public management

heba.malki

17.pdf

Home >Business & Finance homework help >Management homework help >public management

xiiiPublic Administration: An Introduction

Public Administration: An Introduction

Public Administration: An Indispensable Part of Society

CHAPTER 1

This chapter introduces the reader to the foundational

elements of government and public administration. It reviews

many of the essential characteristics of government, such as

revenue collection, government expenditures, and government

workforce. It also presents an overview of the services that

government provides and how those services affect citizens

on a daily basis. Furthermore, this chapter constructs a

working definition of public administration and discusses key

concepts that are essential to the field.

2 CHAPTER 1

3Public Administration: An Indispensible Part of Society

“Management is the science of which organizations are but experiments.”

JOHN CONSTABLE English Romantic Painter

(1776-1837)

Postal Workers Mural

“Management is the science of which organizations are but experiments.”

JOHN CONSTABLE English Romantic Painter

(1776-1837)

Postal Workers Mural

“The care of human life and happiness… is the first and only legitimate object

of good government.”

THOMAS JEFFERSON Third President of the United States

(1743–1846)

Environmental Police Unit Officers with the Department of Sanitation of New York take precautions when dealing with hazardous waste.

4 CHAPTER 1

There is no question that government spends a great deal of money. And theoreti-

cally—just like any other organization—the government must make money before

it can spend money. So, where does government get its money and how does it

spend it? How does this process affect people on a daily basis? These are just some

of the questions we will answer in this introductory chapter.

Let’s start with the basics. Like all organizations, the government typically must

take in money before expending it. In rare situations, government can spend money

it did not collect; that will be discussed in Chapter 9, “Public Budgeting.” Unlike

organizations in the private or nonprofit sectors, government has the power to tax.

Taxation, one of the federal government’s constitutional rights under the founding

documents of the United States, is necessary to support the three branches of gov-

ernment, particularly the executive branch with its wide

array of functions. State constitutions extend that taxing

power to states, which then authorize counties, cities,

towns, villages, and special districts to levy taxes.

Governments are considered sovereign bodies, holding the

highest authority in a specific region; therefore, govern-

ment is granted unique powers under which it may imple-

ment its authority. Taxation is one of those unique powers.

Unlike companies, which make money by selling a product

or a service, the government takes in funds by taxing its cit-

izenry. These taxes are collected by local, state, and federal

agencies and pay for a broad range of services that meet

citizens’ daily needs. The nature of these needs will be dis-

cussed throughout this chapter, but first we will sketch out the amount of money

government spends on a yearly basis.

In 2007 (the latest year for which the actual state and local spending figures

were available at the time this book was written) the federal, state, and local

governments in the United States spent over $4 trillion. Federal spending rep-

resented about 63 percent of all spending by governments. The U.S. federal gov-

ernment spent about $2.7 trillion, and state and local governments spent about

$1.6 trillion.

To understand the impact that government spending has on the economy of the

United States, it is sometimes helpful to use economic terms. One often-used term

for gauging the nation’s economy is the gross domestic product (GDP). The GDP is

a measure based on the amount of goods and services produced within the borders

of the United States. There are numerous ways to measure this figure, but the most

straightforward is simply to add together the total amount of money spent on pro-

GOVERNMENT REQUIRES RESOURCES

“What made you choose this career is what made me go into politics—a

chance to serve, to make a difference. It is not just a job. It is a vocation.”

TONY BLAIR Prime Minister of

GreatBritain

5Public Administration: An Indispensable Part of Society

So ur

ce : W

as hb

ur n

U ni

ve rs

ity S

ch oo

l o f L

aw , U

.S . F

ed er

al R

es ou

rc es

, w w

w .w

as hl

aw .e

du /d

oc la

w /o

rg ch

ar t/

m ai

no g.

ht m

FI G

U R

E 1

.1 –

U .S

. G O

V E

R N

M E

N T

O R

G A

N IZ

A TI

O N

A L

C H

A R

G A

G P

Li b

ra ry

o f

C o

n g

re ss

Te ch

n o

lo g

y A

ss e

sm e

n t

C o

n g

r. B

u d

g e

t O

ff ic

U .S

. S u

p re

m e

C o

u rt

U .S

. C o

u rt

o f

A p

p e

a ls

C o

u rt

I n

te rn

a ti

o n

a l T

ra d

U .S

. T a

x C

o u

C o

u rt

o f

M ili

ta ry

A p

p e

a ls

Fe d

e ra

l J u

d ic

ia l C

e n

te r

S e

n te

n ci

n g

C o

m m

is si

o n

D e

p a

rt m

e n

t o

f E

d u

ca ti

o n

D e

p a

rt m

e n

t o

f A

g ri

cu lt

u re

D e

p a

rt m

e n

t o

f C

o m

m e

rc e

D e

p a

rt m

e n

t o

f D

e fe

n se

D e

p a

rt m

e n

t o

f E

n e

rg y

D e

p a

rt m

e n

t o

f H

e a

lt h

a n

d H

u m

a n

S e

rv .

D e

p a

rt m

e n

t o

f H

o u

si n

g a

n d

U rb

a n

D ev

D e

p a

rt m

e n

t o

f S

ta te

In d

e p

e n

d a

n t

E st

a b

lis h

m e

n ts

a n

d G

o ve

rn m

e n

t C

o rp

o ra

ti o

n s

D e

p a

rt m

e n

t o

f th

e I

n te

ri o

r D

e p

a rt

m e

n t

o f

Ju st

ic e

D e

p a

rt m

e n

t o

f La

b o

r D

e p

a rt

m e

n t

o f

Tr a

n sp

o rt

a ti

o n

D e

p a

rt m

e n

t o

f Tr

e a

su ry

D e

p a

rt m

e n

t o

f Ve

te ra

n s

A ff

a ir

Le g

is la

ti ve

B ra

n ch

Ju d

ic ia

l B

ra n

Th e

C o

n st

it u

ti o

Th e

P re

si d

e n

t E

xe cu

ti ve

O ff

ic e

o f

th e

P re

si d

e n

E xe

cu ti

ve B

ra n

O M

Th e

W h

it e

H o

u se

Tr a

d e

R e

p re

se n

ta ti

E n

vi ro

n m

e n

ta l Q

u a

lit y

S ci

e n

ce &

T e

ch n

o lo

g y

D ru

g C

o n

tr o

l P o

lic y

6 CHAPTER 1

ducing these goods and services. Understandably, one may think that the GDP

measures only the private sector’s economic activity; in reality, however, public sec-

tor activity makes up a large percentage of the GDP. Federal, state, and local gov-

ernment spending was approximately 32 percent of the U.S. GDP in 2007 (see

FIGURE 1.2 – TOTAL GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURES (IN BILLIONS OF DOLLARS)

Source: U.S. Government Printing Office, Office of Management and Budget (OMB). 200. “Budget of the U.S. Government: Historical Tables Fiscal Year 2009.” www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy09/hist.html.

FIGURE 1.3 – GOVERNMENT SPENDING AS A PERCENTAGE OF GDP (IN BILLIONS OF DOLLARS)

State and Local Government Expenditure: $1591.1

Federal Government Outlays: $2730.2

GDP of the United States (2007) in current dollars: $13,667.5

Government Spending = 32% of GDP: $4,321.3

$9,346.3

7Public Administration: An Indispensable Part of Society

Figures 1.2 and 1.3). It is important to remember that government not only pro-

vides an array of services with the money it spends but that such spending con-

tributes significantly to the health and stability of the nation’s economy.

To spend trillions of dollars, governments need to take in as much money every

year—a feat that is accomplished through both taxation and fee-based services.

Among the various taxes government collects from its citizens is the sales tax, which

is typically levied by states. Sales taxes are encountered at most retail stores when a

good is sold to the final customer in a transaction. A majority of states do not tax food

purchases, and many other goods and services such as medical care, landscaping,

salon, and taxi and courier services are exempt from taxation in some states. In 2008

sales taxes ranged from zero in states such as New Hampshire and Alaska to 7.25

percent in California; county or local sales taxes often add to those taxes at the cash

tax, and excise tax—are used to create the revenue needed to provide the public serv-

ices that citizens expect and demand. In addition, tolls on roads, bridges, and tun-

nels are considered a direct tax for the use of integrated transportation networks.

A large part of government funding at the federal level comes from employment taxes,

Source: U.S. Government Printing Office, Office of Management and Budget (OMB). 2008. “Budget of the U.S. Government: Historical Tables Fiscal Year 2009.” www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy09/hist.html. Note: Unless otherwise noted, all receipts shown in this figure are trust funds and on-budget. 1On-budget and off-budget.

FIGURE 1.4 – COMPOSITION OF SOCIAL INSURANCE AND RETIREMENT RECEIPTS, 2000–2007

Hospital Insurance: $184.908,000

Railroad retirement/pension fund: Trust Funds: $2,309,000

Railroad social security equivalent account: $1.952.000

Disability insurance (Off-Budget): $92,188,000

Trust funds (Off-Budget): $542,901,000

Total1: $824,258,000

8 CHAPTER 1

which are directed toward specific social programs that generally provide support for

citizens when they have reached the age of retirement or are disabled. Among the pro-

grams covered by payroll taxes are Social Security benefits and Medicaid and Medicare

insurance. Employees also contribute to U.S. unemployment insurance and to the pen-

sion funds of the federal workforce. These revenue sources are collected and used in a

Source: U.S. Government Printing Office, Office of Management and Budget (OMB). 2008. “Budget of the U.S. Government: Historical Tables Fiscal Year 2009.” http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy09/hist.html.

