Q1. What do you understand by Public administration? Discuss its nature, scope and significance.

Ans INTRODUCTION

Public administration is formed by two different terms, public and administration. The term public
means government which mainly focuses on government activities and actions. Whereas the term
administration is derived from a Latin word “Administer” which means to serve, to direct, to control,
to care for, or to look after people. Literally, the term “administration” means management of public
or private affairs. Public administration involves managing public affairs and implementing
government policies. It is both a field of study and a practical discipline aimed at preparing civil
servants for public service. Public administrators include city managers, budget directors, HR
administrators, and heads of public departments at various government levels, working to serve the
public and ensure smooth government operations.

Woodrow Wilson Public Administration is the detailed a systematic execution of public law. Every
particular application of law is public administration.

Natue of Public administration

There are two main views on the nature of public administration: the integral view and the
managerial view.

Integral View: This view sees administration as the total sum of all activities (manual, clerical,
technical, managerial) done to achieve goals. It includes the work of everyone, from the lowest to
the highest level, to implement public policies. Supporters of this view include Woodrow Wilson,
Marshal Dimock, John Pfiffner, and L.D. White.

Managerial View: This view focuses only on the work of those involved in managerial functions like
planning, organizing, directing, controlling, and coordinating government activities. It emphasizes
getting things done rather than doing tasks. Luther Gulick, Henry Fayol, Robert Dahl, and Herbert
Simon support this view.

Scope of Public administration

There are two main views about its scope: the Traditional View and the Modern View.

1. Traditional View:

This view limits public administration to the executive branch of government. It mainly focuses on
the organization, personnel, practices, and procedures necessary for running the civil functions of
the executive branch. Traditional thinkers see public administration as primarily concerned with the
tasks performed by the executive branch alone.

2. Modern View:

This view expands the scope to include all three branches of government:

Legislative: Makes laws and oversees administration.

Executive: Implements laws and government policies.

Judiciary: Ensures that public administration acts within the law.

The modern view considers public administration as the entire government in action, emphasizing
that all branches contribute to governance.
The scope of public administration can be understood through two main views: As an Activity or
POSDCORB View and As a Discipline or Subject Matter View.

1. POSDCORB View:

This view, proposed by Luther Gulick, outlines seven key functions of administration, summarized by
the acronym POSDCORB:

• P (Planning): Setting goals and deciding how to achieve them.

• O (Organizing): Creating a structured authority system.

• S (Staffing): Hiring and managing personnel.

• D (Directing): Making decisions and guiding staff.

• C (Coordinating): Ensuring harmony between different tasks.

• R (Reporting): Keeping everyone informed through records and reports.

• B (Budgeting): Managing finances, planning, and controlling expenditures.

This view is technique-oriented and focuses on the common administrative tasks across different
agencies.

2. Subject Matter View:

This view emerged as a response to the limitations of the POSDCORB view. It emphasizes that
administration is not just about techniques but also about the specific functions and services
provided (like defense, health, and education). Each agency has its own unique challenges and
specialized techniques that POSDCORB does not cover. Therefore, this view is subject-oriented and
highlights that understanding the specific field of service is crucial for effective administration.

Significance of public administration

1. Good Governance: Public administration ensures the effective implementation of government

policies, maintaining transparency and accountability. It upholds the rule of law, maintains public
order, and facilitates the delivery of public services, promoting trust between the government and
citizens.

2. Addressing Socio-Economic Challenges: It plays a vital role in executing social welfare programs
and economic initiatives, including poverty eradication, healthcare, education, and infrastructure
development. Through targeted interventions, it aims to reduce inequality and improve the quality
of life for citizens.

3. Strengthening Democracy: Public administration supports democratic governance by maintaining

stability and continuity, irrespective of political changes. It ensures the consistent implementation of
policies and programs, fostering integration among diverse communities and preserving democratic
values in multi-ethnic and multi-cultural societies.

4. Crisis and Disaster Management: During natural disasters, pandemics, or emergencies, public
administration coordinates relief operations, resource distribution, and rehabilitation efforts. It
manages crisis responses efficiently, minimizing damage and loss while restoring normalcy, thereby
protecting public safety and ensuring community resilience.
Q2. What do you understand by Public administration? Discuss the various stages of evolution of
public administration as a discipline.

Ans Public administration became a discipline in 1887, not as an activity Woodrow Wilson's
influential paper, The Study of Administration, published in the Political Science Quarterly, played a
key role in establishing it as a formal discipline. Because of this, Wilson is often seen as the founder
of public administration as a field of study. Remain will be same INTRODUCTION as above

Various stages of evolution of public administration.

There are five stages in the chronology of the evolution of Public Administration as a discipline:

First stage: Politics administration dichotomy (1887-1926)

The first stage was the manifestation of Woodrow Wilson's view of politics - administration
dichotomy( difference between two things as they are completely opposite). This idea sparked
interest in studying public administration, especially in the United States and worldwide, leading to
reforms in government. At the time, people were frustrated with the government due to corruption
and the spoils system in the bureaucracy. Wilson’s view offered a fresh perspective, making it
popular among scholars. In 1926, L.D. White’s book Introduction to the Study of Public Administration
supported Wilson’s idea, further encouraging scholars to explore public administration as a separate
field of study.

Stage 2: Principles of administration (1927-1937)

The second stage of administrative theory focused on strengthening Wilson’s idea of separating
politics from administration, aiming to make management a value-free science. During the Industrial
Revolution, increasing production became crucial, but rapid industrial growth created new
management challenges. F.W. Taylor and Henri Fayol introduced scientific and engineering-based
management principles to improve efficiency, which gained worldwide acceptance. Their ideas, along
with Max Weber’s concept of bureaucracy as a structured, rule-based system for maximum
efficiency, shaped the Classical theory of administration. This theory, also called the Mechanical
theory, emphasized practical, systematic approaches to administration, focusing on efficiency and
standardized processes.

Stage 3: Era of challenge (1938-1947)

The third stage of public administration theory, known as the "era of challenge," emerged in the late
1920s and early 1930s. It questioned the rigid, mechanical principles of earlier theories, emphasizing
the human side of administration. This shift was driven by the Hawthorne experiments conducted by
Elton Mayo and his colleagues at Harvard Business School. These experiments focused on the
psychological and social aspects of industrial workers, highlighting factors like leadership, morale,
and motivation. Herbert Simon, a prominent scholar, criticized earlier administrative principles as
vague and inconsistent, calling them mere proverbs. He argued that decision-making, not rigid rules,
is the essence of administration, as decisions shape every administrative action.

