Public Administration: Administration means a cooperative effort of a group

of people in pursuit of a common objective. Administration is a universal

process and occurs in diverse institutional settings. Based on its institutional
settings, administration is divided into public administration and private
administration. The former refers to the administration which operates in a
government setting, while the latter refers to the administration which operates
in a non-governmental setting, that is, business enterprise. According to
Woodrow Wilson, administration is government in action.

Administration, Organisation and Management

The distinction between administration, organisation and management is made
clear by William Schulze. He says “Administration is the force which lays
down the object for which an organisation and its management are to strive and
the broad policies under which they are to operate. An organisation is a
combination of the necessary human beings, materials, tools, equipment and
working space, appurtenances brought together in systematic and effective co-
relation to accomplish some desired object. Management is that which leads,
guides and directs an organisation for the accomplishment of a pre-determined
object. “
Oliver Sheldon states, “Administration is the function in an industry in the
determination of the policy; Management is the function in an industry
concerned with the execution of policy within the limits set by administration
and the employment of the organisation for the particular objects set before it;
Organisation is the formation of an effective machine, management of an
effective executive, administration of an effective direction.”

“Administration determines the organization, management uses it.

Administration defines the goal; management strives towards it. Organisation is
the machine of management in its achievements of the ends determined by the
administration.”

Nature of Public Administration

The scholars of public administration have expressed two divergent views on
the nature of public administration, viz. Integral view and managerial view.

The Integral View

According to this view, public administration encompasses all the activities
which are undertaken to accomplish the given objective. In other words, public
administration is the sum total of managerial, technical, clerical and manual
activities.

Page 1 of 14
The Managerial View
Public administration, in this context, encompasses only the managerial
activities and not the technical, clerical and manual activities which are non-
managerial in nature. Administration, according to this view, is same in all the
spheres as the managerial techniques are same in all the fields of activities.
Neither, the integral view or the managerial view is without any flaws.

Scope of Public Administration

There are two views regarding the scope of public administration, viz.
POSDCORB view and Subject Matter View.

The POSDCORB View: The view of the scope of public administration was
advocated by Lurther Gulick. He believed that administration consisted of seven
elements. He summed up these elements in the acronym ‘POSDCORB’, each
letter of which implies one element of administration.

Luther Gulick explains these seven elements of administration (or functions of

the chief executive) in the following way:

P – Planning: Working out in broad outline the things that need to be done and
the methods for doing them to accomplish the purpose set for the enterprise.

O – Organising: Establishment of the formal structure of authority through

which work sub-divisions are arranged, defined and coordinated for the defined
objective.

S – Staffing: Whole personnel function of bringing in and training the staff and
maintaining favourable conditions of work.

D – Directing: Continuous task of making decisions and embodying them in

specific and general orders and instructions and serving as the leader of
enterprise.

CO – Coordinating: Inter-relating the various parts of the work.

R – Reporting: Keeping informed those to whom the executive is responsible

as to what is going on. This includes keeping oneself and one’s subordinates
informed through records, research and inspection.

B – Budgeting: All that goes with budgeting in the form of fiscal planning,
accounting and control.

Page 2 of 14
The Subject Matter View: POSDCORB view overlooks the fact that different
administrative agencies are faced with different problems. It represents only the
tools of administration whereas the substance of administration is something
different. The real core of administration consists of the various services
performed for the people like defence, health, agriculture, education, social
security, etc. The POSDCORB view is ‘technique-oriented’ rather than
‘subject-oriented’, i.e., it ignores the essential element involved in public
administration, namely, ‘knowledge of the subject matter’. Hence, the subject
matter view of the scope of public administration arose. It lays emphasis on the
services rendered and the functions performed by an administrative agency. It
advocates that the substantive problems of an agency depend upon the subject
matter (i.e. services and functions) with which it is concerned. Therefore, public
administration should study not only the techniques of administration but also
the substantive concerns of administration.

The POSDCORB view and subject matter view are not mutually exclusive, but
complement each other. They together constitute the proper scope of the study
of public administration. M. E. Dimock observed, “Administration is concerned
with ‘what’ and ‘how’ of the government. The ‘what’ is the subject matter, the
technical knowledge of a field, which enables the administrator to perform his
tasks. The ‘how’ is the technique of management, the principles according to
which co-operative programmes are carried to success. Each is indispensible,
together they form the synthesis called administration.”

Public Administration as a discipline consists of five branches:

1. Organisational Theory and Behaviour.

2. Public Personnel Administration.
3. Public Financial Administration.
4. Comparative and Development Administration.
5. Public Policy Analysis.