FIGURE 1.6 – 2007 GOVERNMENT RECEIPTS BY SOURCE (IN MILLIONS OF DOLLARS)

FIGURE 1.5 – 2007 TOTAL GOVERNMENT RECEIPTS (IN BILLIONS OF DOLLARS)

State and Local Government Non-Interest Receipts: $1,420.5

Federal Government Receipts: $2,568.2

Social Insurance and Retirement Receipts: $869,607

Excise Taxes: $65,069

Other: $99,878 Individual Income Taxes:

$1,163,472

Corporation income Taxes: $370,243

9Public Administration: An Indispensable Part of Society

different manner than other revenue sources: They are earmarked, or set aside, as

trust funds for the benefit of those who paid in (see Figure 1.4). The money put in by

users will be taken out by users when they are in need of various insurance programs.

Government funds also come from fees. These fees make up a smaller portion of a

government’s income and tend to be more significant on the state and local levels.

Fees are charged for access to certain desirable locations, such as public beaches or

state parks. Fees may also be charged for obtaining a driver’s license, a passport, or

Source: Global Issues. 2010. “World Military Spending.” http://www.globalissues.org/article/75/world-mili- tary-spending#WorldMilitarySpending.

FIGURE 1.7 – 2008 U.S. MILITARY SPENDING VS. THE WORLD (IN BILLIONS OF DOLLARS AND % OF WORLD TOTAL)

2008 Total Military Spending: $1.473 Trillion

Middle East/ N. Africa

$82 5%

Russia $70 5%

Latin America $39 3%

Central/ South Asia

$30 2%

Sub-Saharan Africa $10 1%

East Asia / Austrailia

$120 8%

China $122 8%

Europe $289 20%

United States $ 7 1 1 48%

10 CHAPTER 1

to get a building permit for an addition to a house or to build in a certain location.

Figures 1.5 and 1.6 indicate the total extent of government revenue.

What exactly does the public sector spend money on? A large portion of federal ex-

penditures go toward defense and other international programs. In 2007 the U.S.

Department of Defense (DoD) had a budget of about $600 billion. Half of the en-

tire world’s military expenditures are spent by the United States alone (see Figure

1.7). In comparison to other expenditures made by the federal government, DoD

spending accounts for about 22 percent of the federal budget. Another large portion

of the federal government’s spending goes toward the insurance programs men-

tioned earlier, such as Social Security and Medicare. Because the government is re-

quired by law to pay for such programs, they are often referred to as mandatory

expenditures. In 2007 the federal government spent about $1 trillion on Social Se-

curity and Medicare. That accounts for almost 40 percent of the federal budget. In

total, funds spent on defense, Social Security, and Medicare make up about 60 per-

cent of all federal expenditures.

Federal spending makes up about 65 percent of all government expenditures, with

state and local governments accounting for the other 35 percent. In 2007 state and

local government budgets in the United States exceeded $1.5 trillion—money used by

government to provide a range of services its citizens access on a daily basis. This

spending contributes significantly to the country’s economy and employment, and it

allows government to provide selected services that would otherwise be challenging to

provide on a private basis. Figure 1.8 shows a breakdown of all government spending.

FIGURE 1.8 – 2007 TOTAL GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURES BY MAJOR CATEGORY (IN BILLIONS OF DOLLARS)

State and Local: $1,568.6

Other Federal: $223.2

Net Interest: $259.5

Defense and International: $581.1

Federal Payments for Individuals (including Social Security and Medicare): $1688.8

11Public Administration: An Indispensable Part of Society

The federal, state, and local governments in the United States employed about 23

million people in 2007. Millions of others were employed to fill public sector posi-

tions via contractual relationships with private organizations: management con-

sultants, temporary workers, technicians, and the like. According to the Bureau of

Labor Statistics (BLS) as of September 2007, this amounts to approximately 17 per-

cent of all employed individuals in the United States, not including farm payroll

(BLS 2007). According to Paul Light, the Paulette Goddard Professor of Public

Service at New York University and the former director of Governmental Studies at

the Brookings Institution, as of 2002 the number of people employed by federal

contracts was about 8 million (Light 2003). This underscores the importance of

government employment in relationship to the U.S. economy.”

The federal government, while the largest single government employer, employs far

fewer people than the combined state and local governments throughout the nation.

In addition, over the past several decades, the federal labor force has been decreas-

ing steadily, while the state and local labor forces have been increasing in size. In

1980, for example, the federal government employed more than 4.9 million people

(military and civilian); nine years later, its ranks peaked at nearly 5.3 million em-

ployees. Since then, the federal government has been scaling back the size of its labor

force. As a percentage of the U.S. workforce, it declined from about 5 percent in 1989

to 3 percent in 2007, meaning more than a million jobs were shed in less than 20

FIGURE 1.9 – GOVERNMENT EMPLOYMENT AND PERCENTAGE OF POPULATION, 2007

Total U.S. Population (2007): 301,621,000 Government Employees = 7.8% of Total U.S. Population: 23,665,000

12 CHAPTER 1

years. At the same time, state and local levels have been behaving in just the oppo-

site manner. In 1980 state and local governments employed nearly 13.4 million peo-

ple. This number increased to over 19 million in 2007, accounting for about 14

percent of the total U.S. workforce. Although state and local governments increased

their labor force by about 6 million people over three decades, in comparison to the

growth of the U.S. population, this number is not out of proportion, and as a percent

of the total workforce it constitutes about 13 percent. Thus, total government em-

ployment (federal, state, local) has stayed somewhat consistent—on average—since

1980, representing about 17 percent of the total workforce, with a high in 1980 of

18.4 percent. It is now (as of 2007) about 16 percent of the entire workforce. Figure

1.9 summarizes personnel figures for local, state, and federal governments.

Clearly, a significant portion of the U.S. workforce is employed by the government.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Governments Division Employment and Payroll. 2010. “Historical Data” http://www2.census.gov/govs/apes/07fedfun.pdf. *Includes Department of Education and the National Science Foundation, plus parts of the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

FIGURE 1.10 – FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES BY FUNCTION, DECEMBER 2007

Other and Unallocable

Libraries

Other Education*

Space Research & Technology

Postal Service

Nat Defense/International Relations

Natural Resources

Housing and Community Development

Parks and Recreation

Social Insurance Administration

Hospitals

Health

Public Welfare

Water Transport & Terminals

AirTransportation

Highways

Correction

Police

Judicial and Legal

Other Government Administration

Financial Administration

0 200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000

13Public Administration: An Indispensable Part of Society

What do all of these people do? On the state and local levels it is more challenging to

identify how the numbers break down exactly, but on the federal level we can clas-

sify employees by their designated function. Figure 1.10 illustrates that the two largest

employee categories, by far, are National Security and the U.S Postal Service.

What Do We Get for All of These Resources? Citizens of the United States come in contact with government on a daily basis—often

without even realizing it. From the moment you wake up in the morning, government

helps ensures your health, safety, and well-being. It continues to do so while you sleep.

In the morning you expect to wake to your alarm clock rather than some pesky

noise such as a lawnmower, construction, or a barking dog. Typically, you will not

hear such noises because government helps to regulate such activities. In New York

City, for example, construction activity is not allowed to begin until 7:00 a.m. Like-

wise, a citizen may not use equipment such as a lawnmower or a leaf blower before

7:00 a.m. Such policies go a long way toward fostering respect among neighbors.

In addition to noise ordinances, thousands of other ordi-

nances facilitate the creation and maintenance of a livable

environment. They range from how citizens should deal

with waste removal to whether or not they may purchase

and use fireworks. Ordinances—enforced by public ser-

vants—help to establish reasonable norms by which we

conduct our daily activities.

Beyond municipal ordinances, broader laws and regula-

tions help us function in our daily activities. The simple act

of obeying a stop sign may seem commonplace—and sen-

sible—but what might happen if we did not have laws in

place that require us to drive in a certain manner? Government has codified these

very basic rules of the road. We know that drivers must stop their vehicles when ap-

proaching a red light and slow down when approaching a yellow light. These rules

allow traffic to flow in an organized manner.

What about water consumption? It seems like second nature to turn on a water

faucet and get a glass of cold drinkable water, or to request a glass of water with

your meal while dining at a restaurant. Although we typically do not think about the

cleanliness and safety of this water, it is clear that somebody must. That is why we

rely on government. The federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is re-

sponsible for setting a national standard for drinking water and ensuring that none

of the 90 different types of banned contaminants taint our water system. In total,

the United States has over 170,000 water systems and on average delivers about

100,000 gallons of water annually to each residence (EPA 2010). Most Americans

“And so, my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you; ask

what you can do for your country.”