Stage 4: crises of identity (1948-1970)

The crisis of identity stage in public administration emerged in the late 20th century when many
countries, including the US, faced social and political challenges. Traditional public administration
failed to address these issues, leading to a call for reform. In 1968, the First Minnowbrook
Conference led by Dwight Waldo introduced New Public Administration (NPA), emphasizing values,
social welfare, and democratic humanism. George Frederickson, a key figure, later organized the
Second Minnowbrook Conference in 1988, reinforcing the focus on client orientation and public
policy. The collapse of the Soviet Union further supported this shift, making public administration
more people-centric and value-driven.

Stage 5: Public policy perspective (1971 onwards)

The New Public Administration (NPA) stage introduced democratic humanism and client orientation,
focusing on making public administration more people-centric. It also embraced a scientific
perspective, integrating management principles to handle evolving challenges. NPA emphasized
public policy, which involves government efforts to address public issues through laws, regulations,
or decisions aimed at public welfare and development. As a discipline, public policy studies
government actions and has brought public administration closer to political science while adopting
management practices to stay dynamic and effective.

Q3. Discuss the major principles of Public Administration. What is its impact on administration?

Ans Introduction same as above

Major principles of Public Administration

1. Hierarchy: Hierarchy means having a clear chain of command in an organization. It looks like a
pyramid, where authority moves from the top to the bottom. Fayol called it the "scalar chain," and
Mooney called it the "scalar process." Max Weber saw hierarchy as an essential part of a structured
system, where each lower position is controlled and supervised by a higher one.

2. Unity of Command: This principle asserts that each employee should receive orders from only one
superior to avoid confusion and conflicting instructions. Henry Fayol stated, “For any action
whatsoever, an employee should receive orders from one superior only.” It is crucial for
maintaining clarity and accountability in organizations.

3. Span of Control: It refers to the number of subordinates that a manager can effectively supervise.
A narrow span leads to a tall structure with more hierarchical levels, while a wide span results in a
flat structure. Dimock and Dimock defined it as the number of direct communication contacts
between a chief executive and fellow officers.

4. Authority and Responsibility: Authority means the official power to make decisions and give
orders. Responsibility means the duty to complete the work given. Mooney and Reiley called
authority the "supreme coordinating power" because it helps manage everything properly. Both
authority and responsibility should be balanced. If not, power can be misused, or work may not be
done well.

5. Delegation: Delegation involves transferring authority from higher to lower levels within an
organization. Mooney defined it as giving specific authority to a subordinate. It allows managers to
distribute workload efficiently while empowering subordinates to make decisions within defined
limits .

6. Supervision: Supervision involves overseeing subordinates to ensure they perform their tasks
effectively. It includes guidance, control, and coordination. Henry Reining described supervision as
the authoritative direction of others' work. It ensures that objectives are met according to standards

7. Line and Staff: Line agencies are the parts of an organization that do the main work and achieve its
goals. Staff agencies do not perform the main work but help by giving advice and support. This idea
came from the military, where some people fight on the front lines (line), and others help by
planning and giving expert advice (staff). Both are important to make sure the organization works
well.

8. Centralization and Decentralization: Centralization means that important decisions are made by
top leaders. Decentralization means that decision-making power is shared with lower-level managers
and employees. Fayol said that centralization gives less power to subordinates, while decentralization
gives them more power and responsibility. A good organization uses a mix of both, depending on
what works best for its needs.

Its impact on administration

1. Improved Governance: Public administration principles like transparency and accountability make
government operations more organized and effective. This builds public trust, leads to better
decision-making, and encourages citizens to be more involved in governance.

2. Social Welfare: By focusing on fairness and the public good, these principles make sure policies
are inclusive, giving everyone equal access to services and improving the lives of all citizens,
especially those in need.

3. Economic Development: The principle of efficiency ensures that resources are used wisely,
reducing waste and allowing governments to invest in infrastructure and services, leading to long-
term economic growth.

Reduction in Corruption: Transparency and accountability create checks and balances, making
government actions more visible and open to review, which helps prevent corruption and
encourages ethical behavior in public administration.

Q4. Critically examine the Scientific management theory of Frederick.

Ans INTRODUCTION

Scientific Management, or Taylorism, emerged in the 20th century under Frederick Winslow Taylor's
leadership. It aimed to improve efficiency by analyzing and optimizing workflows in organizations.
While Taylor developed the theory, others like Charles Babbage, Henry R. Towne, Frederick Halsey,
and Henry Metcalfe contributed to its practical applications. The term “Scientific Management” was
coined by Louis Brandeis in 1910, and Taylor used it to describe methods that made organizational
processes more efficient. His ideas are presented in works like A Piece Rate System, Shop
Management, Art of Cutting Metals, and Principles of Scientific Management. This approach
significantly impacted both industrial and government organizations, shaping administrative
practices.

Historical Context and Development

The late 19th century was characterized by rapid industrialization, leading to increased demand for
efficiency in manufacturing and business operations. Traditional methods of management were
largely based on trial and error, intuition, and arbitrary decision-making, resulting in inconsistent
productivity and operational inefficiencies. Taylor, a mechanical engineer, observed these
inefficiencies and sought to apply scientific principles to optimize work processes. His seminal work,
The Principles of Scientific Management (1911), laid the foundation for modern management
practices.
Key Principles and Characteristics of Scientific Management

Taylor observes that what workmen want from their employers more than anything else is high
wages, while employers seek low labor costs for manufacturing. This balance of minimum input and
maximum output determines good or bad management. Taylor further debates this notion and
formulates four principles of Scientific Management:

1. Replacement of the 'Rule of Thumb' with Science

Taylor criticized the traditional approach where workers relied on personal judgment and experience
to perform tasks. He proposed that every aspect of work should be analyzed scientifically to
determine the most efficient way to complete a task. This involved conducting systematic
observations, experiments, and measurements to establish standard procedures. By replacing
guesswork with proven methods, organizations could ensure consistency, efficiency, and higher
productivity.

2. Scientific Selection and Training of Workers

Taylor believed that rather than allowing workers to choose their tasks randomly or learn through
trial and error, management should carefully study their capabilities and assign them roles that
match their skills. Proper training should be provided to ensure workers perform their tasks
efficiently. This approach enhances productivity and job satisfaction while reducing wastage of time
and resources. A well-trained workforce, guided by scientific methods, leads to greater efficiency and
precision in industrial work.

