DU SOL BA 3rd Year Administration and Public Policy Notes Chapter 3 Public Administration as a Discipline
Explain briefly the salient features of Administrative System in:
(a) U.S.A. (b) U.S.S.R. (c) Great Britain (d) France.
(A) Salient Features Of Admimstrauve System In U.S.A :
The Administrative System in the U.S.A. is also democratic as in Britain, but die method of enforcing the responsibility of the administration to the legislature is different from dim of Britain. This is due to the feet that in die U.S.A. there is no cabinet responsible to the legislature. Hence, the legislature has no direct control over die administration in its day to day operations. In the United States, the day to day activities of the administration cannot be questioned in the legislature through questions and adjournment motions as is done in Britain. The legislature controls the administration through such means as the ratification of high administrative appointments, control exercised by the committees of the legislature over the administration etc. The important method of democratic control in the U.S.A. is through the control that the committees of the legislatures exercise over the administrative officials through hearings in which the various acts of the administrative officials can be questioned. Thus it is seen that even though the administrative system in the U.S.A. is democratic the responsiveness of the administration to the wishes of the representatives of the people on a day to day is restricted unlike as in Britain.
The administrative system in the U.S.A. is based on the principle of specialization unlike as in Great Britain where the generalist is supreme. In the U.S.A. the specialist is predominant and the generalist has very little role to play in the administrative system. Even at the top levels of the bureaucracy, the specialist is supreme and both at the federal level and in the states there is no generalist administrative service to man top policy-making posts in the administration. The result is the predominance of narrow Specialization in the various department and lack of an overall perspective In the part of the top policy makers in the government. Moreover, due to the predominance of the principle of specialization, the recruitment of personal is based on their capacity to man a particular position and the concept of a career civil service is not very strong. Classification of positions is based on the principle of position classification in which each position is classified into a separate category based on the work of that particular position. This means that the personnel manning the position had to be experts in the work of that position and their mobility to other positions is restricted unlike as in the British system wherein the classification is based on the principle of rank. The flexibility that we noticed in the British system in the mobility of personnel amongst the departments of the governments, at least at the top levels, is absent in the U.SA. where such mobility is restricted. Civil service is not considered a. career in the U.SA. as it is in Britain and unlike as in Britain where the lateral entry into the civil services.at the higher levels is rather restricted .‘In the U.SA. such lateral entry into the civil service at higher levels is quite possible and frequent.
The administrative system in the U.SA. is not an integrated whole as in Britain, While in Britain the cabinet has complete control over the administrative agencies, the administrative system in the U.SA. is unintegrated in terms of tire control of the President and his cabinet over the administration. This is because, in addition to the various departments and public corporations, there are numerous independent regulatory commissions over the working of these commissions as they are regulated by statute and do not report to the President. They are islands of independence in the administrative system in the U.S. and they regulate the working of such important areas as money supply and monetary policy (Federal Reserve Board), inter-state commerce (inter-state Commerce CommissionX telecommunication, etc. This mitigates vastly the integrated functions of the government Thus, in Britain, the administrative system is well integrated and allows the government to implement its policies with full vigour but in the U.S A. the desperate nature of the system leads to difficulties for the government in the process of policy implementation.
(B) Salient Features Of Administrative System In USSR
The USSR is different from the United States and Britain in political , organization and this difference is reflected in its administrative system also. The USSR is a one party Communist State and hence the bureaucracy plays a very important role in the running of the state apparatus and in the life of the individual as most aspects of life in the USSR are controlled by the State. J* The bureaucracy in the USSR is an arm of the Communist Party and one of tiie fundamental qualifications for requirement to the bureaucracy is membership of the Communist. Party. The Britain concept of open recruitment based on merit is alien to tire USSR as is the concept of a neutral civil service serving whichever government is an power. In the USSR the administrative system and bureaucracy are arms of the Communist Party and arc expected to promote the interest of the Party, The bureaucracy and the administration are also constantly subject to Party control in ail their activities unlike in Britain and the other democracies where the administration and bureaucracy are free from party control and act neutrally based on rules and regulations framed by the government in the interests of fair administration. The administrative system in the USSR is thus highly partisan in its composition and in its functioning.