JOHN F. KENNEDY 35th President of the

United States

14 CHAPTER 1

rarely think about the complexity of this infrastructure and the amount of support

and control required to keep the supply of drinkable water safe and easily accessi-

ble. It is important to remember, though, that access to clean, safe water is not

cheap; according to the United Nations (2010), nearly 20 percent of the world’s

population does not benefit from having clean drinking water.

The government not only establishes these ordinances, laws, and regulations but

also serves as a major provider of services such as public education. From the mo-

ment you enter kindergarten until you graduate at the end of your senior year of

high school, the U.S. education system provides the tools you need to become a re-

sponsible adult. Throughout the United States in any given year, there are about

50 million school-age children attending elementary, middle, or high schools—a

total of 97,000 public schools. To maintain such an expansive system requires a

great deal of pooled resources in the form of public sector budgets.

While children are at school, adults are generally at work. Although we may rarely think

twice about the dangers that might occur at the workplace, the Occupational Safety and

Health Administration (OSHA) does. This federal agency is charged with ensuring that

any given workplace provides a safe and healthy environment for all its employees.

Since OSHA’s creation in 1971, on-the-job injuries have decreased by 61 percent and fa-

talities by 44 percent. A decrease on such a large scale cannot happen without a great

deal of planning and work. In 2006 OSHA inspected over 35,000 workplaces. In addi-

tion to the federal government, many state agencies conduct inspections, and an addi-

tional 58,000 were completed on the state level that same year. Although most of us are

not concerned with work-related injuries on a daily basis, it is important to remember

that one of the main reasons we can afford to be so complacent about workplace safety

is the government’s vigilance in ensuring our protection.

Water Tunnel Is Spectacular Feat of Engineering—and Hard Work Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani Mayor’s WINS Address, Sunday, August 16, 1998 (New York City, 1998) “New York City has always been a place where seemingly impossible things are made

possible—in business, art, literature and so many other realms—because no other

City can match the ambition, hard work, and perseverance of our people. This Thurs-

day [August 13, 1998], these qualities were on full display in Central Park for the

opening of the Third Water Tunnel—which represents the culmination of decades of

hard work and sacrifice by thousands of New Yorkers.”

15Public Administration: An Indispensable Part of Society

There are literally thousands of additional programs, services, and interventions that

government initiates and that we encounter every day. Some of the key public sector

services are listed in the section that follows. Although we might not access many on

a daily basis, the safety net they provide allows us to go about our daily routines.

How Government Is Organized to Deliver Services The Interstate Highway System “Although the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1944 authorized designation of a ‘Na-

tional System of Interstate Highways,’ the legislation did not authorize an initiat-

ing program to build it. This act started the initial design of the system, but it was

not until the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956 that the system started to be con-

structed. Currently, the Interstate System is 46,876 miles long. The final estimate

of the cost of the Interstate System was issued in 1991. It estimated that the total

cost would be $128.9 billion, with a Federal share of $114.3 billion.”

(Source: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, “Frequently Asked Questions,” http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/interstate/faq.htm.)

Federal Housing Administration “The Federal Housing Administration, generally known as ‘FHA,’ is the largest gov-

ernment insurer of mortgages in the world. A part of the United States Department

of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), FHA provides mortgage insurance on

single-family, multifamily, manufactured homes and hospital loans made by FHA-

approved lenders throughout the United States and its territories. While borrow-

ers must meet certain requirements established by FHA to qualify for the insurance,

lenders bear less risk because FHA will pay the lender if a homeowner defaults on

his or her loan. FHA has insured over 37 million home mortgages and 47,205 mul-

tifamily project mortgages since 1934. Currently, FHA has 5.2 million insured sin-

gle-family mortgages and 13,000 insured multifamily projects in its portfolio.”

(Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, “Federal Housing Administration Overview,” http://portal.hud.gov/portal/page/portal/HUD/fed- eral_housing_administration.)

Consumer Protection “If you exercise your right to receive a free credit report, use the National Do Not

Call Registry to block unwanted telemarketing calls, or refer to product warranties,

care labels in your clothes, or stickers showing the energy costs of home appliances,

you are taking advantage of laws enforced by the FTC’s [Federal Trade Commis-

sion’s] Bureau of Consumer Protection. The Bureau of Consumer Protection works

to protect consumers against unfair, deceptive, or fraudulent practices in the mar-

ketplace. The Bureau conducts investigations, sues companies and people who vi-

16 CHAPTER 1

olate the law, develops rules to protect consumers, and educates consumers and

businesses about their rights and responsibilities. The Bureau also collects com-

plaints about consumer fraud and identity theft and makes them available to law

enforcement agencies across the country.”

(Source: Federal Trade Commission, “About the Bureau of Consumer Protection,” www.ftc.gov/bcp/about.shtm.)

National Weather Service “The National Weather Service is a component of the National Oceanic and At-

mospheric Administration (NOAA). NOAA is an Operating Unit of the U.S. De-

partment of Commerce…. The National Weather Service (NWS) provides weather,

hydrologic, and climate forecasts and warnings for the United States, its territories,

adjacent waters and ocean areas, for the protection of life and property and the en-

hancement of the national economy. NWS data and products form a national in-

formation database and infrastructure which can be used by other governmental

agencies, the private sector, the public, and the global community.”

(Source: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Weather Service, “About NOAA’s National Weather Service,” www.nws.noaa. gov/admin.php.)

Federal Student Financial Aid Programs “Federal Student Aid’s core mission is to ensure that all eligible individuals benefit

from federal financial assistance—grants, loans and work-study programs—for ed-

ucation beyond high school. The programs we administer comprise the nation’s

largest source of student aid. Every year we provide more than $100 billion in new

aid to nearly 14 million postsecondary students and their families. Our staff of 1,100

is based in 10 cities in addition to our Washington headquarters.”

(Source: Federal Student Aid, “About Us,” http://studentaid.ed.gov/PORTAL- SWebApp/students/english/aboutus.jsp.)

Create a New Government (Simulation) Working as a team, create a new governing body for your university using the strat- egy established to create the Iraqi National Assembly as highlighted in the follow- ing simulation. Establish a list of the key principles upon which this new governance structure is based, and explain why each principle is important.

Sarah Kavanagh and Javaid Khan, “A Good Government Is Hard to Build,” The New York Times: The Learning Network, March 30, 2005, http://learning.blogs.nytimes.com/2005/03/30/a-good-government-is-hard-to- build

EXERCISE 1.1

17Public Administration: An Indispensable Part of Society

Food and Drug Safety Programs “FDA [the Food and Drug Administration] is an agency within the Department of

Health and Human Services and…is responsible for protecting the public health by

assuring the safety, efficacy, and security of human and veterinary drugs, biologi-

cal products, medical devices, our nation’s food supply, cosmetics, and products

that emit radiation. The FDA is also responsible for advancing the public health by

helping to speed innovations that make medicines and foods more effective, safer,

and more affordable; and helping the public get the accurate, science-based infor-

mation they need to use medicines and foods to improve their health.”

(Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, “Centers and Offices,” www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/CentersOf- fices/default.htm.)

Federal Emergency Response “FEMA’s mission is to support our citizens and first responders to ensure that as a

nation we work together to build, sustain, and improve our capability to prepare for,

protect against, respond to, recover from, and mitigate all hazards.”

“FEMA has more than 3,700 full time employees. They work at FEMA headquar-

ters in Washington D.C., at regional and area offices across the country, the Mount

Weather Emergency Operations Center, and the National Emergency Training Cen-

ter in Emmitsburg, Maryland. FEMA also has nearly 4,000 standby disaster assis-

tance employees who are available for deployment after disasters. Often FEMA

works in partnership with other organizations that are part of the nation’s emer-

gency management system. These partners include state and local emergency man-

agement agencies, 27 federal agencies and the American Red Cross.”

(Source: U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Manage- ment Agency, “About FEMA,” http://www.fema.gov/about/index.shtm#0.)

AMTRAK “As the nation’s intercity passenger rail operator, Amtrak connects America in

safer, greener and healthier ways. With 21,000 route miles in 46 states, the Dis-

trict of Columbia and three Canadian provinces, Amtrak operates more than 300

trains each day—at speeds up to 150 mph—to more than 500 destinations. Amtrak

also is the operator of choice for state-supported corridor services in 15 states and

for four commuter rail agencies.”

(Source: AMTRAK, “Amtrak Information and Facts,” www.amtrak.com/ servlet/ContentServer/Page/1241256467960/1237608345018.)

United States Post Office “The United States Postal Service delivers more mail to more addresses in a larger

geographical area than any other post in the world. We deliver to more than 150

18 CHAPTER 1

million homes, businesses and Post Office boxes in every state, city, town and bor-

ough in this country. Everyone living in the U.S. and its territories has access to

postal services and pays the same postage regardless of his or her location.”

(Source: United States Postal Service, “Postal Facts 2010,” www.usps.com/com-

munications/newsroom/postalfacts.htm.)

Organizational Chart of Municipality—City of Burlington, New Jersey “The City of Burlington operates in accordance with the Mayor-Council form of gov-

ernment. The Mayor is the chief executive of the municipality, while the legislative

powers of the City are exercised by the Common Council. The Common Council

consists of seven members, three at-large Councilpersons and one from each of the

four wards, who shall serve for a term of four years. Various boards, committees,

and departments comprise other areas of the City’s government.”