3. Cooperation Between Management and Workers

Taylor stressed that conflicts between employers and employees arise due to a lack of understanding
and inefficient work practices. Instead of opposing each other, management and workers should
collaborate to achieve organizational goals. Managers should support workers by providing clear
instructions, incentives, and proper working conditions. This cooperation ensures that employees are
motivated to maximize their productivity while feeling valued and respected. A workplace where
workers and management work in harmony leads to improved efficiency and job satisfaction.

4. Division of Responsibility Between Management and Workers

Taylor proposed that the roles of management and workers should be clearly defined to ensure
efficiency. Managers should focus on planning, organizing, and designing work processes based on
scientific analysis, while workers should focus on executing their tasks according to these guidelines.
This division allows each group to concentrate on their strengths, ensuring that the management
handles decision-making, supervision, and efficiency improvements, while workers perform tasks
with precision and consistency. By clearly distinguishing responsibilities, organizations can achieve
greater productivity and smoother operations.

Criticism and Limitations:

Scientific Management focused on efficiency rather than employee well-being, treating workers like
parts of a machine. This approach led to dehumanization and job dissatisfaction as repetitive,
specialized tasks reduced motivation and increased burnout. It also neglected psychological and
social factors by focusing mainly on financial incentives while ignoring teamwork, leadership, and a
positive workplace culture. Modern management recognizes that motivation involves more than just
money. Furthermore, Scientific Management has limited relevance in modern workplaces as its
rigid, task-oriented approach does not fit today’s dynamic industries that value flexibility, creativity,
and problem-solving.

Q5. Critically examine the Weberian model of Bureaucracy.

Ans INTRODUCTION

Max Weber, a German sociologist, was the first to systematically study bureaucracy and develop a
comprehensive theory around it. His theory of bureaucracy marked a significant milestone in
organizational studies, addressing the need for efficiency in industrial organizations. Weber's ideas
emerged as a response to the demands of a capitalist economy, which required structured and
efficient administration. He introduced the concept of the "ideal-type bureaucracy," emphasizing
rationalization, clear authority, merit-based recruitment, division of labor, and formal rules. Weber's
work, particularly his book Economy and Society (1922), laid the foundation for understanding how
bureaucratic structures function efficiently.

Concept of bureaucracy

The concept of bureaucracy was discussed even before Weber’s writings. The term was first coined
by Vincent de Gournay, a French economist, in 1745. He combined the French word bureau (meaning
writing table or desk) with the Greek-derived suffix -cracy (meaning rule) to signify “desk
government” or the rule of officials. By the late 19th century, the concept gained prominence among
sociologists like Mosca, Michels, and Weber. According to Weber, bureaucracy is an administrative
body of officials aimed at achieving efficiency within an organization. He viewed it as the most
efficient and rational way to organize human activities, emphasizing structured processes, organized
hierarchies, and the elimination of favoritism to maintain order and maximize productivity.

Max weber on authority

Weber's concept of bureaucracy is closely related to his ideas on the legitimacy of authority. He
developed theories on domination, leadership, and the legitimacy of authority. Weber differentiated
between authority, power, and legitimacy.

Power is the ability to influence someone's thoughts, actions, beliefs, and behavior.

Authority is the legitimate power that a person or group is granted to exercise over others within an
organization.

Legitimacy means the quality of being acceptable or reasonable.

Weber classified authority into three ideal types based on its claim to legitimacy:

1. Charismatic Authority: This authority is based on a leader's special qualities that make people
admire and follow them. The leader might be seen as a hero, savior, or prophet. Followers believe in
their extraordinary powers and follow them without question. However, this authority is unstable
since it relies on the leader's personal charm.

2. Traditional Authority: This type comes from customs and long-standing traditions. Leaders, like
kings or village elders, gain power because of their family background or inherited status. People
follow them out of respect and loyalty, often involving family and close aides.

3. Legal-Rational Authority: This is the most common form today. It is based on clear rules and laws
that apply equally to everyone. Leaders get power through official positions and follow rules strictly,
ensuring fairness and order.

Max weber: The Concept of Bureaucracy

According to Max Weber, bureaucracy is a system where appointed officials, not elected leaders,
manage administration using rules, procedures, and technical knowledge. He believed that this
system is logical and efficient because it is based on legal-rational authority. Bureaucracy gets its
power from expert knowledge and experience, especially in modern times when technology and
large-scale organizations are important. Weber saw bureaucracy as an ideal model—a perfect
concept that doesn’t fully exist in reality but helps us understand how systems should function. He
studied both ancient and modern bureaucracies and believed this model brings predictability and
order. Weber considered it the most efficient way to manage large organizations, whether in
government, business, charities, or religious groups.

Features of bureaucracy by weber

1. Division of Work with High Specialisation: In a bureaucratic setup, tasks are divided into smaller
parts based on specific skills. Each employee is assigned duties according to their expertise, making
them specialists. This structured approach increases productivity as everyone focuses on what they
do best.

2. Functions Defined by Formal Rules and Regulations: Bureaucracy operates on strict written rules
and regulations, ensuring fairness and consistency. These formal guidelines help maintain discipline
and order, preventing personal bias or misuse of power within the organisation.

3. Hierarchy of Authority (Legitimate Order): There is a clear and structured chain of command
where higher authorities supervise lower levels. This hierarchy ensures accountability and control. If
an employee feels unfairly treated, they can appeal to a higher authority.

4. Assessment and Selection Based on Technical Skills: Employees are selected based on their
technical skills, qualifications, and training rather than personal connections. Objective methods like
exams and interviews ensure that only competent individuals are hired, promoting merit and
fairness.

5. Formal Relationships at Work: Interactions between employees are strictly professional and role-
based, avoiding personal biases. Superiors give instructions according to official duties, ensuring
equal treatment and maintaining a formal work environment.
6. Fixed Salaries for Employees: Employees receive fixed salaries determined by their role and
position within the hierarchy. Pay structures are transparent, and promotions are based on merit and
seniority, encouraging good performance and dedication.

7. Separation Between Job and Ownership: In a bureaucratic organisation, employees do not treat
their roles as personal assets. They are responsible for performing their duties without using their
position for personal gain, maintaining professionalism and discipline.

8. Regular Career Progress Over Time: Career advancement in bureaucracy follows clear and
objective criteria, without being influenced by favoritism. Promotions are given based on merit,
experience, and performance, motivating employees to stay committed and work efficiently.’