Page 3 of 14
 Approaches to the Study of Public Administration
The various approaches to the Study of public administration are explained
below:
1. Philosophical Approach: It is the most comprehensive as well as
the oldest approach. It considers all facets of administrative activities. It
is based on the normative approach and concentrates on what ought to be.
Its object is to enunciate the ideals (principles) underlying the
administrative activities. Plato’s Republic, John Locke’s Treatise on
Civil Government Swami Vivekananda have advocated this approach.
2. Legal Approach: It studies Public Administration as part of law and
lays emphasis on the constitutional/legal structure, organisation, powers,
functions, and limitations of public authorities. Hence, it is also known as
Juridical or Juristic approach. It is the oldest systematically formulated
approach and came into existence during the era of laissez faire, that is,
when the functions of the state were limited and simple.
3. Historical Approach: It studies public administration through the
historical developments in the past having its impact on the present. It
organises and interprets the information pertaining to administrative
agencies in a chronological order. Kautilya’s Arthashastra and books on
Mughal Administration give glimpses of past administrative system of
India. This approach is closely related to the biographical approach to
administration.
4. Case Method Approach: It deals with the narration of specific
events that constitute or lead to a decision by an administrator. It seeks to
reconstruct the administrative realities and acquaints the students of
public administration with them. It became popular in USA during the
1930s. Twenty case studies titled Public Administration and Policy
Administration edited by Harold Stein were published in 1952. According
to Dwight Waldo Emerson, the case method is going to be a permanent
feature of the study and teaching of public administration.

In addition to the above other various approaches to the study of public

administration are – Structural Approach, Human Relations Approach,
Behavioural Approach, Systems Approach, Comparative Approach, Ecological
Approach, Developmental Approach, and Public Choice Approach.

Page 4 of 14
 Dimensions of Role of Public Administration
The role and importance of Public Administration can be analysed as follows:-
1) It is the basis of government whether in monarchy or in democracy or n
communist country like China or in capitalist country, and so on.
2) It is the instrument for executing the laws, policies and programmes
formulated by the state.
3) It is the instrument of social change and economic development
especially in the ‘Third World’ (i.e. developing countries), which are
engaged in the process of social-welding and nation-building.
4) It is an instrument of national integration p[particularly in the developing
countries which are facing the challenges of sub-nationalism,
secessionism, classwars, and so on.
5) It is the instrument of the state for providing to the people, various kinds
of services like educational, health, transportation, and so on.
6) It is a great stabilising force in the society as it provides continuity when
governments change either due to revolutions or elections or coups.

Gerald Caiden in his popular book The Dynamics of Public Administration

says that the public administration has assumed following crucial roles in
contemporary modern society:
a) Preservation of the polity.
b) Maintenance of stability and order.
c) Institutionalisation of socio-economic changes.
d) Management of large scale commercial services.
e) Ensuring growth and economic development.
f) Protection of the weaker sections of society.
g) Formation of public opinion.
h) Influencing public policies and political trends.

Growing Importance
Traditionally, the role of public administration in the society has been limited.
But in contemporary society, its role has increased manifolds. The following
factors have contributed to this phenomenon:
1) The scientific and technological developments have led to ‘big
government’ which implies vast increase in the scope of the activities of
public administration.
2) The Industrial Revolution which gave rise to socio-economic problems
forcing the government to take up new responsibilities.
3) The emergence of ‘welfare state’ replacing ‘police state’ (i.e. a negative
state based on the philosophy of laissez faire). A welfare state is a
positive state which is committed to the welfare of the people.
Page 5 of 14
 4) The adoption of economic planning by the modern governments to
achieve the goals of welfare state has increased the scope of the role of
public administration.
5) The population explosion has created various socio-economic problems
like growth of slums, food shortage, transportation problem, and so on,
which have to be dealt by the public administration.
6) The nature of modern warfare has increased the responsibilities and
activities of public administration in terms of mobilization of necessary
human and material resources.
7) The increase in the natural calamities like floods, droughts, earthquakes,
due to excessive environmental degradation has enhanced the functions
of public administration as it has to handle the rescue operations.
8) The decline in social harmony and increase in violence due to class
conflicts, communal riots, ethnic wars, and so on, have increased the
importance of public administration in terms of crisis management.

Administrative Development is strengthening the capacity and capability of

the administrative system through structural, procedural and behavioural
changes.

