PAPA 5014 Concepts/Approaches in Public Administration Final Exam December 2010 Cecily Rodriguez

List four major concepts that you learned in this class. 1) Concept of Bureaucracy Bureaucracy is not always the unpleasant task of dealing with government services that many people envision it to be. Often, bureaucracy is exactly what keeps important programs and services operating and effective. Max Weber is widely acknowledged as having developed the scope and characteristics of bureaucracy in the later part of the 19th century. According to Weber, the legalrational authority, a form of leadership that is tied to legal rationality and legitimacy, is manifested in this institutional form. It is how our modern western society is ordered and controlled. Bureaucracy describes how we vest our power and authority in an office rather than in the individual in that office. This provides us with a consistency and predictability for power and authority. For example, when we elect a new President, we expect that that new official will follow the same rules that govern how he or she is to exercise his or her authority as the previous President. Weber defined six general principles in defining the western bureaucracy. The first that there is a firmly ordered system of hierarchy with a particular delegation give to each level of authority. Second is that decisions are made at high levels to be executed consistently at lower levels. Third, that work is done by specialist and is organized by functional units. Fourth, the focus is to fulfill the needs of leadership and those who empower the organization such as public officials or funders. Fifth, an attempt to provide equal treatment that results in an impersonal approach to employees and stakeholders in policies and procedures. Finally, Webers bureaucracy emphasizes a reliance on qualifications for employment as opposed to relationships or personal connections.

Concept of Ecology The concept of Ecology in public administration was articulated through the writings of John Gaus at Harvard University. According to Gaus, an ecological approach to public administration is built from the ground up. This means, it is important to take a scan from 40,000 feet. For example, you can start with the environment, are we describing meadowlands or watersheds? Then ask ourselves, who are the people that live there? What are the demographics? Is there a historical context to their demographics? What is the breadth and depth of the socio-economic status in the area we are discussing? And how are all of these facts interrelated? He argues that public administrators must use such an approach to understand the complex social, economic and political nature of modern society. Reflecting on the transformation from a rural to urban society Gaus provides a useful illustration of the concept of Ecology. In his writings, he explains that a century ago, most Americans had larger families and lived on farms. These farms provided goods and services and were largely self sustaining. In modern times, we are more urban and are less self reliant. Our needs have changed. This movement has changed how we work, where we shop, how we use our land, and what kind of housing we have. All of this has implications for public administrators. Intergovernmental Relations Because of the nature of our interdependent government, public administrators in the US work within a unique framework in which authority and program activities are often shared by various levels, jurisdictions, and units of governments. The concepts of intergovernmental relations are a critical part of public administration because of how authority can be scattered across federal, state, local, and organizational levels. Intergovernmental relations, according to Laurence J. OToole Jr. is the subject of how the varied government agencies deal with each other and what their relative roles, responsibilities, and levels of influence area and should be (Stillman, 2009). It is difficult to find a public policy scenario 2

or public administration case study where intergovernmental relations do not play a significant role in the issue or outcome. This semester, my team looked at the decision to euthanize two wild bears at the Maymont Foundation, a publically and privately funded park in Richmond, after one of the bears nipped a young child. This was a fascinating study of how complicated intergovernmental relations can get even at the most basic level. Just as in the case with Maymont, significant issues arise when there is ambiguous overlap of responsibility and authority. Not only does it make it difficult to decipher where the decision finally rests, but it makes it difficult to articulate the rationale for such a decision to stakeholders and to the public. At the federal level, much of the relationship between governments is outlined in incentives or grant requirements or regulations. This is one way, beginning in the early 20th century, in which the federal government sought to influence programs and services at the state and local levels. Later in the century, the New Deal refined this idea by creating formula driven, categorical grant opportunities for activities aligned with federal level goals. This continues to be a major way that the federal government influences how states and localities prioritize development and deliver programs and services. Concept of Public Service Culture Understanding the concept of public service culture could be one of the most important managerial techniques in public administration. These motives are described by Lois Recascino Wise as a kind of human need (Stillman, 2009). Dr. Wise says that they significant because they provide a value basis for governance She goes onto describe three types of motives. They are 1) based on a persons deep belief that something will be of great benefit to society; 2) a sense of duty and a desire to serve the public interest; and 3) a personal interest or desired connection with a program or policy goal (Stillman, pg. 109).

Understanding these concepts can help a public manager with a multitude of organizational and goal oriented functions. For example, if a public manager can identify the different motives in his or her employees, then he or she may be able to tap into the intrinsic motivation to support that person in achieving their best work. If the manager can recognize when the goals of the organization are incongruent with an the motives of an employee, he or she can make an effort to work one on one with that person to reconcile those issues in effort to retain the employee. If a public manager recognizes how contextual factors play into public service motivation, they may be able to increase the prevalence of acts that serve the public good. Lastly, if managers understand the how public service values manifest themselves in practice, they can use the idea of self sacrifice and desire to shape the public good as a tool for social norming that develops more employees with a commitment to public service.

References Stillman, Richard. (ed) 2009. Public Administration: Concepts & Cases. Wadsworth Cengage, 8th Edition.