Criticism

Weber’s concept of bureaucracy faces several criticisms. Critics argue that it overlooks human
behavior and individuality, focusing too much on rules and technical efficiency. Carl J. Friederich
points out that Weber’s “ideal type” is unrealistic and not practical. Robert K. Merton highlights that
strict rules can make organizations rigid and less adaptable, causing inefficiency. Alvin Gouldner
argues that an overemphasis on rules can lead to goal displacement, where employees focus more
on regulations than actual objectives. Victor Thompson adds that too many rules create insecurity
among superiors, leading to more control measures. Lastly, bureaucracy can demotivate employees
as it limits their involvement in decision-making, causing frustration and disengagement.

Q6. Analyse how the Human relations theory of organization is an important upon the scientific
management theory of organization.

Ans INTRODUCTION

Elton Mayo (1880–1949) was an Australian psychologist and professor known as the father of the
Human Relations Movement. His influential Hawthorne Studies (1924–1932) transformed
management thought by focusing on the social and emotional needs of workers rather than just
mechanical efficiency. These studies highlighted that workers are motivated not only by money but
also by social interactions and a sense of belonging. The Human Relations Theory emerged as a
response to the failures of classical theories like Taylor’s Scientific Management during the interwar
economic crisis. By emphasizing the human side of organizations, Mayo’s ideas encouraged
managers to focus on employee well-being, social connections, and group dynamics, fundamentally
changing modern management practices.

Early experiment

In 1923, Elton Mayo conducted his first research at a textile mill near Philadelphia, known as the
"first inquiry." Despite being a well-organized workplace, the mill had a high labor turnover of around
5% per year. Even with various incentives, the problem persisted, especially in the mule-spinning
department. Mayo and his team studied the issue and found that workers were fatigued due to a
lack of rest. They introduced rest periods, which significantly boosted motivation and productivity.
Allowing workers to decide their rest times improved social interaction between management and
employees, marking a new approach to workplace relations.

The Hawthorne Experiment (1924–1932)

The Hawthorne Experiments of Elton Mayo are considered the bedrock of the Human Relations
Movement in management. The following is a brief overview of the three Hawthorne experiments
carried out by Mayo and his team between 1924 and 1932 at the Hawthorne branch of the Western
Electric Company near Chicago, USA.

1. The Illumination Experiment (1924–27)

In this experiment, two groups of female workers assembling telephone relays were placed in
separate rooms: a test room and a control room. The objective was to study productivity levels,
hypothesizing that better illumination would increase output. Despite changes in the test group’s
lighting and other factors like rest periods, wages, and room conditions, productivity increased in
both groups. Researchers concluded that improved communication and attention led to positive
results.

2. Relay Assembly Study (1927-32)

To analyze the impact of various factors on productivity, two new groups were formed after the
illumination study. The first hypothesis suggested that wage increases would boost output, while the
second proposed that improved supervision would enhance attitudes and productivity. Initially,
offering individual incentives increased output, but it later stabilized. The study found that better
working conditions, relaxed supervision, and open communication, rather than wages, led to higher
productivity. Mayo concluded that work satisfaction depends mainly on informal social interactions
and supportive supervision.

3. Human Attitudes and Sentiments (1928-31)

From 1928 to 1931, Mayo and his team interviewed 21,000 workers to understand their attitudes
and feelings about working conditions and management policies. The goal was more to boost morale
than gather data. The study revealed three key points: first, involving workers in decision-making
created a sense of equality and hope for better working conditions. Second, the research made
managers more responsive to workers’ concerns. Third, understanding workers' real problems
requires appreciating their feelings, which are influenced by their personal and social backgrounds.

4. The Bank Wiring Observation Study (1931-32)

In this experiment, 14 workers were given a group task and paid based on the total output. Instead
of increasing their work, the workers set their own lower targets and kept a steady pace. The study
showed that workers had a group mindset and informal rules that affected their productivity. These
rules included avoiding too much or too little work (to avoid being called a "rate buster" or
"chiseler"), not reporting negative comments about coworkers to the supervisor, and maintaining a
friendly, respectful attitude. This highlighted the importance of group behavior in the workplace.

Main Findings Of Hawthorne Experiments

The Hawthorne experiments showed how social and psychological factors affect worker satisfaction
and performance. Here are the key findings:

1. Social Factors in Output: Workers' productivity depends more on social norms than official rules.
Workers are not just machines; their social needs affect how well they work.

2. Group Influence: Workers act as part of a group, not just as individuals. The group's standards
influence their behavior and productivity. The group also protects workers from management's
retaliation.

3. Rewards and Sanctions: Social rewards, like recognition from peers, and group sanctions are more
effective than money in improving productivity.
4. Supervision: Workers are more likely to accept organizational goals if they are involved in
discussions and if their informal leaders are consulted. This requires good communication and
management's willingness to include workers in decision-making.

5. Communication: Clear communication is key to a positive work environment. Management should

explain decisions well and understand workers' social, emotional, and work-related needs through
good communication.

Human Relations And Classical Approach: A Comparison

The classical approach to management, led by figures like Taylor and Fayol, focused on increasing
productivity through strict organization, job specialization, and monetary incentives. It viewed
workers as parts of a machine, emphasizing efficiency. In contrast, the human relations approach,
pioneered by Mayo, highlighted the importance of informal social relationships within organizations.
It focused on fulfilling workers' emotional and social needs to improve performance and job
satisfaction. While the classical approach emphasized economic needs and rules, the human
relations approach encouraged cooperation, communication, and consideration of workers as
individuals to boost productivity and harmony in the workplace.

Q7. Examine the Herbert Simon’s rational decision making theory.

Ans INTRODUCTION

Herbert Simon, a Nobel Prize-winning economist, is well known for his contributions to the study of
decision-making, particularly in the field of public administration. His most influential work,
Administrative Behaviour (1947), emphasizes that decision-making is central to understanding
organizations. Simon challenged the traditional rational decision-making model, arguing that it
assumes perfect knowledge and complete rationality, which is unrealistic. Instead, he proposed the
concept of "bounded rationality," suggesting that decision-makers work within the limits of available
information, cognitive abilities, and time constraints. Simon’s approach, grounded in logical
positivism, highlights the importance of empirical analysis while recognizing the practical challenges
in administrative decisions.

Herbert Simon : “A theory of administration should be concerned with the processes of decision as
well as the processes of action. Mere setting up of a theory and no relation to reality is of no value.”

Simon’s decision making process

Simon’s Decision-Making Theory offers a realistic view, suggesting that decisions impact prices and
outputs. Unlike classical theories that assume one best choice, Simon argues that decisions involve
choosing between alternatives, including action or non-action, since complete information is
unattainable and a better option may always exist. The theory also considers psychological factors
like stress and motivation, which classical economists often overlook, as these factors limit problem-
solving, especially in risky and uncertain situations. At its core, the theory introduces "satisficing"—a
blend of satisfying and sufficing—where people make decisions that are good enough rather than
optimal, aiming to minimize risks rather than maximize profits.
Stages in decision making

Intelligence Activity Stage: This stage identifies the problems of the organization and helps the
organization head analyze and understand the issues within the organization.