Page 6 of 14
 EVOLUTION AND STATUS OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
The term ‘Public Administration’ stands for two implications. First, it
refers to the activity of administering the affairs of government, like
enforcement of law and order. Second, it also refers to a field of study, like that
of Sociology, Political Science, Economics, Philosophy, and so on.
Public Administration as an aspect of governmental activity is as old as
political society, i.e., it has been co-existing with the political systems to
accomplish the objectives set by the political decision makers. But, as a field of
systematic study, public administration is much more recent – it is only about
hundred years old.
However, since ancient times various thinkers have contributed to the
administrative thought and practice. For example, Kautilya’s Arthashastra in
ancient India, Aristotle’s Politics in ancient West and Machiavelli’s The Prince
in the medieval West, contain significant observations about the organisation
and functional government.
Public Administration as a separate subject of study originated and
developed in the USA. According to Rumki Basu, the following factors have
contributed to this in the 20th Century: -
i. The scientific management movement advocated by F. W. Taylor.
ii. The 19th Century industrialisation which gave rise to large-scale
organisations.
iii. The emergence of the concept of welfare state replacing the police state
(laissez faire).
iv. The movement for government reform due to negative consequences of
‘Spoils system’.

Stages in the Evolution

Public Administration has developed as an academic discipline through a

succession of a nu8mber 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).

Page 7 of 14
Robert T. Golembiewski noted the four phases in the historical development of
public administration:

Phase I: Analytic Politics/Administration.

Phase II: Concrete Politics/Administration.
Phase III: A Science of Management.
Phase IV: Public-Policy Approach.

According to him, each phase may be distinguished and understood in terms of

its locus or focus. ‘Locus’ refers directly to the ‘where’, to the contexts that are
conceived to yield the phenomena of interest. ‘Focus’ refers to the analytical
targets of public administration, the ‘what’ with which specialists are
concerned.

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 policy making while administration is concerned with the
implementation of policy decisions.

Wilson described public administration as a field of business. He also

believed that administration is a science. 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:

i. To straighten the paths of government.

ii. To make its business more businesslike.
iii. To strengthen and purify its organisation.
iv. To crown its duties with dutifulness.

The Wilsonian line of thought was further continued by Frank J.

Goodnow in his book Politics and Administration published in 1900. He made a
sharp conceptual distinction between two functions of government, i.e., Politics

Page 8 of 14
and Administration. To quote Goodnow, “Politics has to do with policies or
expressions of the state will”, whereas, “administration has to do with the
execution of these policies.”

In the beginning of the 20th century, the American universities showed

much interest in the public service movement (movement for governmental
reform). As a result, public administration received the first serious attention of
scholars. 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, i.e., 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 public administration is a science.

This stage began with the publication of W. E. 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.”

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
organisation which should govern arrangements for human association of any
kind. These principles can be studied 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.”

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
Page 9 of 14
implementation of political policy decisions, but also plays an important role in
policy formulation which is the domain of politics. In other words, the idea of
politics-administration dichotomy was rejected.

Similarly, the principles of administration were challenged and criticised

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 organisational analysis was

criticised as a mechanistic approach due to its emphasis on the formal structure
of organisation and neglect of socio-psychological aspects of organisational
behaviour. The Hawthorne 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 organisations in determining
organisational efficiency. These studies gave rise to ‘human relations’ theory of
organisation.

Herbert A. Simon was the most important critic of principles of

administration and described them as “proverbs”. He advocated the behavioural
approach to public administration to make it a more scientific discipline. He
focussed upon decision making as the alternative to the principles approach.

Robert Dahl argued that the evolution of science of public administration

(or development of universal principles of public administration) was hindered
by three problems:

a. The frequent impossibility of excluding normative considerations from

the problems of public administration.
b. The need to study certain aspects of human behaviour limits the
potentialities of a science of public administration.
c. The unscientific nature of principles of administration which are based on
a few examples drawn from limited national and historical settings.

No science of public administration is possible unless:

a) The place of normative values is made clear.

b) The nature of man in the area of public administration is better
understood and his conduct is more predictable; and
c) There is a body of comparative studies from which it may be possible to
discover principles and generalities that transcend national boundaries
and peculiar historical experiences.

Robert Dahl emphasised the environmental effects on administrative behaviour.

He believed that public administration cannot escape the effects of national

Page 10 of 14
psychology and social, political and cultural environment in which it develops.
Hence, he suggested the cross-cultural studies, that is, comparative studies.

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:

(i) Some of them returned to the fold of political science (the mother
science). However, they were not encouraged by political scientists. Rosco
Martin in his 1952 article, called for continued “dominion of political science
over public administration.”

(ii) Some others moved towards the administrative science. They argued that
administration is administration irrespective of its setting. They founded the
Journal of Administrative Science Quarterly in 1956.

However, in both cases (i.e. either towards political science or administrative

science), public administration lost its separate identity and distinctiveness and
it had to merge with the larger field. This, is why, this stage in the evolution of
public administration is called as the ‘stage of crisis of identity’.

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 political and administration had
become an “outworn credo”.