The administrative system in the USSR is all embracing as far as the citizen is concerned and controls all aspects of his life. In spite of this life ‘ responsiveness of the system to the needs and aspirations of the people is limited. In the USSR the concept of democracy does not prevail and though the bureaucracy is subject to party Cenfrol, it is not responsive to public opinion. As long as the bureaucrats protect the interests of the party they can very much do as they like and no one is likely to pull them up, This being the case, the administrative system in die USSR is unresponsive to public opinion and there is no organization in die administration life an Ombudsman to protect the interests of the citizen vis-a-vis die bureaucracy.
The administrative system in die USSR is highly centralized arid delegation of powers to the lower levels of the economy and its decisions affect the various far-flung regions of the country. Most decisions of importance in the r economy emerge .« ran. the various ministries in Moscow and are faithfully carried out m tire field even if conditions in die field require the implementation of different policies. This centralization of the administrative system in a vast’ country like the USSR reduces the effectiveness of the administrative system as quite a lot of time is lost in the transmission of messages to Moscos for a decision and in tire transmission of the decision to the field.
(C) Salient Features Of Administrative System In Great Britain
The British administrative system is important as it the model for the administrative system of democratic countries following the system of Rule of Law. It has, therefore, influenced the administrative system of most of the Anglo Saxon as well as the administrative system of the erstwhile British colonies. We shall discuss die salient features of this administrative system and compare it with the administrative system of the other three countries i which are the object of interest to us.
The British administrative system in a democratic system. Tire government is responsible to the Parliament for all its actions and this implies that the administrative system through which it acts must also be responsive to the will of tile Parliament. Though the administration is directly responsible for its acts to the cabinet and works under tire supervision of the cabinet, the Parliament does scrutinise the act of the administration. Many Committees of the Parliament exercise control over the working of the administration. For example, the Public Accounts Committee scrutinizes the expenditures of the government and in this process brings to light various irregularities in the expenditures which are committed by the bureaucracy. The bureaucrats have to appear before this Committee and reply to the questions of the members of the Committee.
Similarly the Committee on subordinate legislation scrutinizes the rules and regulations framed by the bureaucrats under various laws and this helps to check the rule making power of the bureaucracy. Similarly the Parliament checks the working of the bureaucracy through such devices as rebates in the House of Commons, Questions, Adjournment Motions, etc., and most acts of bureaucrats can be questioned by the Parliament. This makes the bureaucracy responsi ve to the wishes of the Parliament and the bureaucracy cannot act in a manner as to ignore the wishes of the elected representatives of the people. In order ensure the responsiveness of the administration to the wishes of the people there are special organizations to help soft out the citizen’s problem with the administration and this grievance machinery is called the Ombudsman. Any citizen who is aggrieved by any act of the administration can appeal to the Ombudsman for help in solving his problems’ and help is provided to _his by the Ombudsman in sorting out his problems. The administrative system in Britain is thus democratic and responsive to public opinion.
It must be pointed out that all institutions of the administration like the various departments and public corporations are subject to the detailed scrutiny of Parliament and there are no organizations in the administration over which the legislature does not have control.
Another important feature of the British administrative system is that entry into the bureaucracy is not based on any special privileges like birth, party affiliation, etc., but is open to all citizens who are qualified to hold a particular class of jobs. Entry to toe government service is based on merit and his merit is tested by open competitive examinations and the best persons in these examinations are chosen for toe service at different levels. This is in keeping with toe democratic traditions of toe country and ensures that the best among toe available personnel are recruited to the government service. Efficiency of the service is thus ensured and there is no favouritism on the part of the government in power towards its own supports in providing government jobs.
The British administrative system is one based on the principle of the supremacy of the generalist at the higher levels of the civil service. This is in contrast to the American system in which the specialist is supreme. In Britain, position at the higher levels of the administration are occupied by-generalist administrator who are drawn from the higher civil service of the country.
These civil servants are chosen for the service on the basis of a open competitive examination and make a career in the government service. They are trained in ! the art of administration and service in various departments of the government.
They, therefore, develop an overall broad view of the functioning of the government and this ensures effective policy formulation from a broad standpoint. Narrow departmental view points are subjugated to the broad interest of the government as a whole and this ensures effective policies in the national interest.