Design Activity Stage: After problem identification, the organization head looks for various suitable
strategies, explores new alternatives, and identifies the merits and demerits of each.

Choice Activity Stage: Once all alternatives have been developed, the choice activity stage begins.
The administration critically evaluates all alternatives, considering their different consequences. After
examining the above-mentioned alternatives, the most suitable course of action is selected. This
stage requires judgment, creativity, quantitative analysis, and experience in decision-making.

Simon classified decision-making into two types:

1. Programmed

Programmed decision making involves those decisions that already have a plan or rule in place,
which is used to reach a solution or conclusion. They follow already established guidelines and
formal patterns.

2. Non-Programmed : Non-programmed decisions are ill-structured and one-time decisions.

Problems or situations that don’t have a concrete set of rules or guidelines to follow rely on non-
programmed decision making. These are complex and have long-term impact.

Key Concepts of Simon’s Rational Decision-Making Theory

Bounded Rationality

Bounded Rationality means that humans are rational within limits. Simon suggests that people aim
to make rational decisions, but several constraints prevent them from achieving the ideal or optimal
outcome. These constraints include:
 • Cognitive Limitations: Human brains can only process a limited amount of information.

• Time Constraints: Decisions often need to be made quickly.

• Incomplete Information: We rarely have all the necessary data.

• Organizational Restrictions: Procedures and policies may limit choices.

• Environmental Uncertainty: External factors are unpredictable and not fully controllable.

Satisficing: The Realistic Approach

The term "satisficing" is a combination of "satisfy" and "suffice." It means choosing an option that
meets minimum acceptable criteria rather than endlessly searching for the optimal one. In practical
terms, satisficing is about being reasonable and realistic.

For example, when buying a new phone, rather than finding the perfect one, a person might choose
one that fits their budget, has decent features, and is reliable.

Means-End Logic

Means-End Logic is another principle in Simon’s theory. It involves analyzing the relationship
between means (actions) and ends (goals). Decision-makers evaluate which actions are most likely to
achieve their desired outcomes.

Example: A student choosing between two jobs evaluates factors like salary, work hours (means),
and long-term career benefits (ends).

Value-Fact Dichotomy

Simon introduced the concept of the Value-Fact Dichotomy to explain how decision-making involves
both personal opinions and objective information. Values are our preferences, beliefs, or priorities,
while facts are the actual data or evidence. In real life, people often need to balance these two when
making choices.

Criticism

Huber, Das, and Teng argue that, despite its differences, it still falls under rational decision-making
and lacks a clear distinction from traditional models. Norton E. Ling and P. Selznick criticize Simon for
focusing too much on decision-making while ignoring social, cultural, and political influences in
organizations. They also point out that his separation of facts and values doesn’t work well in real life
since values are essential in public decisions. Chris Argyris argues that Simon overlooks important
factors like intuition, tradition, and creativity. Some critics believe that the concept of satisficing can
be misused to justify less effective decisions, and they find the difference between maximizing and
satisficing unclear.

Q8. Critically evaluate the contribution of Fred Rigg’s ecological model to public administration.

Ans INTRODUCTION

F.W. Riggs was a modern thinker in the fields of political development and comparative public
administration. He focused on understanding how administrative systems interact with their
environments, especially considering social, cultural, historical, and political differences. Riggs called
this interaction the "ecology" of administration. His ideas on the ecological approach are mainly
found in his books The Ecology of Public Administration (1961) and Administration in Developing
Countries: The Theory of Prismatic Society (1964). Riggs later introduced the Fused, Prismatic, and
Diffracted models to better analyze administrative systems in different countries. These models
represent underdeveloped, developing, and developed societies, respectively, offering a clearer
understanding of how administration adapts to various environments.

Riggsian model of administration

F.W. Riggs first introduced two models: Agraria for traditional societies and Industria for developed
societies. To include developing societies, he introduced the Transitia model, forming the Agraria-
Transitia-Industria model. However, since the Transitia model was not detailed enough, Riggs
eventually dropped it. He then developed the Fused-Prismatic-Diffracted model, using the concept
of a prism to better capture the blend of traditional and modern elements in developing societies.

Riggs’ Model of Prismatic Societies

a. Fused Model
The fused model represents traditional societies where agriculture is the main occupation, known as
the Agraria model. A single structure performs multiple roles, lacking specialization. Examples
include Thailand, the Philippines, and Imperial China.

b. Diffracted Model
The diffracted model represents modern societies where industry is the primary occupation, also
called the Industria model. Functions are clearly divided among specialized structures—families
handle social roles, markets manage economic tasks, and political parties address political issues.
Examples include the United States and other developed countries.

c. Prismatic Model
The prismatic model represents developing societies, also known as the Transitia model. It blends
traits of both fused and diffracted models, reflecting a mix of traditional and modern practices.
Examples include India and other developing countries.

According to Riggs, the prismatic society has three important characteristics features, namely:
heterogeneity, formalism, and overlapping

Formalism

Formalism in a prismatic society refers to the gap between stated objectives and actual performance.
It highlights the difference between what is formally prescribed (like laws or rules) and what actually
happens in practice. For example, while constitutions may outline democratic structures like
elections and parliaments, these often lack real power or public involvement.

Heterogeneity

Heterogeneity in prismatic societies means the coexistence of old and new systems, practices, and
viewpoints. This results from incomplete social change, where modern urban areas with advanced
administration exist alongside rural areas with traditional practices. For example, while cities may
have modern offices, villages still rely on local leaders performing multiple roles, creating a mix of
contrasting elements.

Overlapping

Overlapping in a prismatic society means that different structures perform similar or even identical
functions, unlike in developed societies where roles are clearly defined. In traditional (fused)
societies, one entity (like a king or family) handles multiple roles, while modern (diffracted) societies
have specialized institutions. In prismatic societies, old and new systems coexist, leading to
overlapping functions.

Sala model: prismatic administrative system

The Sala model is an administrative structure in prismatic societies, introduced by F.W. Riggs. The
term "sala" (from Spanish, meaning "drawing room") symbolizes a blend of modern (diffracted) and
traditional (fused) administrative traits.

1. Mixed Administrative Traits

The sala combines modern and traditional features. It shows honesty, rationality, and efficiency like
modern systems, but also corruption, inefficiency, and irrationality typical of traditional systems. This
combination makes the sala unpredictable and inconsistent, as it struggles to balance formal policies
with informal practices.