According to Robert T. Golemsbiewski, the public policy approach stage

in the evolution of public administration is built upon two basic themes: - (i)
The interpretation of politics and administration at all or many levels; and (ii)
The programmatic character of all administration. In all, these themes directed
attention in public administration toward political or policy-making processes as
well as toward specific public programmes.

With the adoption of public policy approach, public administration has

become inter-disciplinary, gaining in social relevance and expanded its scope.

Page 11 of 14
 COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Meaning
Comparative public administration is the first major development in the post-
war evolution of public administration.

Comparative public administration stands for cross-cultural and cross-national

public administration. It has two basic motivation concerns: (i) theory-building,
and (ii) administrative problems of the developing countries.

As rightly observed by Nicholas Henry comparative public administration is

different from traditional or American public administration in two respects:

1. Public administration is ‘culture-bound’ (ethnocentric) while comparative

public administration is ‘cross-cultural’ in its orientation and thrust.
2. Public administration is ‘practitioner-oriented’ and involves the ‘real
world’ whereas comparative public administration attempts to the
‘theory- building’ and ‘seeks knowledge for the sake of knowledge’.

While highlighting the significance of comparative public administration, Fred

Riggs asserted that American public administration should be viewed as a sub-
field because public administration is global in scope.

Definition by Comparative Administration Group (CAG): “Comparative

public administration is a theory of public administration applied to the diverse
cultures and national settings and the body of factual data by which it can be
examined and tested.”

Formation of CAG

The most important single contribution to the growth of comparative public

administration came from the Comparative Administration Group (CAG),
established in 1960 as a Committee of the American Society for Public
Administration.

Fred Riggs is considered as the father of comparative public administration.

Fred Riggs stated that the purposes of comparative public administration have a
combination of empirical and normative concerns which are reflected in the
literature of comparative public administrative analysis.

According to him, the comparative public administration has the following four
purposes: -

1) To learn the distinctive features of a particular system or cluster of

systems.
Page 12 of 14
 2) To explain the factors responsible for cross-national and cross-cultural
differences in bureaucratic behaviour.
3) To examine the causes for success or failures of particular administrative
features in particular ecological settings.
4) To understand strategies of administrative reform.

Factors contributing to rise and growth of comparative public administration

are:

i. The revisionist movement in comparative politics due to dissatisfaction

with the traditional approaches.
ii. The dissatisfaction with traditional public administration which was
culture-bound.
iii. Intellectually oriented catalysts, that is, to develop universally relevant
theoretical models.
iv. Exposure of American scholars and administrators to the new features of
the administrative systems of developing countries during the WWII
period.
v. The emergence of newly independent Third World countries which
attempted to achieve rapid socio-economic development, creating
opportunities for scientific investigation.
vi. Policy oriented catalysts, i.e., to develop the practical knowledge to make
policy-formulation and policy-execution more effective.
vii. The scientific, technological and theoretical developments which have
influenced the forms of administrative structures.
viii. The extension of American foreign aid programmes (both political and
economic) to newly emerged developing countries.
ix. The rise of behavioural approach in public administration as a reaction to
the classical structural approach.

TRENDS

Fred Riggs noticed three trends in the comparative study of public

administration:

a) A shift from Normative Studies (which deals with ‘what ought to be’) to
Empirical Studies (which deals with ‘what is’). Empirical Studies are
factual and scientific.
b) A shift from Ideographic Studies (one nation studies/individualistic
studies) To Nomothetic Studies (universal studies). Nomothetic studies
are abstracted and generalisable.
c) A shift from non-ecological studies (which examines administrative
phenomena as an isolated activity) to ecological studies (which examines

Page 13 of 14
 administrative phenomena in relation to its external environment).
Ecological Studies are systematic and non-parochial.

DECLINE

The beginning of the 1970s saw the decline of the comparative public
administration. In 1971, the Ford Foundation terminated its financial support to
the CAG. In 1973, the CAG itself was disbanded and merged with the
International Committee of the American Society for Public Administration to
form a new Section on International and Comparative Administration.

On the failure of comparative public administration, Robert T. Golembiewski

said “Public administration should take full notice of the fact that comparative
administration’s failure rests substantially on a self-imposed failure experience.
It set an unattainable goal, that is, in its early and persisting choice to seek a
comprehensive theory or model in terms of which to define itself.”

SIGNIFICANCE

According to T.N. Chaturvedi, the various contributions of comparative study in

public administration are:

a) It has helped to eliminate the narrowness of ‘provincialism’ and

‘regionalism’.
b) It has broadened the field of social science research, which was earlier
confined to cultural limitations.
c) It has led to a greater scientific outlook in theory construction.
d) It has encouraged the process of broadening the field of social analysis.
e) It has played an important role in making the subject of public
administration broader, deeper, and useful.
f) It has brought politics and public administration closer to each other.

Page 14 of 14