As the civil servants manning various departments belong to a common cadre they are able to effective coordinate the policies of the different departmentr. The fact that the civil servants make a career in the public service ” ensures that they always consider the interests of the government in the process of policy making and the long term interests of the government are protected bv the civil servants. Thus the British administrative system is not only democratic but it ensures the effective protection of the long-term interests of the government.
The system of position classification in vogue in Britain is called Rank Classification and reflects the generalist nature of the administrative system discussed earlier. Glassification of positions in the civil service for purposes of pay, promotion, retirement benefits etc., is done in the British system on the basis of various ranks into which the civil service is divided. The higher posts in the civil service are included in the covenantee. Civil Sendee and the position at lower levels are divided into three other grades.
Classification of positions is not dependent on the exact job description of that particular post but on the grade to which the post belongs based on the nature of the functions of the position and the position is usually manned by an individual belonging to the category of service appropriate to that service. This system of position classification helps to provide flexibility in the manning of positions at various levels as any individual who belongs to a particular category of service can be asked to man any position. This provides flexibility to the government in positioning appropriate personnel in various jobs and this system of position classification is a concomitant to the system of career civil service and generalist administration prevalent in Great Britain.
(D) Salient Features Of Administrative System In France
The administrative system in France is somewhat different from the system in Britain and the U.S.A. due to the fact that even though France is a democratic, it is a country where the system of administrative law prevails arid this has an effect on the administrative system. Like Britain, the administrative system in France is democratic and all agencies of the government are responsible to Parliament as the Parliamentary system of government prevails. Hence the government of the day has complete control over all the organs of administration as in Britain and Parliament has the tight to exercise day to day control over these organs of administration.
The administration in France is, therefore, responsive to public needs. Like Britain, the civil servants make a career in the civil service and are recruited by an open competitive examinations which tests, their general mental abilities and not their specific skills to man a particular position. The classification of positions is by rank and emphasis , is on the superiority of generalists rather than specialists thus ensuring integrated development of policies at the level of the national government. The civil service in France is of exceptional quality and has been able to ensure continuity of administration in spite of the chronic political instability in the country.
The important , feature of the French administrative system which differentiates it from the British system is the concept of administrative law embodied in the French political system. Unlike as in Britain where the concept of the Rule of Law is supreme and all persons as subject to the same law and the same courts, the French system incorporates the system of administrative law. Under this system of administrative law quite a few of the functions performed by the ordinary courts in respect of the administration like the appeals of a citizen against an order of an administrative authority denying him a particular privilege are actually decided by administrative tribunals. * This system is followed In France as it is considered that such tribunal can be maimed by persons well versed .in the concerned acts and regulations.
Discuss the various approaches to the study of Public Administration. Which is the most preferable approach from your point of view?
Approaches To The Study Of Public Administation Philosophical Approach :
The Philosophical Approach is perhaps the oldest approach to the Public Administration as of all other social sciences. An example of this approach is found in Santi Parva of the Mahabharata, other well-known examples being Plato’s Republic, Hobbes’ Leviathan, Locke’s Treatise on Civil a Government etc. The Philosophical Approach is wide taking within its purview all aspects of administrative activities. Its goal is to find out and enunciate the principle or ’ideals’, underlying these activities. The general idea was that general principles of universal application can be found out. which will enable all organisations to work efficiently.
1. Legal Approach. The Legal Approach to the study of Public Administration comes after the philosophical one, but in a sense is the oldest systematically formulated approach and traces its ancestry to the European tradition of rooting Public Administration in law. Those who have adopted this approach study Public Administration as part of law and concentrate on the legally prescribed structure and organization of public authorities. This approach was formulated at a period when tlje functions of the State were narrowly limited and simple in nature.
2. Historical Approach. The Historical Approach to the study of Public Administration seeks to recreate a, segment of history, it studies the Public Adminishation of the past within particular time spans organizating and interpreting the information in a chronological order. The Historical Approach naturally command a powerful attraction in a society having a rich past’ and can be very valuable in identifying the uniqueness of the administrative system. Indeed, many administrative institutions can be test understood in the light of their past, which is possible by adopting the historical approach. We for instance, cannot understand the Indian National A Congress, founded as early as 1885, without studying it historical development.