Source: City of Burlington, New Jersey, USA Website. 2008. “The Administration: City Government, Depart- ments & Divisions Organization Chart.” www.burlingtonnj.us/Organiz.html.

FIGURE 1.11 – CITY OF BURLINGTON ORGANIZATIONAL CHART

CITIZENS

MRYOR COMMON COUNCIL

GOVERNING BODY

BUSINESS ADMIN-

ISTRATOR

MUNICIPAL CLERK

A D M I N I S T R A T I O N

PUBLIC SRFETY DEPT.

PUBLIC RFFAIRS

DEPT.

LRW DEPT.

ENGINEERING DEPT,

HOUSING & COMMUNITY DEVT. DEPT.

PUBLIC WORK DEPT.

FINANCE DEPT.

OFFICES

Director Director Municipal Attorney

Director Director Director CFO Director

Municipal Court Tax Rsseesor

Police Recreation Prosecutor

Fire Chirtf Div.

Public Relations [Events]

Public Defender

Fire Prevention

Div.

Health & Vital

Statistics

Special Counsel

A n i m a l Control

City Boat Ramp

Energy Mgmt.

Commun- ications

Construction code

Enforcement

Public Works

Div. Treasury

Court Admin- istration

Municipal Court Judge

Planning & Zoning

Water U t i l i t y

Div. Revenue

Landlord Registration

Sewer & Drainage Div.

Nuisance Inspection

Public Bldgs. & Grounds

Div.

Historic Preservation Commission

Tr a f f i c

Maintenance Div.

Housing Programs & Grants

Recycling

Governing Body

Admin. Departments

Divisions

19Public Administration: An Indispensable Part of Society

How Government Serves Others It is clear that government affects us on a daily basis, but it is important to re-

member that government not only serves the individual; it lends its resources to a

number of efforts that aid the common good.

Government support for the not-for-profit sector is one example of the public sector

promoting the common good. The not-for-profit sector or nonprofit sector is gener-

ally viewed as the charitable arm of American society. What differentiates it from the

private sector? Unlike for-profit companies, organizations in the nonprofit sector are

not driven to increase revenue by an economic bottom line. Rather, they are driven

by a unique mission upon which all of their organizational programs and activities are

focused. Nonprofit organizations typically try to limit their spending on administra-

tive functions and use the bulk of their funding for mission-specific activities.

According to the Urban Institute (2010), about 1.4 million nonprofit organizations account for

5.2 percent of the national GDP. Nonprofit organizations range widely in size and scope of ac-

tivities. Some nonprofits provide arts, culture, education, envi-

ronmental monitoring, health care, human services and seemingly

endless lists of services that promote the common good. Not only

do nonprofits give to the community, they also enable citizens to

give of their time and energy to others. The Bureau of Labor Sta-

tistics (2010) estimates that approximately 27 percent of adults

(more than 60 million individuals) volunteered at a nonprofit or-

ganization in 2009. To some degree, many people believe that

nonprofits hold society together.

How does this have anything to do with government? The

government supports the nonprofit sector in two primary

ways: First, it has created a special tax status for nonprofit

organizations that allows them to operate outside of the typical tax structure. Sec-

ond, government makes direct contributions to nonprofit organizations through

grant funding for specific programs.

The special tax status developed by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for public

charities—known as 501(c)(3)—provides nonprofit organizations with an exemp-

tion from paying federal income tax. It also ensures that all individuals who make

contributions to such organizations can deduct those donations from their own in-

come. To qualify as an exempt organization, nonprofits must follow certain rules.

According to the guidelines listed on the IRS website, they must be organized

specifically for an exempt purpose, as outlined in the following text:

The exempt purposes set forth in section 501(c)(3) are charitable, religious,

educational, scientific, literary, testing for public safety, fostering national

or international amateur sports competition, and preventing cruelty to

“The call to service is one of the

highest callings you will hear and

your country can make.”

LEE H. HAMILTON Former U.S.

Congressman; Vice Chairman, 9/11

Commission

20 CHAPTER 1

children or animals. The term charitable is used in its generally accepted legal sense and includes relief of the poor, the distressed, or the under-

privileged; advancement of religion; advancement of education or science;

erecting or maintaining public buildings, monuments, or works; lessening

the burdens of government; lessening neighborhood tensions; eliminating

prejudice and discrimination; defending human and civil rights secured

by law; and combating community deterioration and juvenile delinquency.

(IRS.gov, “Exempt Purposes—Internal Revenue Code Section 501(c)(3),”

updated December 7, 2009, www.irs.gov/charities/charitable/article/

0,,id=175418,00.html).

Furthermore, IRS rules indicate that nonprofit organizations cannot be owned by

any private shareholder or individual, and the goal of such organizations cannot be

to increase the wealth of such a person or persons. In addition, to meet this exempt

status, nonprofit organizations cannot exist to promote a

specific political campaign, and they must restrict their lob-

bying and advocacy activities.

Aside from granting a special tax status to not-for-profit

charitable organizations, government also contributes a

great deal of money outright to the nonprofit sector. In

2005 the U.S. government provided about $18 billion in

direct payments to nonprofits; that translates into about

30 percent of all revenue for nonprofit organizations in

2005 (Wing, Pollack, and Blackwood 2008). Some of the

recipients of these funds are well-known organizations and typically have a strong

presence in our communities. For instance, the Boys and Girls Clubs of America

received about $81 million in 2005. Their mission is to “enable all young people, es-

pecially those who need us most, to reach their full potential as productive, caring,

responsible citizens” (www.bgca.org). For over 40 years, the community-based or-

ganization Experience Works, originally called Green Thumb, Inc., has received

about $85 million in government dollars to “improve the lives of older people

through employment, community service, and training” (www.experienceworks.

org). By promoting the nonprofit sector, government is strengthening the fabric of

American civil society.

Another effort by government to enhance the common good is the promotion of re-

search. Although this may sound like an abstract concept that rarely affects the lives

of everyday people, it is just the opposite. One of the main avenues through which

research funding has a broad public impact is the National Institutes of Health, or

the NIH. The NIH was formed in 1887 and is now composed of 27 different research

institutions and groups. It is one of the largest funders of scientific research world-

wide. In 2007 the NIH made over 47,000 research awards at a total cost of about

$20 billion. Over its history, the NIH has provided funding for groundbreaking dis-

“No one is useless in this world who

lightens the burden of it for someone else.”

BENJAMIN FRANKLIN American Statesman; Ambassador; Patriot

21Public Administration: An Indispensable Part of Society

Accountability Accountability in the public sector most often boils down to dual aspects: accounta-

bility for what and accountability to whom. Typically, accountability is a political

construction. Public managers are accountable to their legislative counterparts. The

delegation of power takes place when Congress assigns its constitutional Article I,

Section 8 powers to the executive branch. Clause 18 of this section specifies that Con-

gress has the power “to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carry-

ing into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this

Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or office

thereof.” While the courts have shifted back and forth on the issue of congressional

delegation, it is clearly stated in the “delegation doctrine” that Congress can delegate

its power to the executive branch as long as the power is accompanied by sufficient

standards or guidelines so the executive branch is controlled by Congress. Therefore,

the chief executive is accountable to the legislature from which power was granted.

In a 2000 article for Public Administration Review, David Rosenbloom highlights the dimensions of accountability implemented to link public administration to a con-

stitutional framework. Traditionally, the executive branch was seen as being under

the purview of the executive (president) in a top-down accountability scheme. How-

ever, as Rosenbloom points out, this is not in line with the U.S. constitutional frame-

work or with the interpretations handed down by the Supreme Court over the years.

As Congress delegates its power, Congress provides oversight for that delegated

power. Rosenbloom (2000) cites four acts passed by Congress to ensure this consti-

tutional accountability: the Administrative Procedures Act, the Federal Advisory

Committee Act (FACA), the Negotiated Rulemaking Act, and the Small Business Reg-

ulatory Enforcement Fairness Act.

Other observers divide accountability into a number of schemes and categories such

as Bureaucratic, Legal, Professional and Political (Romzek and Dubnick 1987).

Robert Behn (2001), in his text Rethinking Democratic Accountability, provides fur- ther insight into the question of professional accountability. Behn argues that ac-

countability among public administrators should be based on their performance. He

claims that systems of accountability should not be set up to deter behavior; they

should be set up to provide incentives for desirable behavior (Behn 2001).

Implementation Implementation is a concept that seems straightforward initially but raises many

questions upon further examination. When, for instance, does implementation (continued)

22 CHAPTER 1

coveries throughout the scientific community (NIH, 2010). Since 1998 NIH re-

search has contributed to increased prevention of type 2 diabetes, advanced treat-

ments for breast cancer, and new knowledge about the transmission and

suppression of HIV/AIDS. Table 1.1 summarizes some of the scientific break-

throughs made possible by NIH funding (NIH, 2009). This research—funded or

conducted by the NIH—has saved millions of lives. Many other federal agencies

have made similar advancements that dramatically improve our quality of life, in-

cluding for example the National Science Foundation (2010), the National Insti-

tute of Food and Agriculture (2010), and the National Office of Public Health

Genomics of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2010).

