PARADIGM 1: THE POLITICS/ADMINISTRATION
DICHOTOMY, 1900-1926 - The
concentration of study during this period was on locus, where public
administration should be.
A.
Frank J. Goodnow (1859-1939) – in his published book on Politics and Administration (1900), he identified two distinct
functions of government:
1. Politics – has to do with policies
or expressions of the state will.
2. Administration – has to do with the
execution of these policies.
Goodnow and his fellow
administrationists view public administration to center in the government
bureaucracy. During the “public service movement” taking place in American
universities in the early part of the century, public administration received
its first serious attention from scholars.
In 1914, the
Committee on Instruction in Government of the American Political Science
Association issued a statement that political science was concerned with
training for citizenship, professional preparations such as law, and training
“experts and to prepare specialists for governmental positions.”
B.
Leonard D. White (1891-1958) – he published in 1926 the
first textbook devoted in to the field of public administration, Introduction to the Study of Public
Administration.
The book is considered by Waldo as
quintessentially American progressive in character.
1.
Politics should not intrude on
administration;
2.
Management lends itself to scientific
study;
3.
Public administration is capable of
becoming a “value-free” science in its own right;
4.
The mission of administration is
economy and efficiency.
In this paradigm, the notion was to strengthen a distinct
politics/administration dichotomy by relating it to value/fact dichotomy.
Everything that public administrationists scrutinized in the executive branch
was imbued with the colorings and legitimacy of being somehow “factual” and
“scientific”, while the study of policy making and related matters was left to
the political scientists. In political science departments, it is the public
administrationists who teach organization theory, budgeting, and personnel
while political scientists teach virtually everything else.
PARADIGM 2: THE PRINCIPLES OF ADMINISTRATION,
1927-1937 – the
concentration of study during this period was on focus – essential expertise in
the form of administrative principles.
1.
927 - F. W. Willoughby published his
book, Principles of Public Administration, the second fully fledged text in the
field depicting certain scientific principles of administration.
2.
1930s and early 1940s – Public
administrationists were in demand for their managerial knowledge, courted by
industry and government alike. ‘Principles were principles, and administration
was administration.’
3.
1937 – Luther H. Gullick and Lyndall
Urwick’s papers on the Science of Administration called the “high noon of
orthodoxy” pointed out the importance of principles to favor ‘focus’
THE CHALLENGE, 1938-1950
1. Politics and administration could
never be separated in any remotely sensible fashion.
2. The principles of administration
were logically inconsistent.
3. Questioned the assumption that
politics and administration could be dichotomized. This is supported by “A
theory of public administration means in our time a theory of politics also.”
4. There could be no such thing as a
“principle” of administration
The first and second
challenges were revealed in the books of Chester I. Barnard’s The Functions of the Executive
and Herbert A. Simon’s
Administrative Behavior in 1938. The third challenge was revealed by Fritz Morstein Marx’s
Elements of Public Administration in 1946 and John Merriman Gaus’s
Trends in the Theory of Public Administration” in 1950. The fourth challenge was revealed in the books
of Robert A Dahl, Simon, Waldo, and others. Simon’s Administrative
Behavior pointed out that for every “principle” of administration there was a
counter-principle therefore it is questionable.
THE REACTION TO THE CHALLENGE,
1947-1950
Positive (on the part of public
administration)
Alternative suggestions
from Simon’s “A comment on ‘The Science of Public Administration’” as
reinforcing components for public administrationists:
1. “Pure science of public
administration” – a thorough grounding in social psychology
2. “Prescribing for public policy” –
resurrecting the unstylish field of political economy
However, public administrationists
didn’t want to be ban from the richest sources of inquiry which is the
normative political theory, the concept of the public interest and the entire
spectrum of human values.
Public administration
considered the formulation of public policies within public bureaucracies and
their delivery to the polity.
Negative (on the part of political
science)
Political scientists
resisted the growing independence of public administrationists. Lynton K.
Caldwell called for “intellectualized understanding” of the executive branch
rather than “knowledgeable action” on the part of public administrators.
The drawing card for
student enrollments and government grants favoring public administration
affected the field of political science.
The formation of the National Science
Foundation in 1950 brought the message to all that the chief federal science
agency considered political science to be distinctly junior member of the
social sciences based on increasing evidence that political science was held in
low esteem by scholars in other fields.
PARADIGM 3: PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AS
POLITICAL SCIENCE, 1950-1970 (locus)
1950s – Establishing linkages between public
administration and political science. Public administration is an “emphasis”,
an “area of interest”, a “synonym” of political science.
1962 – Public administration was not included
as a subfield of political science in the report of the Committee on Political
Science as a Discipline of the American Political Science Association.
1964 – A survey of political scientists
indicated that the Public Administration Review was slipping in prestige among
political scientists relative to other journals and signaled a decline of
faculty in public administration.
1967 – Public administration disappeared as
an organizing category in the program of the annual meeting of the American
Political Science Association.
1972 – A survey indicated that only four
percent of all the articles published between 1960 and 1970 could be included
in the category of “bureaucratic
politics”, the only category of the 15 possible that related directly to
public administration.
PARADIGM 4: PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AS
PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION, 1956-1970 (focus)
1956 – An important journal, Administrative Science
Quarterly was founded by an administrationist on the premise that public,
business, and institutional administration were false distinctions. Thus,
administration is administration.
1960s – Organization theory should be the
overarching focus of public administration according to Keith M. Henderson and
others. “Organization development” began its rapid rise as a specialty in
administrative science due to its involvement in social psychology, opening up
of organizations, and self-actualization of the members.
A conflict arises between the public
administration and private administration as triggered by administrative
science. However, after years of painful dilemma, it was conceived that the
concept of determining and implementing the public interest constitutes a
definition of public administration.
THE EMERGING PARADIGM 5: PUBLIC
ADMINISTRATION AS PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION, 1970-? (locus)
The term “public affairs” became popularized.
Public administrationists have been
increasingly concerned on areas of policy science, political economy, public
policy-making process and its analysis, measurement of policy outputs.
INSTITUTIONALIZING PARADIGM 5: TOWARD
CURRICULAR AUTONOMY
Public administration is, at last,
intellectually prepared for the building of an institutionally autonomous
educational curriculum. This is because of the presence of a paradigmatic focus
of organization theory and management science and also a paradigmatic locus of
the public interest as it relates to public affairs.
1971-1973
1. 1970-1971 – Undergraduate
enrollments in public administration increased by 36 percent.
2. 1971-1972 – Graduate enrollments
went up 50 percent based on figures provided by NASPAA (National Association of
Schools of Public Affairs and Administration)
3. Graduate public administration
programs that were part of political science departments sank from 48% to 36%
during these periods.
4. Those programs connected with
business schools (13%) appeared to be declining.
5. The percentage of separate schools
of public administration more than doubled from 12% in 1971 to 25% in 1972.
6. Separate departments of public
administration accounted for 23% of the 101 graduate programs surveyed in
1971-73.
7. In an 18-month period between 1970
and 1972, the number of units pertaining public administration more than
doubled to approximately 300.
It is time for public administration
to come into its own as substantial progress has been in this direction
intellectually. However, it remains to be done.
Sixth PARADIGM later came in that is
GOVERNANCE
Where both the locus and focus was
maintained …!!!!
Meaning of Public
Administration
