MANOJ KUMAR, B.A. (H) POL. SCIE. Do visit -: polticsmania.wordpress.

com
P.G.D.A.V. COLLEGE, (DELHI UNIVERSITY)
justmail2manoj@gmail.com

EVOLUTION OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AS A DISCIPLINE

As an activity, public administration originated much earlier than its birth as a discipline. One time
American president, Woodrow Wilson is thought to be founding father of public administration as a
separate discipline because his essay laid the foundation for systematic and separate study of public
administration. As Nicholas Henry says, “Woodrow Wilson largely set the tone for the early study of
public administration”.
In 1887, Woodrow Wilson introduced Americans to a new field, public administration, with an essay
titled, “The study of Administration”. Besides, Wilson’s article on administration, Americans also
witnessed “The Reformist Public Service Movement” which planted ideas of public administration in the
practical ground – even in streets, says Nicholas Henry.
The evolution of public administration as a separate discipline can be traced in the following phases.
1. The Politics/Administration Dichotomy (1887 – 1926)
2. Principles Of Public Administration (1927 – 1937)
3. The Challenge (1938 – 1950)
4. The Crisis Of Identity (1950 – 1970)
I. Public Administration As Political Science (1950 -1970)
II. Public Administration As Management (1950 – 1970)
5. Public Administration As Public Administration (1970 – Present)

1. THE POLITICS/ADMINISTRATION DICHOTOMY (1887 – 1926)

Woodrow Wilson led the first stone of a new discipline in 1887 with the ideas of development of ‘science
of administration’ and ‘separation between politics and administration’. However, Wilson did not draw a
clear line between the politics and the administration. It was in 1900, when Frank J. Goodnow (known as
father of American public administration) separated politics and administration. He wrote in his book,
“Politics and Administration” –
“Politics has to do with policies or expressions of the state will,” while “administration has to do
with the execution of these policies.”
“The location of politics is the legislature and the higher echelons of the government where
major policy – decisions would be made and the larger questions of allocation of values decided
upon,” while “the location of administration is the executive arm of government, the
bureaucracy.”
According to scholars of this era, separation between politics and administration was necessary so that
elected holders and appointed public administrators could work together more effectively as civic leaders.
Nevertheless, this idea was overlooked as public administration sought its identity during this period. In
1926, L. D. White in his book, “Introduction to the Study of Public Administration” expressed that;
“Partisan politics should not intrude on administration; the mission of public administration is
efficiency; and administration in general is capable of becoming a “value-free” science in its
own right.”

Monday, September 5, 2016

MANOJ KUMAR, B.A. (H) POL. SCIE. Do visit -: polticsmania.wordpress.com
P.G.D.A.V. COLLEGE, (DELHI UNIVERSITY)
justmail2manoj@gmail.com

This perspectives provided an intellectual base for the next phase of public administration which focused
on the idea that like principles of science, there were principles of administration.
2. PRINCIPLES OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION (1927 – 1937)

In 1927, W. F. Willoughby wrote in his book, “The principles of Public Administration” that –
“Public administrators would be effective if they learned and applied scientific principles of
administration.”
This suffused the whole management theory into public administration which proved poison for
newly born field, public administration. Mohit Bhattacharya writes – “during this period, focus of
public administration from ‘public’ was replaced almost wholly by ‘efficiency’.”
Advocates of the principles approach believed in:-
a. Universality Of administrative principles which could be applied to all sorts of organization
anywhere regardless of culture, administrative setting, institutional framework, environment,
function, mission etc.
b. Principle approach would promote efficiency and economy in administration.
However, in 1935, Princeton University hosted a national conference where it was found that public
administration could not be established as separate field of study within the universities.