In a world that becomes smaller each day in a technological sense—with, for in-

stance, the ability to transmit information from the United States to China in a mat-

begin? Who is responsible for implementation? Can the implementers change the

mode of implementation? We look to the formation of the term implementation from

the classic text by Pressman and Wildavsky (1973), Implementation. They write, “Im- plementation, to us, means just what Webster and Roget say it does: to carry out, ac-

complish, fulfill, produce, complete.” They authors state that it is a policy that is being

implemented, but they go further, providing a context for implementation. Imple-

mentation must have a clear goal; otherwise, it is difficult to determine the success

of the implementation efforts. The challenge in defining implementation in this man-

ner is that often the environment and conditions change. While initially stipulated

with a clear goal, the process may change due to the environment in which the im-

plementation is taking place. Ultimately, “implementers become responsible both

for the initial conditions and for the objectives toward which they are supposed to

lead” (Pressman and Wildavsky 1973).

Those responsible for implementation are sometime referred to as “street-level bu-

reaucrats”—a term coined by Lipsky (1980). These men and women are implement-

ing state policies; they are responsible for providing everyday services, including

police, education, and waste disposal. Lipsky believes this aspect of implementation

has grave consequences for society. He writes, “Thus, in a sense, street-level bu-

reaucrats implicitly mediate aspects of constitutional relationships of citizens to the

state. In short, they hold the key to a dimension of citizenship.”

According to Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, 11th ed., the verb imple- ment means to “CARRY OUT, ACCOMPLISH; especially: to give practical effect to and ensure of actual fulfillment by concrete measures.”

(continued)

23Public Administration: An Indispensable Part of Society

Year Discoveries

1998 Results from a National Cancer Institute (NCI) sponsored clinical trial showed

that women at high risk of developing breast cancer who took the drug tamoxifen

had 49 percent fewer cases of breast cancer than those who did not. Tamoxifen

was hailed as the first drug to prevent breast cancer in women at high risk for the

disease.

1999 A team of investigators led by a National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Dis-

eases (NIAID) grantee discovered that a subspecies of chimpanzees native to west

Africa are the origin of HIV-1, the virus responsible for the global AIDS pandemic.

2000 Researchers supported by National Institute of General Medical Sciences

(NIGMS) demonstrated that a simple and inexpensive change in basic surgical

procedures—giving patients more oxygen during and immediately after surgery—

can cut the rate of wound infections in half, thus saving millions of dollars in hos-

pital costs by helping to prevent postsurgical wound infection, nausea, and

vomiting.

2001 A team composed of scientists from National Human Genome Research Institute

(NHGRI) and National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS),

grantees of National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) and National In-

stitute on Aging (NIA), and others demonstrated that adult stem cells isolated

from mouse bone marrow could become functioning heart muscle cells when in-

jected into a damaged mouse heart. The new cells at least partially restored the

heart’s ability to pump blood.

2002 People with elevated levels of the amino acid homocysteine in the blood had nearly

double the risk of Alzheimer’s disease (AD), according to a team of scientists sup-

ported by NIA and NINDS. The findings, in a group of participants in NHLBI’s

long-running Framingham Study, are the first to tie homocysteine levels meas-

ured several years before with a later diagnosis of AD and the other dementias,

providing some of the most powerful evidence yet of an association between high

plasma homocysteine and later significant memory loss.

2003 Researchers supported by National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) found a

gene called 5-HTT that influences whether people become depressed when faced

with major life stresses such as relationship problems, financial difficulties and

illness. The gene by itself does not cause depression, but it does affect how likely

people are to get depressed when faced with major life stresses. Another study led

by National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) researchers

found that this same gene affects drinking habits in college students. These stud-

ies are major contributions toward understanding how a person’s response to their

environment is influenced by their genetic makeup.

TABLE 1.1 – THE NIH ALMANAC—HISTORICAL DATA

(continued)

24 CHAPTER 1

ter of seconds—one must also consider the common good outside U.S. borders.

Since the 1980s, globalization has increased at a particularly rapid pace, resulting

in both positive and negative effects. Globalization has changed how Americans do

business and has turned a national economy into a global economy. It has opened

up markets for American products and has allowed for the importation of less ex-

pensive goods from developing markets—i.e., China, India, Brazil.

At the same time, U.S. citizens have also witnessed how globalization might affect

their health and safety. Foodborne illnesses such as mad cow disease have traveled

across borders. H1N1 and avian flu strains have entered the United States with rel-

ative ease. Globalization has made it easier for terrorists to attack American inter-

ests both within and outside the borders of the United States. This new global

environment stresses the need for the U.S. government to increase national secu-

rity while improving defensive measures on an international scale as well.

TABLE 1.1 – THE NIH ALMANAC—HISTORICAL DATA (continued)

Year Discoveries

2004 An international clinical trial concluded that women should consider taking letro-

zole after five years of tamoxifen treatment to continue to reduce the risk of re-

currence of breast cancer. This advance in breast cancer treatment will improve

the outlook for many thousands of women. NCI supported the U.S. portion of the

study, which offered one more example of the ability to interrupt the progression

of a cancer using a drug that blocks a crucial metabolic pathway in the tumor cell.

2005 An HIV/AIDS vaccine developed by scientists at NIAID’s Dale and Betty Bumpers

Vaccine Research Center moved into its second phase of clinical testing in Octo-

ber. This vaccine contains synthetic genes representing HIV subtypes found in

Europe, North America, Africa, and Asia that account about 85 percent of HIV in-

fections worldwide.

2006 NCI-funded research spanning nearly two decades helped lead to U.S. Food and

Drug Administration (FDA) approval for a vaccine to prevent cervical cancer, a

disease that claims the lives of nearly 4,000 women each year in the United States.

It is the first cancer vaccine approved by the FDA.

2007 An experimental vaccine—originally created and tested over the past two decades

by NIAID scientists—appears safe and effective in preventing hepatitis E, a some-

times deadly viral disease prevalent in developing countries. A clinical trial in-

volving nearly 2,000 healthy adults in Nepal, where the virus is widespread, found

that the vaccine was nearly 96 percent effective in preventing hepatitis E during

a follow-up period of about two years.

Source: National Institutes of Health, “The NIH Almanac—Historical Data,” September 1, 2009, www.nih.gov/about/almanac/historical/chronology_of_events.htm.

25Public Administration: An Indispensable Part of Society

One of the federal government’s most powerful tools in the international arena

is the United States Agency for International Development, or USAID. Created

in 1961 with the primary responsibility of providing long-range social and eco-

nomic assistance, USAID has a vision of “accelerat[ing] the advance of democ-

racy, prosperity and human well-being in developing countries.” According to

the agency, its mission is to facilitate “human progress in developing countries

by reducing poverty, advancing democracy, building market economies, pro-

moting security, responding to crises, and improving quality of life. Working

with governments, institutions, and civil society, we assist individuals to build

their own futures by mobilizing the full range of America’s public and private

resources through our expert presence overseas” (USAID 2008). To accomplish

that mission, USAID has five strategic goals around which it organizes its oper-

ations: Peace and Security, Governing Justly and Democratically, Investing in

People, Economic Growth, and Humanitarian Assistance. As displayed in Figure

1.12, in FY 2007 the total net cost of USAID operations was about $9.3 billion,

and less than 2 percent of that was spent on management. More than $8 billion

was spent on foreign aid.

Since its inception in 1961, USAID has revolutionized the concept of foreign assis-

tance programs. According to the USAID website:

• More than 3 million lives are saved every year through USAID immu-

nization programs.

• Oral rehydration therapy, a low cost and easily administered solution

Source: USAID Policy. 2007. “Analysis of USAID's Financial Statements. Overview of Financial Position.” www.usaid.gov/policy/afr07/mda_0400.html.

FIGURE 1.12 – NET COST OF OPERATIONS (DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS)

N E T C O S T O F O P E R A T I O N S (Dollars in Thousands)

$117.152 (1.3%)

$459,065 (4.9%)

$1,386,054 (14.9%)

$1,303,047 (14.0%)

$3,000,895 (32.3%)

$3,029,681 (32.6%)

Objective

Peace and Security

Governing Justly and Democratically

Investing in People

Economic Growth

Humanitarian Assistance

Operating Unit Management

Total $ 9,295,894

26 CHAPTER 1

developed through USAID programs in Bangladesh, is credited with

saving tens of millions of lives around the globe.

• There were 58 democratic nations in 1980. By 1995, this number had

jumped to 115 nations.

• Life expectancy in the developing world has increased by about 33

percent, smallpox has been eradicated worldwide, and as of 2009, the

number of the world’s chronically undernourished has been reduced

by 50 percent.

• The United Nations Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation Decade, in

which USAID played a major role, resulted in 1.3 billion people re-

ceiving safe drinking water sources, and 750 million people receiving

sanitation for the first time.

• With the help of USAID, 21,000 farm families in Honduras have been

trained in improved land cultivation practices that have reduced soil

erosion by 70,000 tons.

• Agricultural research sponsored by the United States sparked the

“Green Revolution” in India. These breakthroughs in agricultural tech-

nology and practices resulted in the most dramatic increase in agricul-

tural yields and production in the history of humankind, allowing

nations like India and Bangladesh to become nearly food self-sufficient.