2. Nepotism

Nepotism is a major issue in the sala model. In developed societies, administration separates
personal loyalty from official duties, while in traditional societies, family ties dominate. In the sala
model, even though nepotism is formally discouraged, it persists. Job appointments and promotions
often depend on personal connections rather than merit, weakening the credibility of institutions
and fostering corruption.

3. Polycommunalism

Polycommunalism means different ethnic, religious, and social groups coexist but often compete or
clash. These groups, called clects (a mix of "clan" and "sects"), have strong community ties that
influence public administration. Officials may feel more loyal to their own community than the state,
leading to biased hiring and decision-making, favoritism, and alliances that result in corruption.

4. Polynormativism

Polynormativism means modern and traditional values coexist, causing mixed and confusing
behaviors. Officials may publicly claim to follow fair and modern rules but privately stick to outdated,
biased practices. This contradiction arises from trying to appear modern while keeping traditional
habits, leading to inconsistent and unfair administration.Prismatic economy: The 'Bazaar-canteen'
model -the economic subsystem

Prismatic Economy: The 'Bazaar-Canteen' Model

Prismatic Economy in the Sala Model: The bazaar-canteen model in a prismatic society blends
traditional and modern economic practices. In modern societies, prices are fixed by market forces
like demand and supply, with no bargaining. In traditional societies, prices depend on factors like
social status and power.

In a prismatic society, both systems coexist, leading to price indeterminacy—prices vary, and
bargaining is common, like in a bazaar. This affects financial administration with issues in budgeting,
accounting, and auditing. Low government revenue results in low public official salaries, pushing
them to seek extra income through illegitimate means. Public service careers often rely on personal
connections and seniority rather than merit, leading to inconsistent norms and unethical behavior.

Criticism of Riggs’ Model

Riggs' model of comparative administration is often criticized for being too complex and lacking
practical application. Critics argue that Riggs used too many coined terms and scientific language,
making it hard to understand. Some, like Richard Chapman, suggest that a dictionary explaining the
terminology would be helpful. Daya Krishna points out that the model lacks empirical evidence and
may not accurately reflect developing societies. Michael Monroe argues that Riggs viewed
developing societies through a Western lens, leading to biased conclusions. Additionally, E.H. Valsan
challenges Riggs’ negative view of formalism, suggesting that positive formalism can aid
development. Overall, critics see the model as overly theoretical and not always practical.

Q9. Elaborate the main features of New Public Management. How is it different from New Public
Service. Examine.

Ans INTRODUCTION

Public administration has evolved significantly, influenced by social, political, economic, and cultural
changes. Globalization, liberalization, privatization, and technological advancements have reshaped
both public and private sectors and their interactions. In response to the challenges faced by
traditional public administration, New Public Management (NPM) emerged during the 1980s and
1990s, driven by reforms in the UK and USA, to make public organizations more efficient and results-
oriented. On the other hand, the New Public Service (NPS), introduced by Janet and Robert Denhardt
in the early 2000s, focuses on democratic values, emphasizing citizen participation and public
interest rather than mere efficiency. While NPM seeks to enhance managerial practices, NPS
prioritizes collaboration between government and citizens for better governance.
New Public Management: Salient Features

New Public Management (NPM) emerged in the late 20th century, influenced by the policies of
Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan. It aimed to improve government efficiency by focusing on the
3Es: Efficiency (better service delivery), Economy (minimal resource wastage), and Effectiveness
(targeted problem-solving). Coined by Christopher Hood in 1991, NPM promotes performance-based
appraisal, managerial autonomy, market orientation, innovation, accountability, and decentralization
to modernize public administration.

Salient Features of New Public Management (NPM)

Freedom of Choice to Citizens: NPM empowers citizens by giving them more choices, such as the
ability to opt out of services ("exit"), express complaints for improvement ("voice"), and remain loyal
despite service quality ("loyalty"). It treats citizens as active customers.

Autonomy to Managers: NPM advocates giving public sector managers more freedom to make
decisions, similar to private sector leaders. This includes flexible personnel policies, contractual
appointments, and encouraging workplace innovation.

Organizational Restructuring: NPM calls for simplifying processes, reducing hierarchical levels, and
promoting decentralization. The goal is to create a flexible, leadership-friendly structure that
responds efficiently to changes.

Strict Performance Measurement: NPM emphasizes measuring performance using techniques like
Total Quality Management and Citizen's Charter. It aims to ensure quality, efficiency, and
accountability in public services.

Restructuring Public Bureaucracy: NPM proposes breaking large bureaucracies into smaller, more
manageable agencies to reduce inefficiency and cost, promoting a user-pay system for services.

Economic Management: NPM supports cost reduction by privatizing services, charging for usage,
and minimizing the state's role, thus promoting a market-driven approach.

Human Resource Revamp: NPM aims to attract skilled talent with competitive salaries, incentives,
and regular training, fostering a motivated and capable workforce.

Theoretical Bases of New Public Management (NPM)

NPM is based on three main theories:

1. New Rights Philosophy: This idea, starting in the 1950s, criticized the welfare state and suggested
that private companies should provide goods and services instead of the government. It supported
free markets and privatization, believing they would lead to better efficiency and adapt to global
changes.

2. Public Choice Approach: In the 1960s, Vincent Ostrom, in his book The Intellectual Crisis in
American Public Administration, argued for replacing traditional bureaucratic systems with a more
democratic approach. He promoted decentralization, economic thinking in public services, and the
involvement of citizens in decision-making.

3. Neo-Taylorism: In the 1970s, after economic crises like the 1973 oil shock, Neo-Taylorism
suggested adopting private sector management practices in public administration. It emphasized
measuring performance, giving individuals responsibility for their tasks, and offering personal
incentives instead of collective ones.
New Public Service

The New Public Service (NPS) approach was introduced by Janet and Robert Denhardt in the early
2000s. NPS emphasizes serving the public and prioritizing citizens' needs. Unlike traditional public
administration, which views citizens as clients, NPS sees them as active participants in governance.
Public servants, according to NPS, should focus on being accountable, responsive, and collaborative,
working with citizens to solve societal problems. The NPS philosophy stresses democratic values and
public service ethics, where public servants are driven by the common good rather than just
efficiency. Influenced by thinkers like Dwight Waldo, NPS draws from theories such as Democratic
Citizenship, Civil Society, and Organizational Humanism.

Principle of New Public Service

1. Serve Citizens, Not Customers: Public servants should focus on serving citizens rather than
treating them like customers. The goal is to build trust and strong relationships based on values and
public faith.