3. The Case Method Approach. The Case Method Approach to the study of Public Administration tegim to be popularized in the thirties. A case is a narration of what has actually taken place in the administration, keeping intact the content and all relevant dimensions. Ably handled, the -case method approaches a sensitive one, seeking as it does to reconstruct the administratis wslities and give to student a flavour of the administrative process. As Duagbt Waldo says “The case approach has been motivated by a to foe ‘objectives and methods of the social sciences to be sure, but it has been shaped also by a ‘ considerable sensitivity to traditional concerts of the humanities and by a interest in pedagogy as against research”. The case method has come to stay in Public Administration, but it cannot perhaps become the dominant approach. Since this method of study is becomes a bit too popular in India it is necessary to be aware of its limitations, fa foe first place, relieving another Person’s life through case studies never succeeds. Secondly, the ; most significant part of a decision is foe agony of it one cannot relieve the agony and anxiety, and, put himself in another individual’s position.
4. Institutional and Structural Approach. While scholars trained in law have adopted the legal approach to foe study of Public Administration, others were content to describe foe organization ami functions of public organization. It must be emphasized here, that foe description of organization * was formal, i.e., in terms of what they were designed to be like. The greatest limitation of this approach is that one cannot get a true picture of how an organization functions in practice. It Is basically a descriptive .approach which describes the institutions and its organizations in very formal way.
5. Behavioural Approach. The growing discontentment against the institutional structural approach crystallized into what has come to be called the behavioural ‘approach to the study of Public Administration. This approach which dates back to the forties, focuses on the actual behaviour of persons am! groups in ©ionizations. Herbert A. Simon and Robert A. Daht have been among the pioneers of this approach to the study of Public Administration.
6. Which is the most ^Preferable Approach? One may at this stage, raise a question Which is the preferable approach to the study of Public Administration? This question needs to be discussed as it has today acquired considerable emotional overtones. Scholarship is a quest after truth, and truth, like a diamond, has many faces, or facts which may not perhaps be adequately studied by any one approach. No single approach may be sufScfcot in itselfand adequate enough to answer the call of scholarship. Public Administration can, thus, stand to benefit from a mix of approaches.
It must be remembered that these approaches do not stand in dichotomous relationship wife each other. On the contrary, they are complementary to each other. While each approach has its uses, and relevance depending upon – the focus of a study, the real is fee capacity of the scholar to choose the appropriate approaches and, what is more, extract the best out of them. Many scholars in India sometimes give an impression of treating an approach as a substitute for scholarship, which is a pathetic belief. It is true that certain fields of study lend themselves more adequately to one approach than to some others, fee academically sound work is the product of how dexterously a scholar can utilize all the approaches having a bearing on his subject.
Discuss the Comparative Approaches to Public Administration.
What do you mean by comparative study of Public Administration.
Do you agree with the view that ‘comparative sudy of Public Administration is one of the most important field of scholar ty activity in Public Administration today? Explain.
Comparative Study Of Public Administration
1. The Comparative Administrative Group (C. A. G.’ set up in 1963. The Comparative Administrative Group as a committee of the American Society for Public Administration, was set up in 1963. It carried on its work tor several years wife the financial support given by the Ford Foundation, which had been interested in multi-dimensional problems of emergent nations. The C, A. G. developed a three fold programme aimed at encouraging research, teaching and more effective public policy fomulation in the area of development administration; The C. A. G. has done commendable wBrk in the following fields : (i) Widening fee horizons of Public Administration, (ii) Opening the doors of the discipline of all kinds of social sciences, (iii) Making the scope of administrative field more systemic by studying different administrative systems in their ecological settings, and (iv) Stimulating interest among its members in the problems of development administration. ‘
2. Focus on Comparative Public Administration. The most significant development in Public Administration which is at present engaging the attention and energies of alarge number of scholars is the focusing of attention on comparative Public Administration. This attention has grown out of personal experience and is related to world-wide developments that’ are likely to continue. But. it is generally the younger students – in Public Administration who are active in the comparative movement, as they are chiefly interested in the theoretical scientific questions. For the most part they are behaviourally oriented and are concerned with the central problems of the social sciences. They find their inspiration, models, and techniques in other- parts of the contemporary social sciences particularly the parallel movement in political science comparative politics.