• In the past 50 years, infant and child death rates in the developing

world have been reduced by 50 percent, and health conditions around

the world have improved more during this period than in all previous

human history.

• Early USAID action in southern Africa in 1992 prevented massive

famine in the region, saving millions of lives.

Jennifer Government: NationStates (Simulation) In this nation-building simulation game, students take charge of a country and test their ability to improve its performance. Your decisions may reduce crime, improve educational achievement, lift people out of poverty, and accelerate economic growth. But improving performance is dependent upon the performance metrics you chose to establish. After completing the simulation, students will summarize the plan of ac- tion they have taken, justify those actions, and assess the outcomes of their deci- sions. In groups of three to five students, compare their strategies and results.

Jennifer Government: NationStates, www.nationstates.net

EXERCISE 1.2

27Public Administration: An Indispensable Part of Society

• Literacy rates are up 33 percent worldwide in the last 25 years, and

primary school enrollment has tripled in that period.

(Source: www.usaid.gov/policy/afr08/afr08_brochure.pdf)

Some observers may question the amount of money the U.S. government spends on

foreign assistance. Some may think that money can be better spent within the bor-

ders of the United States. Ultimately, the answers to those questions remain a po-

litical decision. Nevertheless, it is clear that without U.S. assistance, the world

would be a much different place. Whether through supporting the nonprofit com-

munity, investing in research, or providing assistance to the international com-

munity, federal government support enhances the quality of life as we know it. But

what about local governments? What efforts can we identify that improve the qual-

ity of our lives on a local level?

Governments around the country continually take innovative initiatives to deliver

public services as promised in their charters, by their elected officials, and by the

appointed public servants who are committed to continuous improvement. For ex-

ample, the city of Chicago makes enormous investments in police services. In 2002

the Chicago Police Department (CPD) launched the Citizen and Law Enforcement

Analysis and Reporting (CLEAR) program. CLEAR is a broad database of crime

statistics. The data are, in general, openly accessible through websites and provide

both police officers and citizens detailed crime information in response to their in-

quiries. CLEAR data are displayed utilizing Geographic In-

formation Systems (GIS) technology. Citizens may engage

the system in multiple ways: First, they can report inci-

dents through CLEAR. According to the website, those re-

ports “should be criminal, quality of life or neighborhood

disorder in nature, which affects more than one person and

should be addressed by the police, city services and the

community” (Chicago Police Department 2008). Second,

citizens may sign up to receive regular updates of crime sta-

tistics within a certain area. Areas can be defined by ward,

beat, district, etc. Finally, citizens can form block groups,

such as those associated with small, geographically defined

communities, or they can be represented as vertical block

groups for residents of one building. Once a block group is

formed, data about that specific block will then be posted

in the CLEAR database. The database can also be useful to police officers. Accord-

ing to Governing magazine, police officer Brian Joseph Tierney claimed it has helped him deal with criminals as he walks the beat: “It’s very deflating to them,”

he says, “when some character finds out that I know he’s lying to me because I was

able to pull up his picture with the touch of a finger.” Tierney’s experience must be

felt by others. Crime in Chicago has been decreasing by about 6 percent each year

“Government is a trust, and the officers of the

government are trustees; and both the trust and the

trustees are created for the benefit of the

people.”

HENRY CLAY American Statesman

28 CHAPTER 1

since the system was initiated in 2002. Based upon Chicago’s success, similar sys-

tems are being implemented throughout the United States.

Public Services Are Provided by Dedicated Public Servants It is ironic that the many deeply personal services of government, only a few of

which have been described here, are often provided by anonymous public servants

who rarely gain personal recognition. That is the government with which most

Americans are familiar—a bureaucracy staffed by civil servants with no faces and no

names. Every day millions of public servants provide the services that make our

lives more secure, healthy, and vibrant.

Dr. Rajiv Jain is the Chief of Staff and Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus

(MRSA) Program Director within the Department of Veterans Affairs. Jain received

his Doctor of Medicine from Saurashtra University in India. He then continued his

training at the University of Connecticut and at the University of Virginia Hospital

in Charlottesville, Virginia. He has won many awards for his outstanding work deal-

ing with MSRA.

In the United States, about 100,000 people die each year from infections contracted

during hospital stays. MRSA is one of the major causes of those infections. Dr. Jain’s

work has led to the reduction of MRSA-caused infections by about 60 percent. If im-

plemented throughout the United States, his techniques would reduce the number of

deaths by about 60,000 people and decrease the number of infections (which has now

reached about 2 million) by 1.2 million. Many other medical personnel—though un-

recognized—are helping him implement this program: “I think the [Service to Amer-

ica] award should really go to the people [working in the hospitals] because, although

we came up with the idea, they are the ones carrying it out every day” (Lu 2009). What

was originally intended to be a short stint at Veterans Affairs has turned into 29 years—

a dedicated life of serving the public. Jain believes, “The fact that you are serving the

public to me is absolutely the icing on the cake” (Service to America 2008).

Harness the Power of Public Service (Video) President Bill Clinton addresses Rutgers University students regarding the value of public service and civic engagement. Access the following website and watch the video. What key messages would you deliver concerning the importance of public service? Augment your answer with information from other videos on this site that deal with the impact of public service on community building.

Rutgers Newark Public Service, “Harness the Power of Public Service,” September 29, 2009, www.youtube.com/RUPubServe

EXERCISE 1.3

29Public Administration: An Indispensable Part of Society

Rarely do we acknowledge a particular public servant who keeps our community

safe or teaches our children on a daily basis. World War II veteran Osceola L.

Fletcher (Ozzie) is a public servant whose career spans 60 years. Not only did he

serve as an officer in the New York Police Department for 24 years, but he contin-

ued to work another 15 years as a teacher in the New York City Public Schools and

then went on to become a community relations specialist in

the Brooklyn District Attorney’s office. He was honored

with a Sloan Public Service Award, at which time the

Brooklyn District Attorney stated: “Ozzie Fletcher’s long

and distinguished career epitomizes what it means to be a

public servant” (Fund for the City of New York 2009, p. 2).

In Ozzie’s own words, “Everything I have done is a contin-

uum of the kind of public service I believe in. I have had

the opportunity to work with such a wonderful diversity of

people—something that was not possible when I was grow-

ing up. It is important to connect generations to each other;

otherwise we lose perspective on the meaning of what came

before and what lies ahead, and how to achieve a less con-

tentious world” (Fund for the City of New York 2009).

Bureaucracy—Functional or Not? Bureaucracy is the structure within which virtually all gov-

ernment organizations operate and is characteristic of

large, private concerns, as well. The concept of a bureau-

cracy is to ensure that goods and services can be produced

or provided in the most efficient manner possible. Max Weber (1922/2004), an

eminent German sociologist and organizational theorist, defined bureaucracy as

having the following characteristics:

I. Jurisdictional boundaries—which are typically prescribed by laws or ad-

ministrative regulations.

II. Hierarchy—which ensures an ordered system where superiors monitor

subordinates.

III. Reliance on written documents (or the preservation of files).

IV. Expertly trained managers.

V. The management of the organization subscribes to general rules, which

can be learned and applied uniformly more or less.

It has become commonplace to associate negative stereotypes with bureaucrats.

These are often perpetuated by groups seeking smaller government, politicians

looking to place blame, or citizens involved in uncomfortable interactions or trans-

actions. But these stereotypes often have little basis in fact. The career officials who

“We know that government can’t

solve all our problems—and we

don’t want it to. But we also know

that there are some things we can’t do on our

own. We know that there are some

things we do better together.”

BARACK OBAMA 44th President of the

United States

30 CHAPTER 1

work for government are typically productive, dedicated members of society. Politi-

cians will often blame an incompetent bureaucracy when a policy fails but rarely

credit the same bureaucratic officials when a policy is successfully implemented.

A common claim is that those who work in the public sector receive too much money

for the amount of time that they work. This is especially common in discussions of

teachers. The assumption is that they work fewer hours a day than other profes-

sionals and have long vacations throughout the year and in the summer. But a recent

study by the Time Committee (2007)—established by the State of Hawaii Board of

Education—found that teachers in Hawaii work an extra 1,780 hours a year prepar-

ing for class, grading papers, attending school events, etc. Even if that figure is some-

what exaggerated, the study suggests that teachers are actually underpaid for the

amount of hours they spend working in a professional capacity (Joint Hawaii State

Teachers Association and Board of Education Time Committee 2007).

Not only do teachers spend more time working in a professional capacity than is

typically acknowledged, but they work in a far more turbulent environment than

many other professionals. During the 2006–2007 school year, students aged 12

to 18 were the victims of 1.7 million nonfatal crimes, and about 10 percent of

teachers in urban schools were threatened with harm or violence (National Cen-

ter for Education Statistics 2009). In the 2003–2004 school year, more than

120,000 teachers reported being physically attacked by a student. That vulnera-

At Age 112, Montana Resident Reflects on More Than a Century of Changes WILLIAM MARCUS [PBS]: And who, of all those presidents, who’s your favorite?

