JOURNAL OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS EDUCATION - naspaa

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Enhancing Professional Socialization Through the Metaphor of Tradition Table 1. Traditions of Public Administration Theory (continued) Tradition Role Type Responsibility and Accountability Constitutional Discretionary Collaborative Bureaucrat Entrepreneur Steward Political State Administrative State Democratic State Trusts politics to produce The Good; administrators serve the system through hierarchical procedures and rules; bureaucratic accountability Does not trust politics to produce The Good; administrators produce The Good through chosen criteria (e.g. efficiency, effectiveness, equity, ethics); performance evaluation and expert responsibility Trusts all mature individuals to produce The Good together; administrators ensure process and empowerment (egalitarianism); being responsive Administrative Decision-making Rationality Instrumental rationality (administrative) — strict procedural rules ensure the best result (technically or normatively); deontological Instrumental rationality (both technical and strategic) — whatever gets the best results given the situation, with “best” defined by expertise (both technical and normative); teleological Organizing Style Bureaucratic hierarchy (deep) Humanistic and entrepreneurial hierarchy (flattened; empowered) Collaborative rationality; intersubjective agreement and communicative action Fluid networking Governance Role Concepts Bureaucrat sees Citizens as abstract objects or passive recipients — interaction is guided by political mandate Entrepreneur sees Citizens as active customers or clients — interaction based on principles of exchange Steward sees Citizens as collaborators — egalitarian interaction in all political and administrative activity 300 Journal of Public Affairs Education
Enhancing Professional Socialization Through the Metaphor of Tradition THEORETICAL APPROACHES TO COMBINING TRADITIONS Given the utopian nature of ideal-types, rarely does a given scholar advocate a tradition of public administration in its ideal-type form. This is because such an approach would create a “trinitarian cul-de-sac” of public administration theory, where the end state of the politics/administration relationship places democracy at risk through 1. Over-empowerment of political micromanagement, 2. Over-empowerment of administrative discretion, or 3. Disempowerment of both politics and administration altogether (Golembiewski, 1996). These conditions are loosely aligned with the logical ends of the three traditions discussed here, should they be fully implemented. Perhaps in large part due to this inevitability, the vast majority of scholarly discussion of public administration theory will draw elemental characteristics from two or more traditions in their ideal-type formulations as presented here. A notable exception would be Lowi’s (1979, 1993) firm defense of the Constitutional tradition throughout his writings, but such cases are rare. It also has been suggested that there may be conditions under which differences between rival and apparently incompatible traditions may be resolved (MacIntyre, 1988). In fact, much of the theoretical debate within public administration is related to whether or not any of these traditions should be primary, or whether two or more can be integrated into some unified, comprehensive theory of public administration in order to improve social outcomes. In many cases, a combination represents an attempt to reform the Constitutional order, without actually bringing it into question or calling for a revolutionary transformation (Stout, 2009). In other cases, blending is an attempt to accommodate what is observed in empirical reality—that neither people nor organizations tend to display pure ideal types of any kind. In still other theories, conciliation is attempted among traditions in order to allow dialectical tensions to persist, by claiming that awareness of their problematical or paradoxical characteristics is the best that can be achieved (King & Zanetti, 2005). In what can be called “integrationist approaches” (Stout, 2007), theorists combine or blend logics into one role conceptualization by taking what is considered to be the “best” of all three traditions. As an exemplar, Appleby (1952) called for a “pattern of administrative responsibility” (p.218). Of concern are 1. Popular control, 2. Humane practice, 3. Pluralist tolerance, and 4. Responsible and unifying leadership. To ensure all of these elements, the pattern of responsibility must begin with Journal of Public Affairs Education 301
Page 1 and 2: Summer 2009 Volume 15, No. 3 JPAE J
Page 3 and 4: EDITOR’S NOTE REFERENCES Henry, N
Page 5 and 6: the University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh
Page 7 and 8: Public Values As a Core Element of
Page 9 and 10: Public Values as a Core Element of
Page 15 and 16: How Do We Know What They Know Evalu
Page 33 and 34: Enhancing Professional Socializatio
Page 43: Enhancing Professional Socializatio
Page 61 and 62: Staying Connected: MPA Student Perc
Page 77 and 78: Teaching Public Administration As a
Page 91 and 92: Badgers & Hoosiers: An Interstate C
Page 93 and 94: Badgers & Hoosiers: An Interstate C
Page 95 and 96:
Badgers & Hoosiers: An Interstate C
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Operation PSA: The Action Learning
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Introduction of Government Process
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
show all

JOURNAL OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS EDUCATION - naspaa

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?