3. Three Major Approaches in Comparative Public Administration. Three major conceptual approaches have been developed in comparative Public Administration the bureaucratic system the general system and development administration. The bureaucratic approach has been use^ to study the development role of bureaucracies in cross-cultural settings. This approach has also stimulated the logical perspective in the comparative study of bureaucracies. The geueral systems approach focuses upon the functioning of administrative systems in their social environmental contexts. The basic premise of the ecological approach in Comparative Public Administration is that public bureaucracies may be regarded as one of die, several basic institutions? in a society. Thus, m order to understand bureaucracy’s ’structures’ and ’functions’, one must study bureaucracy in the context of its interrelationships with other social institutions. In systemic, terms, the bureaucratic system is continually interacting with i.e., affected by and feeding back, upon the political-economic, and so-io-cultural sub systems in a society.
The United States provide a natural laboratory for comparative analysis. If we examine the expenditure of each state w-e can determine which states’ administrative systems give greater or lesser amounts of financial resources and which are likely to have greater or lesser impact on their environments. If we. look at the salaries and other perquisites of officials of each state, we can judge which states have made greater or lesser efforts to professionalize their public service. As, a measure of die fiscal resources allocated to state administration, we will use total state government expenditure.
Comparative study of Public Administration is important and useful ‘ om the following point of view as well. Although making possesses a common stock of administrative experience, every nation tends to develop its own unique administrative pattern. These national differences emerge out of the special social setting, the peculiar economic bent, and the particular political culture of each country. A description of the detailed features of each national administrative system would require a treatise of its own. So we would present here some distinctive administrative profiles rather titan the specific features of individual administrative systems.
Write a short note on the “Behavioural Approach” of Organisation. . .
Behavioural Approach Of Organisation :
Behavioural Approach is not actually a theory of organisation. It is in feet, the use of behavioural sciences in the study of organisational behaviour. The behavioural sciences include mainly the, discipline of anthropology, psychology and Sociology, It also includes parts of social geography, psychiatry and behaviour parts of economics, political science and law. From the main disciplines of anthropology, psychology and sociology, the behavioural sciences exclude very specialised sectors like physiological, psychology, archaeology, technical, linguistics and most of physical anthropology. In feet, the behavioural sciences have drawn upon the scientific research in different disciplines which deal with the human behaviour.
Behavioural approach has been used in the study of many subjects including political science, econqmics, etc. A number of prominent scholars .have tried to use this approach to study the human behaviour in ^organisations. The process started with an attempt to understand the behaviour of the workers in the Hawthrone experiments. The important contributions in the study of organisations through /the behavioural approach have come from Gari Rogers, J. L. Moreno, Kurt Lewin, A. H. Maslow, Herbert Simon, Chris Agyris, Fredrick Kersberg, etc. Since behavioural approach is not a systematic theory of organisation, we would proceed to study the contributions of some of the scholars who have applied this approach in their work.
Starting with the human rationalists, many and varied contributions from the behavioural scientists have enriched administrative theory and management practice.
The behavioural scientists have been making contribution since the days of the Hawthrone Experiments mentioned above. Among these the more important names have been those of Cart Rogers, J. L. Morens, Kurt Lewin and A. H. Moslow. The contribution of Chafer Bernard deserved special mention. Bernard (The Function of the Executive, published in 1938) viewed the organisation as .basically; a social system. Bernard developed an equilibrium theory of organization by suggesting that die organization exists by maintaining an equilibrium between die contributions and the satisfaction of its participant members.
In elaborating his notion of efficiency, he pointed out that the members participate in organizational activities because they receive actual benefits or’ they perceive that they are receiving certain rewards. Therefore, Bernard perceived that both material inducements and psychological rewards are important He referred to the existence of informal organisations aid noted their significance for the formal structure. In an authority-relation situation, authority is a matter of acceptance of the superior role of the supervisor by the subordinate.
It is “acceptance” by the subordinate and his willingness to cdmply that lends support to organizational authority.
The behavioural scientists have given a new orientation to administrative thought by focussing attention on the role of the individual, leadership in organisation, group dynamics, motivation and satisfaction.
The behavioural studies are a growing body of konwledge and these are increasingly being used in organisational redesigning and problem solving. More importantly, many of the behavioural scientists are now active in the role of change agents. They are not merely satisfied with interpreting the organisation. They are also interested in changing it.