WALTER BREUNING: Well, I think Roosevelt done the most when he created So- cial Security and made several changes. But, you know, the second war, if he hadn’t

opened up at that time, Roosevelt would have had a tough time.

WILLIAM MARCUS [PBS]: How would you counsel future generations to be a part of their country?

WALTER BREUNING: Everybody learns from life what’s going on. And if they pay attention to everything that people do, especially helping people, that’s one big thing.

A lot of people think they’re born for themselves; I don’t think that. I believe that

we’re here to help other people all the way through.

Source: PBS NewsHour, online transcript, February 16, 2009, www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/social_is- sues/jan-june09/walter_02–16.html.

31Public Administration: An Indispensable Part of Society

bility is not specific to teachers, however. In 2002, about 35 percent of social

workers reported being attacked. Other public servants such as police officers

and firefighters face even greater risk to their lives. On average about 62,000 po-

lice officers are assaulted and 95,000 firefighters are injured each year. The con-

tributions provided by dedicated public professionals in dangerous settings

certainly deserve our appreciation.

What, Then, Is Public Administration? Among the many depictions of the field of public administration (PA) is that of

the administrator as an impartial implementer. This view gained much of its cred-

ibility from some of the original scholars in the field of public administration, in-

cluding Woodrow Wilson (1887/2004) and Frank Goodnow (1906/2004). Both

scholars viewed the field as being separate from the everyday clashes and com-

promises of politics. They defined a field in which politics and administration

could and should be separated from each other. Wilson held that “the business of

government is to organize the common interest against the special interest”

(1887/2004). Goodnow advocated for a distinction between the functions of the

politics and the administration of government, noting that politics had to do with

policies and the administration dealt with their execution (1906/2004). Although

this view of a “dichotomy” has long been disputed and is commonly viewed as

overly narrow and simplistic, its legacy still partly defines public administration.

An overly narrow understanding of public administration can be challenged quite

easily by examining the many facets of responsibility for the public administrator.

Although impartial implementer may be one legitimate role, it does not fully define

a field so vast and influential in its actions. In 1926 Leonard White—a renowned

public administration scholar—defined public administration as “the management

of men and materials in the accomplishment of the purpose of the state.” He went

on to say, “The objective of public administration is the most efficient utilization of

the resources at the disposal of officials and employees.” Absent from this defini-

tion, though, is the idea of democracy and social equity (White 1926/2004).

A narrower view of public administration is as public management, generally con-

sidered the management of organizations within the government or nonprofit sec-

tor. Unlike private management, public management is driven by its need to reach

its goals or mission rather than its need to make a profit. Public management’s in-

herent attachment to democratic principles affects the dynamics of management

policies. Public management has to do with some of the key responsibilities of the

executive as defined by Luther Gulick’s (1937/2004) formulation of PODSCORB—

Planning, Organizing, Directing, Staffing, Coordinating, Recruiting, and Budget-

ing. In the twenty-first century, public management also deals with broad

organizational objectives through strategic planning, budgeting, and human re-

source implementation.

32 CHAPTER 1

Since the 1930s, the field of public administration has changed significantly. One of

the largest changes came in the 1960s and 1970s with the ideas that grew out of the

New Public Administration movement. Eminent scholar H. George Frederickson

wrote: “The rationale for public administration is almost always better (more effi-

cient or economical) management. New Public Administration adds social equity to

the classical objectives and rationale” (1971/2004). The concept of social equity—

and its adoption as an integral element of government’s mission—has transformed

the field of public administration.

Our own definition incorporates some of the classical and more recent concepts as-

sociated with public administration. We define public administration as the for- mation and implementation of public policy. It is an amalgamation of management-based strategies such as planning, organizing, directing, coordi- nating, and controlling. It incorporates behaviorally based practices adopted from fields such as psychology and sociology. All of those strategies and practices are utilized within a democratic framework of accountability. The formation and implementation of policy, while formally controlled by government managers, has since been expanded to include the nonprofit and for-profit communities.

The Encyclopedia Britannica Online defines public administration as “the imple-

mentation of government policies. Today public administration is often regarded as

including also some responsibility for determining the policies and programs of gov-

ernments. Specifically, it is the planning, organizing, directing, coordinating, and

controlling of government operations” (www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/

482290/public-administration).

33Public Administration: An Indispensable Part of Society

Behn, R.D. 2001. Rethinking Democratic Accountability. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

Boys and Girls Clubs of America. 2010. “Who We Are.” http://www.bgca.org/

whoweare/mission.asp.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2010. “Economic News Release. Volunteering in the

United States, 2009.” http://www.bls.gov/news.release/volun.nr0.htm.

Chicago Police Department. 2008. “CLEARpath. Community Concerns.”

https://portal.chicagopolice.org/portal/page/portal/ClearPath/Communi-

ties/Community%20Concerns.

Environmental Protection Agency. 2010. “EPA Office of Water.” http://

water.epa.gov/.

Experience Works. 2010. “What We Do.” http://www.experienceworks.org.

Frederickson, H.G. 1971/2004. “Toward a New Public Administration.” In Classics of Public Administration, ed. A.C. Hyde, J.M. Shafritz, and S.J. Parkes, 315–27. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.

Fund for the City of New York. 2009. “Sloan Public Service Awards.” New York:

Alfred P. Sloan Foundation/Fund for the City of New York. www.fcny.org/

fcny/core/sloan/.

Goodnow. F. 1906/2004. “Politics and Administration.” In Classics of Public Ad- ministration, ed. A.C. Hyde, J.M. Shafritz, and S.J. Parkes, 35–37. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.

Greene, J.P., and M. Winters. 2005. “The Teacher-Pay Myth.” New York Post, Sep- tember 22.

501(c)(3)

Bureaucracy

Employment taxes

Globalization

Gross domestic product (GDP)

Nonprofit sector

Private sector

Public administration (PA)

Public management

Public sector

Sales taxes

Taxation

KEY TERMS

REFERENCES

34 CHAPTER 1

Gulick, L. 1937/2004. “Notes on the Theory of Organization.” In Classics of Public Administration, ed. A.C. Hyde, J.M. Shafritz, and S.J. Parkes, 90–98. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.

Howe, S. 2008. “Eight Stand-out Public Servants Receive Coveted Service to Amer-

ica Medals at Washington, DC Gala.” Partnership for Public Service, September 16. http://ourpublicservice.org/OPS/pressroom/releases/release_080917_

sammies.shtml.

Joint Hawaii State Teachers Association and Board of Education Time Committee.

2007. Time Committee Preliminary Report. Honolulu: Hawaii Board of Educa- tion, http://www.focusmauinui.com/pdf/TimeCommittee%20PreliminaryRe-

port_3–15–07.pdf.

Light, P.C. 2002. “Fact Sheet on the New True Size of Government.” Brookings

Institution website. www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/articles/2003/

0905politics_light/light20030905.pdf.

Lipsky, M. 1980. Street-level Bureacracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Lu, Y. 2009. “Pittsburgh Doctor Wins Service to America Medal.” The Tartan On- line, January 26. www.thetartan.org/2009/1/26/scitech/serviceaward.

National Center for Education Statistics. 2009. “Indicators of School Crime and

Safety: 2008.” http://nces.ed.gov/programs/crimeindicators/crimeindica-

tors2008/key.asp.

National Institute of Food and Agriculture. 2010. “About NIFA.”

http://www.csrees.usda.gov/about/about.html.

National Institutes of Health. 2009. “The NIH Almanac—Historical Data,” Sep-

tember 1. www.nih.gov/about/almanac/historical/chronology_of_events.htm.

National Institutes for Health. 2010. “About the National Institutes of Health.” May

18. http://www.nih.gov/about/index.html.

National Office of Public Health Genomics of the Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention. 2010. “Public Health Genomics. About Us.” http://www.cdc.gov/ge-

nomics/about/index.htm.

National Science Foundation. 2010. “About the National Science Foundation.”

http://www.nsf.gov/about/.

New York City. 1998. Archives of Rudolph W. Giuliani. Mayor’s WINS Address,

Sunday, August 16. http://www.nyc.gov/html/records/rwg/html/98b/

me980816.html.

Partnership for Public Service. 2008. “Service to America Medal Recipients.”

35Public Administration: An Indispensable Part of Society

http://servicetoamericamedals.org/SAM/recipients/sam08/sam08a.shtml.

Pressman, J.L., and A.B. Wildavsky. 1973. Implementation: How Great Expecta- tions in Washington Are Dashed in Oakland; Or, Why It’s Amazing That Fed- eral Programs Work at All, This Being a Saga of the Economic Development Administration as Told by Two Sympathetic Observers Who Seek to Build Morals on a Foundation of Ruined Hopes. The Oakland Project series. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Romzek, B.S., and M.J. Dubnick. 1987. “Accountability in the Public Sector: Les-

sons from the Challenger Tragedy.” In Democracy, Bureaucracy, and the Study of Administration, ed. C. Stivers, 182–204. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Rosenbloom, D.H. 2000. “Retrofitting the Administrative State to the Constitu-

tion: Congress and the Judiciary’s Twentieth-Century Progress.” Public Admin- istration Review 60: 39–46.

United Nations. 2010. “International Water for Life Decade. Factsheet on Water

and Sanitation.” http://www.un.org/waterforlifedecade/factsheet.html.

