people and concerned with formulation of plans, programmes, policies and projects and their implementation. It plays a central role in carrying out planned change i.e. it is concerned with planning, co-ordination, control, monitoring and evaluation of plans and programmes. It is not only concerned with the application of policies as determined by the political representatives in existing situation but also with introducing efforts to modify existing situations so as to serve the cause of the masses.
Objectives of Administration of development
Development of Administration or Administrative Development
Development of administration means cultural change in administration. It has to be efficient and effective. For that purpose it has to aim at enlargement of administrative capabilities and structural and behavioural change. It is this aspect of administration that is called administrative development or development of administration. In simple terms it means development of administrative system,’or administrative health by introducing-administrative rationalisation and institution building. The purpose implicit in this concept is not merely changing the administrative procedures and channels but also bringing out fundamental change in administration that leads to:
Concerns of Administrative Development
Features of development administration
As we know that, development administration is a process of action motivated by and oriented to the achievement of progressive goals of development. It aims at creating and/or mobilising the will and skills to utilise in an optimum manner the resources of the country leading to the realisation of development objectives. Thus development administration is a process of planned change. The administration is being studied now a days in the contextual perspective. Comparative analysis of the administrative system in terms of organisation, administration and development management brings out two distinct elements of ‘ administration:
(1) Administrative reforms are improvements that each nation has been trying so as to match administration with development needs.
(2) Concentration of efforts at acceleration of rate of growth and change so as to meet the challenges of socio-political development and nation-building effectively. It is in this context that the concept of development administration has come to be used. However, the concept has varied dimensions-social, cultural, economic and political. The issue regarding the focus or scope of development administration as a discipline and as a process has assumed importance.