2. Pursue the Public Interest: Public servants should work collectively to find solutions that reflect
shared interests and responsibilities.

3. Value Citizenship and Public Service: Public interest is best served by dedicated public servants
and active citizens working together, rather than by those with a business mindset.

4. Think Strategically, Act Democratically: Policies and programs should be developed through
collective efforts, involving citizens to meet public needs effectively.

5. Acknowledge Accountability’s Complexity: Public servants should stay aware of community

values, political standards, professional ethics, and citizens' welfare, as accountability is not a one-
size-fits-all concept.

6. Serve, Not Steer: Instead of directing or controlling citizens, public servants should focus on
helping and supporting them.

7. Value People, Not Just Productivity: Public organizations thrive when they promote collaboration
with citizens and encourage shared leadership rather than focusing solely on efficiency.

New Public Service v/s New Public Management

1. Focus:

NPM: Focuses on improving the efficiency of public sector management by using managerial and
market-oriented approaches. It borrows practices from the private sector, such as performance
measurement, results-oriented management, and cost-effectiveness. The aim is to reform public
administration to deliver services more efficiently.

NPS: Concentrates on public service ethics and democratic governance, focusing on citizen
engagement and collaboration. Instead of treating people as customers, it views them as active
participants in governance. It values shared decision-making and community welfare over purely
managerial outcomes.
2. Human Behavior Perspective:

NPM: Views public servants as "economic men" motivated by personal gain and entrepreneurial
spirit. It emphasizes competition and individual performance, encouraging public managers to act
more like private-sector executives.

NPS: Believes that public servants are motivated by a desire to serve the community. It sees them as
facilitators of public good rather than profit-driven managers. The approach values collective
responsibility and ethical public service.

3. Role of Government:

NPM: Advocates for the government to "steer" rather than directly "row." This means the state
should guide and regulate rather than directly provide services. The focus is on creating policies that
foster competition and market mechanisms within public services.

NPS: Emphasizes that the government's role is to "serve" rather than to "steer." It focuses on
building a relationship of trust between citizens and the state. The aim is to facilitate citizen
engagement and solve societal problems through cooperative efforts.

4. Citizen Relationship:

NPM: Treats citizens as customers who receive services. The focus is on efficiency, cost-cutting, and
customer satisfaction, similar to business practices. This model often leads to a transactional
relationship between the state and citizens.

NPS: Views citizens as partners rather than customers. It values civic engagement and community
participation, aiming to build long-term relationships rooted in trust and shared responsibility.
Citizens are seen as co-creators in the policy-making process.

5. Accountability:

NPM: Stresses accountability through performance measurement and outcomes. Success is often
quantified, and public managers are evaluated based on efficiency and results. It aligns with the
principle of managerial accountability rather than public accountability.

NPS: Focuses on accountability towards citizens rather than just performance metrics. It emphasizes
community values, political norms, and social responsibility. Public servants are accountable to the
public, prioritizing transparency and ethical governance.

6. Motivation:

NPM: Public servants are seen as motivated by incentives, often tied to performance-based contracts
and productivity measures. This aligns with the private-sector model, where financial rewards drive
better service delivery.

NPS: Public servants are motivated by a sense of duty and commitment to public good. The approach
encourages fostering public trust and collective problem-solving rather than focusing solely on
individual performance metrics.
Q10. What is good governance? Outline the steps taken to ensure good governance in recent
times.

Ans INTRODUCTION

Good governance refers to the effective, transparent, and accountable use of power and authority by
the government to ensure public welfare and social development. The term “good” in good
governance highlights that governance becomes good when the government’s decisions and actions
are based on people’s consent, legitimacy, and accountability. It promotes active citizenship and a
responsible government. The idea of good governance became more prominent after the World
Bank’s 1989 report linked it to sustainable development. In India, important steps towards good
governance include the Right to Information Act (2005), which promotes transparency, and the
Digital India initiative (2015), aimed at using technology to make services more efficient. Another key
step was the Goods and Services Tax (GST) rollout (2017), which simplified the tax system. Good
governance is an ongoing process that needs the cooperation of citizens, government bodies, and
civil society.

Emergence of Good Governance

The concept of good governance emerged in the 1990s, focusing on the government's responsibility
to meet citizens' needs. It gained attention after the World Bank's 1992 report Governance and
Development, which defined good governance as how governments manage a country's resources
for development. The report emphasized four key areas: public sector management, accountability,
legal frameworks for development, and information transparency. These areas aim to ensure
responsible, efficient, and transparent governance.

Characteristics of Good Governance

Accountability: This means both the government and other sectors (private, NGOs, etc.) should be
responsible for their actions and transparent in their dealings, following the rule of law.

Participation: All sections of society, including men, women, minorities, and the disadvantaged,
should have equal participation in decision-making processes.

Transparency: Information should be made easily accessible to citizens, ensuring openness in

government actions.

Rule of Law: Good governance is achieved when laws are applied equally, and all branches of
government—legislative, executive, and judiciary—remain impartial.

Responsiveness: The administration should respond to citizens’ needs in a timely and efficient
manner.

Equity and Inclusiveness: All citizens, regardless of culture, religion, or caste, should have equal
opportunities, with no one left marginalized.

Effectiveness and Efficiency: Governance should be effective, ensuring the sustainable use of
resources while achieving desired results.

Significance of Good Governance

1. Economic Development: A strong administration helps avoid instability in economic progress.

Challenges like resource distribution, investment, and production can be tackled with fair governance
that ensures the even distribution of resources, promoting sustainable growth.
2. Social Development: Societies with diverse groups need equal wealth distribution to prevent
unrest. If marginalized groups, like women or minorities, are treated unfairly, it may lead to
dissatisfaction. Good governance ensures inclusive policies that promote peace and harmony.

3. Political Development: Politicians must follow the rules to maintain peace. A good democratic
system encourages healthy competition among political parties and ensures that policies benefit
citizens. The state should design and implement policies that address the needs of the people and
contribute to political stability.

Steps taken to ensure good governance in recent times

1. Digital India Initiative (2015): Launched to empower citizens digitally, this initiative focuses on e-
governance, digital literacy, and online services. It promotes access to government services online,
reducing physical visits, and encourages financial inclusion, especially in rural areas. It increases
transparency, reduces corruption, and enhances service efficiency.

2. Right to Information Act (2005): RTI empowers citizens to request information from government
bodies, ensuring accountability. It promotes transparency in decision-making and helps expose
corruption and inefficiency, making government actions open to public scrutiny and encouraging
better governance.

