Public Management and Administration - Owen E.hughes

22 Public Management and Administration
6. The management of the office follows general rules, which are more or less stable,
more or less exhaustive, and which can be learned. Knowledge of these rules represents
a special technical learning which the officials possess. It involves jurisprudence,
or administrative or business management.
The principles of bureaucracy have become so ingrained in society that these
points seem obvious, but they did represent a substantial advance on early
administration.
The first of Weber’s principles means that authority derives from the law, and
from rules made according to law. No other form of authority is to be followed.
Following from this, the second principle is that of hierarchy, perhaps the most
familiar of Weber’s ideas. Strict hierarchy meant that rational/legal authority
and power were maintained organizationally, not by any individual but by the
position he or she held in the hierarchy. Particular functions could be delegated
to lower levels as the hierarchical structure meant that any official could act
with the authority of the whole organization. The third point adds to this. The
organization is something with an existence separate from the private lives of
its employees; it is quite impersonal. Written documents are preserved; something
that is essential, as previous cases become precedents when similar
events recur. Only with the existence of files can the organization be consistent
in its application of the rules. The fourth point is that administration is a specialist
occupation, one deserving of thorough training, it was not something
that could be done by anyone. Fifthly, working for the bureaucracy was a fulltime
occupation instead of a secondary activity as it once was. Finally, office
management was an activity that could be learned as it followed general rules.
These rules would presumably be carried out in the same way by whoever
occupied a particular office.
The main differences and advances of the Weberian system are best understood
by comparison with earlier models of administration. The key contrast,
the most important difference between Weber and previous models, is the
replacement of personal administration with an impersonal system based on
rules. An organization and its rules are more important than any individual
within it. The bureaucratic system must be impersonal in its own operations and
in how it acts to its clients. As Weber argued (Gerth and Mills, 1970, p. 198):
The reduction of modern office management to rules is deeply embedded in its very
nature. The theory of modern public administration … assumes that the authority to order
certain matters by decree – which has been legally granted to public authorities – does
not entitle the bureau to regulate the matter by commands given for each case, but only
to regulate the matter abstractly. This stands in extreme contrast to the regulation of all
relationships through individual privileges and bestowals of favour, which is absolutely
dominant in patrimonialism, at least in so far as such relationships are not fixed by sacred
tradition.
This is a very important point. Earlier administration was based on personal
relationships – loyalty to a relative, patron, leader or party – and not to the