3. THE CHALLENGE (1938-1950)

During this phase, both the first and the second phase were challenged. It was objected that-
a. Politics and administration could never be separated clearly because in practice, there is close
nexus between politics and administration. In 1950, a scholar wrote, “A theory of public
administration means in our time a theory of politics also.” And hence, Nicholas Henry says,
“With this declaration, the dichotomy died.”
b. Principles of administration were not something big enough.
Herbert Simon and Robert Dahl were in support of the above two objections. In 1947, Herbert Simon in
his book, “Administrative Behavior” wrote that –
“A fatal defect of the current principles of administration is that for almost every principle one
can find an equally plausible and acceptable contradictory principle.”
In Simon’s conclusion, principles are unscientifically derived and no more than proverbs. He also rejected
separation between politics and administration and argued for ‘logical positivism’ in the study of policy-
making and relation of means and ends. He observed that decision-making must be derived from the logic
and psychology of human choice.
While Robert Dahl in his essay, “The Science of Public Administration” expressed three problems in the
evolution of science of public administration –
i. Exclusion of normative consideration from public administration.
ii. Exclusion of the study of human behavior from the science of public administration.
iii. Exclusion of the varying historical, sociological, economic & other conditioning factors from
the science of public administration.

Monday, September 5, 2016

MANOJ KUMAR, B.A. (H) POL. SCIE. Do visit -: polticsmania.wordpress.com
P.G.D.A.V. COLLEGE, (DELHI UNIVERSITY)
justmail2manoj@gmail.com

By 1950s, both the objections were completely rejected by scholars of public administration. This
rejections left public administration without identity, and thus a new phase of evolution of the discipline
of public administration took birth.

4. THE CRISIS OF IDENTITY (1950-1970)

I. PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AS POLITICAL SCIENCE (1950-1970)

In this phase, public administration was reestablished into the mother discipline, political science. But
there were several issues such as-
a. Absence of comprehensive intellectual framework for public administration as a separate
discipline.
b. And willing of political scientists to engulf public administration into political science.
So observers rightly commented that –“public administration stands in danger of …senescence, and that
lusty young giant of a decade ago, may now ‘evaporate’ as a field.”
During 1960s, the American Political Science Association moved officially to rid itself of public
administration. So, a scholar pointed that political science seems to have less utility in the education of
public administrators. Political science educates for “intellectualized understanding” of public
administration, whereas public administration educates for “knowledgeable action”.
II. PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AS MANAGEMENT (1950-1970)
As public administration was struggling for its identity, a few public administrationists began searching
for an alternative. They found it in ‘management’, called either ‘administrative science’ or ‘generic
management’ , which holds that sector, culture, institution, mission, so on and so forth have little
consequence to efficient and effective administration, and that “a body of knowledge” – statistics,
economics, accounting, operation research, and organization are often needed, and exists common to the
field of administration. But it is noteworthy that “management’s focus is exclusively technical, whereas
public administration’s focus is both technical and normative.
Finally, it was becoming increasingly clear to public administrationists that neither political science nor
management addressed their interest, nor could they. With this, a new phase began.
5. PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AS PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION (1970-PRESENT)
Public administration as public administration is refers to public administration’s successful break with
political science and management, and its emergence as an autonomous field of study and practice. So in
1970, public administration declared as an independent discipline with the birth of National Association
of schools of Public Administration (NASPAA).
Finally, according to recent research, pioneering of public administration were right on several important
counts such as – Professional public administration improves governance, public administrators and
politicians work in team to fulfill the public interest, even though elected politicians and appointed
administrators do different things, etc.

Monday, September 5, 2016

MANOJ KUMAR, B.A. (H) POL. SCIE. Do visit -: polticsmania.wordpress.com
P.G.D.A.V. COLLEGE, (DELHI UNIVERSITY)
justmail2manoj@gmail.com

Public administration happy at last……..

References:-

1. Nicholas Henry, Public Administration & Public Affairs

2. Mohit Bhattacharya, A New Horizons of Public Administration
3. S. Polynaidu, Public Administration

Monday, September 5, 2016