3. Goods and Services Tax (GST) (2017): GST replaced multiple indirect taxes with a unified system,
simplifying the tax structure. It uses technology to ensure transparency, reduces human intervention,
and lowers compliance costs. It streamlines business operations, making it easier to do business and
improving the economic environment.

Digital Governance (for short note only)

Digital governance is a system where governments use information and communication technology
(ICT) to improve how they operate and serve citizens. It ensures that government websites, channels,
and services are accessible and functioning properly for the public. The goal is to make government
administration more efficient, transparent, and accountable, making it easier for citizens to access
services and engage with the government.

This shift to digital governance has been driven by advances in technology, allowing governments to
adapt to the needs of citizens. It helps improve public policy delivery, making the entire
administrative system more streamlined and accessible. As a result, digital governance is seen as the
future of government, as it enhances decision-making, service delivery, and citizen participation.

Digital governance involves three main components: E-administration, E-services, and E-governance.
E-administration focuses on electronic systems for managing government operations, such as
electronic workflows and voting. E-services provide online services to citizens, making it easier for
them to access public resources. E-governance encourages electronic consultation and citizen
engagement, allowing people to participate in decision-making processes.

One of the key aims of digital governance is to support good governance by making government
processes more efficient, transparent, and responsive to the needs of citizens. It also helps in
managing the political, economic, and administrative functions of the government. By using ICT,
digital governance makes public administration more effective and connects citizens to their
government in ways that were not possible with traditional methods.
Q11. The feminist Perspective on Public Administration has contributed toward inclusivity.
Elaborate.

Ans INTRODUCTION

The feminist theory of public administration examines public administration through a gendered
lens, focusing on how women and men can equally share work, privilege, and the shaping of the
world. Emerging in the 1970s, this perspective critiques the male-dominated history of public
administration, challenging the "masculine interpretation" that has shaped the field since its
institutionalization. Feminists argue that the exclusion of women from the workforce, notably during
the early 20th century, contributed to a male-centric perspective in public administration theory and
practice. By highlighting gender as a central element, feminist public administration seeks to assess
and question these assumptions. The theory sheds light on issues, such as the historical alienation of
women, urging a critical examination of gender biases in public administration.

Amartya Sen: "Within cach community, nationality and class the burden of hardship falls
disproportionately on women."

Camilla Strivers: "As long as we go on viewing the enterprise of administration as genderless,

women will continue to face their present Hobson's choice, which is to either to adopt a masculine
administrative identity or accept marginalization in the bureaucratic hierarchy.

Waves of feminism

1. First Wave (1848-1920): The first wave of feminism began in 1848 at the Seneca Falls Convention
in New York, led by Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucretia Mott. It focused on legal issues, primarily the
right for women to vote. The key achievement of this wave was the ratification of the 19th
Amendment in 1920, granting women the right to vote in the United States.

2. Second Wave (1960s-1980s): The second wave started in the 1960s with Betty Friedan’s The
Feminine Mystique, which criticized the limitations placed on women as housewives and mothers.
This wave focused on equality in the workplace, reproductive rights, and an end to sexual
discrimination. Major achievements include the Equal Pay Act and the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade
decision in 1973.

3. Third Wave (1990s-early 2000s): The third wave started in the 1990s, focusing on issues like sexual
harassment and inequality in leadership roles. It introduced “intersectionality,” a concept by
Kimberlé Crenshaw, highlighting how race, class, and gender overlap. This wave celebrated
individuality and supported trans rights. Feminist punk bands like “riot grrrls” used music to address
sexism and promote empowerment.

4. Fourth Wave (2010s-present): The fourth wave, driven by social media, addresses sexual
harassment, body positivity, and gender equality. The #MeToo movement, started by Tarana Burke in
2007, gained global attention in 2017, highlighting sexual misconduct. This wave also tackles systemic
issues and promotes inclusivity regardless of sexuality, race, or gender.

Understanding The Feminist Approach

The feminist approach to public administration challenges traditional, male-centered models by

promoting gender inclusion. It critiques the Reinvention Project from the Clinton administration
(1993), which aimed to make government more entrepreneurial but overlooked gender issues.
Feminist scholars argue that public administration has long been shaped by male, upper-class, and
white perspectives, ignoring women's experiences. They believe government structures and
practices are not fixed and should include diverse perspectives. This approach highlights how policies
can reinforce gender inequalities and calls for making women's experiences visible in governance. It
seeks to create a more inclusive public administration that values diverse voices and addresses
gender-based disparities.

The Feminist Theory

A feminist is someone who views gender as a key analytical category and critically examines women’s
status and opportunities. According to Gerda Lerner (1984), a feminist is the one who believes in a
system of ideas and practices which assumes that men and women must share equally in the work,
in the privileges, in defining and dreaming of the world. Feminism is not a single concept but a
diverse set of ideas and actions, including liberal, Marxist, socialist, radical, and postmodern
perspectives. Despite their differences, all these forms of feminism believe in gender equality and
aim to eliminate gender-based injustice. Feminism advocates for a heterogeneous gendered
perspective, using a “gender lens” to examine social phenomena. This means analyzing how social
processes and opportunities differ for women and men, challenging the historically masculine focus
in public administration.

Gender of Governance

1. The main point here is that politics and administration are centered around men, as they are
mostly linked to male activities. It is believed that women completely lack the basic skills, knowledge,
and expertise needed for proper governance and political involvement.

2. Over time, feminist scholars like Kate Millet and Carole Pateman questioned the idea that public
and private spheres are separate. They argued that this division is unfounded and that the private
sphere is actually where power and gender inequalities first take root. They also emphasized that
gender is closely linked to power, and it is through the use of power that inequalities and male
dominance are created and sustained.

3. Politics, the administrative state, and governance are also influenced by male dominance, favoring
men over women. This mindset keeps women confined to domestic tasks (like cooking and clothing),
which undervalues their presence, contributions, and concerns.

Governance of Gender

The feminist perspective, through gender analysis, shows that male dominance exists not only in
administrative theories but also in real practices. This male-centered view impacts work culture,
state policies, and government actions, affecting both men and women.

Women’s roles and leadership qualities are often overlooked, and their presence in authority is not
widely accepted. This inequality is built into the structure of organizations (called the "gender of
governance") and is also seen in how administration works (the "governance of gender"). Feminist
scholars argue that just pointing out inequalities is not enough; the basic ideas and systems behind
these theories also need to be challenged. A new, unbiased approach is needed to study governance
and politics more fairly. This would help create a balanced, inclusive, and just political environment.