Study of Public administration --
Following are the various approaches/phases of study of Public Administration: Policies-Administration Dichotomy Approach: Woodrow Wilson, the father of modern Public Administration, considered politics and administration as separate processes and attempted to conceptually distinguish between the two areas of study. A similar attempt was made by Frank Goodnow, another exponent of the dichotomy approach who observed that "politics has to do with policies or expressions of state while administration has to do with the execution of these policies".
This distinction is made between policy making and policy execution. Policy making is regarded as the realm of politics and execution as the realm of Public Administration. Further, politics and Public Administration are differentiated on the basis of their institutional locations. The location of politics is identified with the legislature and the higher echelons of government where major policy-decisions would be made and the larger questions of allocation of values decided upon. The location of administration on the other hand is identified with the executive arm of government the bureaucracy. The processes of administration, it was argued, have a certain regularity and concreteness about them, which can be successfully investigated. Thus it is possible to develop a science of Administration. Structural Approach: This approach is marked by the tendency to reinforce the idea of politics - administration dichotomy and to evolve a value-free
"Science of Management'. The 'Public' aspects of Public Administration was virtually dropped at this stage and the focus was almost wholly on economy and efficiency. The questions of "value' were not considered important to the new science of Administration. Politics as practiced by the politicians was considered irrelevant. Seientific Management for the efficient handling of the 'business' of administration became the focus of interest. Principles of management were worked out as readymade aids to practitioners. The administrative practitioners and the business schools joined hands to emphasise the mechanistic aspect of management unaffected by the predilections of politicians and the failings of human beings. The approach emphasized the structure of the organization. Structure is a device through which human beings working in an organization are assigned tasks and related to one another. It is believed that the effective functioning of the organization depends upon the structure that a group of human beings build and operate. The structural approach was criticized for the ambiguity of its principles, absence of scientific validity and its mechanistic approach to human problems.
Human Relations Approach:
The Hawthorne experiments pioneered a movement which came to be known as the Human Relations Approach to management. Its impact on Public Administration was felt much more widely in the postwar period than before. This approach to organizational analysis drew attention to the formation and effect of work groups in the organization, the force of informal organization in the formal setup, the phenomena of leadership and conflicts and cooperation among groups in the organizational setting. In short, the human relations approach brought out the limitations of the machine concept of organization in 'Scientific Management' thought. By drawing attention to the social and psychological factors of work situation, it underlined the importance of the "human side of the enterprise".
The social psychologist has extended the concern of human relationists by bringing in additional knowledge about the sensitivity to human components. It is aimed at bringing about: (1) greater organizational productivity. or effectiveness, and (2) greater human happiness and increased self-realisa Prominent writers advocating this approach include Abraham Maslow, Douglas McGregor, Rensis Likert and Chris Argyris. The human relations approach has been criticized for its manipulative orientation. It is alleged that the aim of the movement is to manipulate the man in organization to achieve higher productivity. It is also criticized for ignoring the institutional and social system variable in understanding the organization.
Behavioural Approach:
Herbert Simon's 'Administrative Behaviour is a critique of the older Public Administration. More importantly, it sets forth the rigorous requirements of scientific analysis in Public Administration. Simon's conclusion about some of the classical 'Principles', was that they were unscientifically derived and were "no more than proverbs". He rejected the politics-administration dichotomy and at the same time brought in the prospective of logical positivism for 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 enforcement of scientific rigour in Public Administration. The substantive focus was on "decision-making" and as Simon insisted. "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's approach provided an alternative definition of Public Administration and widened the scope of the subject by relating it to Psychology, Sociology Economics and Political Science. In the development of the 'discipline' he identified two mutually supportive streams of thought. One was engaged in the development of a pure science of administration which called for a good grounding in social psychology and the other in the development of a broad range of values and in working out prescriptions for public policy. The second approach was, in Simon's view, analytically far-ranging. It would imply the assimilation of the whole of Political Science and Economics and Sociology as well as Public Administration. Thus Public Administration, he feared, might lose its identity in the second approach. But he favoured the co-existence of both the streams of thought for the growth and development of the discipline. As he said,
"there does not appear to be any reason why these two developments in the field of Public Administration should not go side by side, for they in no way conflict or contradict. But the workers in this field must keep clearly in mind in which area, at any given time, they propose to work".
Development Approach: The ecological approach to the study of administration originated in the wake of the emergence of the Third World and increasing realization of irrelevance of most of the western organization theories to the study of administration. To quote Robert Dahl,
"The study of Public Administration inevitably must become a much more broadly based discipline, resting not on a narrowly defined knowledge of techniques and processes, but rather extending to the varying historical, sociological, economic and other conditioning factor."
This suggestion has been taken up as a challenge and efforts have been made in the study of Public Administration in the developing countries in a bid to - "establishing propositions about administrative behaviour which transcend national boundaries".
Such efforts have given rise to Comparative Public Administration and Development Administration. Public Policy Approach: The Social Sciences' general concern for social engineering has resulted in the laying of emphasis on public policy. The study of Public Administration has also been influenced by the public policy perspective. The abandonment of politics-administration dichotomy made the public policy approach agreeable to administrative analysis. Evidence from the practical world of administration has brought out the critera of a close nexus between politics and administration. As governments seek formulate and implement more and more welfare programmes, the promoue of policy studies in public Administration gathers momentum. At this stag ,the study of Public
Administration has been gaining in social relevance no doubt; but its boundaries as a descriptive study are not as clearly distinguishable now as they used to be in the olden days of politics administration dichotomy. The discipline, to many Public Administration analysts, has gained in vigour and rigour; but it has suffered a crisis of identity with diversification and strength.
Political Economy Approach:
Another development in the study of Public Administration is brought about by the adoption of the political economy approach to the analysis of administrative problems. This is associated with the moving of Political Science closer to Economics in the interest of greater theoretical coherence and better policy guidance. Economists like Anthony Downs and Gordon Tullock have gone over the boundary by experimenting with the application of economic methods and models to political problems. Thus Public Administration as a branch of Political Science and on its own has moved towards a liaison with Economies. The liberal democratic tradition in the evolution of Public Administration shows that, starting with an assertion of independent identity, it has moved towards the assimilation of ideas, methods and techniques of different Social Science disciplines. Thus the scope of the discipline seems to be broadening while the questions of its identity remains unanswered.
0 Comments