Urban Institute. 2010. “Nonprofits.” http://www.urban.org/nonprofits/index.cfm.

USAID.2008. “Fiscal Year 2008. USAID Annual Performance Report. Overview.”

http://www.usaid.gov/policy/budget/apr08/apr08_overview.pdf.

Walters, Johnathan.2007. “Data on the Beat.” Governing magazine, July 31. www. governing.com/topics/public-justice-safety/Data-on-the-Beat.html.

Weber, M. 1922/2004. “Bureaucracy.” In Classics of Public Administration, ed. A.C. Hyde, J.M. Shafritz, and S.J. Parkes, 50–55. Belmont, CA:

Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.

White, L. 1926/2004. “Introduction to the Study of Public Administration.” In Clas- sics of Public Administration, ed. A.C. Hyde, J.M. Shafritz, and S.J. Parkes, 56– 63. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.

Wilson, W. 1887/2004. “The Study of Administration.” In Classics of Public Ad- ministration, ed. A.C. Hyde, J.M. Shafritz, and S.J. Parkes, 22–34. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.

Bozeman, Barry. 2007. Public Values and Public Interest. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

Denhardt, Janet V., and Robert B. Denhardt. 2007. The New Public Service: Serv- ing, not Steering. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

SUPPLEMENTARY READINGS

36 CHAPTER 1

Gargan, John J., ed. 2000. Handbook of State Government Administration. New York: Marcel Dekker.

Laurence E. Lynn. 2006. Public Management: Old and New. New York: Routledge.

Nicholas Henry. 2009. Public Administration and Public Affairs. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice-Hall.

Peters, B. Guy and Jon Pierre, eds. 2003. Handbook of Public Administration. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Philip H. Jos and Mark E. Tompkins. 2009. “Keeping It Public: Defending Public

Service Values in a Customer Service Age.” Public Administration Review 69, no. 6: 1077-1086.

Richard T. Green, Gary L. Wamsley and Lawrence F. Keller. 1993. “Reconstituting

a Profession for American Public Administration.” Public Administration Re- view 53, no. 6: 516-524.

Tina Nabatchi, Holly T. Goerdel, and Shelly Peffer. 2011. “Public Administration in

Dark Times: Some Questions for the Future of the Field.” Journal of Public Ad- ministration and Research 21: i29-i43.

Wamsley, Gary L., Robert N. Bacher, Charles T. Goodsell, Philip S. Kronenberg,

John A. Rohr, Camilla M. Stivers, Orion F. White, and James F. Wolf. 1990. Re- founding Public Administration. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Wing, K., Pollack, T.H., and Blackwood, A. 2008. The Nonprofit Almanac, 7th ed. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press.

Fred Thompson. "What Public Managers Should Study." Atkinson Graduate School

of Management, Willamette University, http://www.willamette.edu/~fthompso/

Public_MANAGEMENT.html

Robert Behn. 2005, "M-Gov, E-Gov, and I-Gov" Public Management report, 2-10,

http://www.hks.harvard.edu/thebehnreport/June2005.pdf

Russell W. Mills. 2010. "The Promise of Collaborative Voluntary Partnerships:

Lessons from the Federal Aviation Administration." Collaborating Across Boundaries Series. IBM Center for The Business of Government, http://www.businessofgovernment.org/sites/default/files/The%20Promise%20

of%20Collaborative%20Voluntary%20Partnerships.pdf

ELECTRONIC RESOURCES

37Public Administration: An Indispensable Part of Society

Building Commissioning for Better Public Buildings Case Study, “Bainbridge Is-

land High School—Assuring HVAC Comfort and Efficiency,” Washington State

Department of General Administration, Fall 2003, www.ga.wa.gov/eas/bcx/

BainbridgeIsland%20HighSchool-cx.pdf.

Fuchs, Ester R., Rachel Hare, and Hannah Nudell. “Innovations in City Govern-

ment: The Case of New York City’s Workforce Development System.” Columbia

School of International and Public Affairs Case Study, November 5, 2008,

www.nyc.gov/html/sbs/wib/downloads/pdf/columbia_case_study.pdf.

CASE STUDIES

38 CHAPTER 1

Government-Bashing: Seven Myths Claim 1: Government exerts too much control over our lives. Every time private citizens allow “government” to enact a new law, or new regulation, we cede a little bit more power to it. We give up a little bit more of our privacy, a bit more control over our future, and enable this huge impersonal force called government to make more decisions for us.

Answer: Ask yourself the following questions: What goes into our ears? Sounds pro- vided by Clear Channel and an ever-shrinking number of privately owned radio con-

glomerates answerable to no one. What goes into our eyes? TV shows and movies

and news broadcasts provided by a small group of ever more powerful private enti-

ties whose goal is to increase their bottom line. Who tells us what foods to eat and

medicines to take? Privately owned companies like McDonald’s and Coke and Pfizer

and Johnson & Johnson. Who tells our children what constitutes “cool behavior” and

gives our kids daily examples of what is fair and moral? Does [President Barack]

Obama get on TV and say that premarital sex and swearing are great ways to make

friends? No, but private industries do—in that case, the entertainment industry,

which makes money selling kids extremely nonfamily values. Who tells us what cars

we need to drive in order to feel manly, what gadgets we need to buy for our chil-

dren, and where to shop? Private industry does. Who tells our children that it’s much

better to spend money on trinkets and fancy cars to impress girls than it is to save for

college? Who tells our kids to drink Budweiser and smoke cigarettes? Private indus-

tries do, industries that make billions of dollars from your children’s future addic-

tions. Who collects data on the websites we visit, what we buy online, and whom we

chat with? Well, my friend, that would be Google, Microsoft and Facebook, not “gov-

ernment.” Who reports the identities of political dissidents to repressive govern-

ments like China, sells our personal data to the highest bidder, and spies on our

Internet activity? You’re thinking, that’s gotta be Obama and those wicked Democ-

rats? No. Once again, that would be Yahoo, Facebook and Google, respectively. Does

government make the schoolbooks our children learn from? No. Private industries

do, companies like Pearson, McGraw-Hill, Reed Elsevier, and Houghton Mifflin.

Check your child’s textbook. Did “government” make it? Nope. Mostly likely, it came

from one of the companies I just named. Does government make the voting machines

we vote on? No. Private industries do, companies like Diebold, Sequoia, and the Ne-

braska-based Election Systems, who are answerable to no one but their sharehold-

ers. And who has the largest financial stake in you ignoring the above paragraph, and

wants you to please, please get back to the business of complaining about govern-

ment? Private industry does.

39Public Administration: An Indispensable Part of Society

Claim 2: When government steps in to fix a problem, they never get it right. They should just leave business to fix itself.

Answer: It’s quite true that government’s fixes never seem to work, but that’s by de- sign. We don’t want a government with absolute power to dictate policies, even if

those policies seem good for the short term. We’re too smart for that. We know very

well that giving government lots of power to fix today’s crises would create rules that,

later on, would be burdensome. This is true by and large, but there are times we

should rethink that notion. Take the example of the BP oil mess. For decades, Amer-

ica has let Big Oil pretty much have its own way, let them sign off on their own safety

reports, accept their verbal assurances that they will play nice and not hurt the pretty

fishes when they drill. Now, BP has created a crisis they can’t control, so we want

[President] Obama to step up and take over. But since America has always let oil

companies manage their own problems, we lack the expertise to come in behind BP

and play cleanup. Obama will now try his best to jump in and fix things, and the re-

sults will appear clumsy and poorly thought out, simply because a spill of this mag-

nitude is quite new to all of us, and we’ll have to learn as we go. One might say that

the government should have been keeping closer watch of Big Oil all along, so as not

to be caught in this sort of mess. But then, Republicans would have seized that op-

portunity to whine even more about “government” interference. Another example of

government’s partial solutions to big problems is Obama’s foreclosure prevention

plan. It’s a flop. Why? Because the plan is voluntary. Obama’s plan would work just

fine if Congress forced the banks to play, but who has the political stomach for that?

Force the banks to take pennies on the dollar? There’d be cries of “socialism.” Very

few people want to grant the government the broad powers and regulatory teeth re-

quired to craft a workable solution to the foreclosure problem. Such a plan would be

very good for the economy, but enacting it is a matter of political will. Who wants to

tell the banks that they need to take a haircut for the good of the nation? Obama

could, if he had enough political support to weather the Glenn Beck character assas-

sination that is sure to follow. But since Americans want Obama to be both “in

charge,” but also let the private sector run its own ship, then he’s bound to fail in

many people’s eyes. Americans seem destined to accept ineffective half-solutions to

the problems we want the government to address, rather than give the President the

mandate to enact something far-reaching and comprehensive. So pick your poison:

Give government the wide-ranging power to fix a problem, or live with that problem

and feel “free” from government oppression. But don’t just complain that “govern-

ment can’t fix things.” (continued)

40 CHAPTER 1

Claim 3: Government can’t do anything right.

Answer: Everything you do is protected by government. We drive on paved high- ways, eat food, drink water, breath air, and take medicines that are relatively safe

and contain ingredients that bear some similarity to what’s on the label, all because

of government. The dealer who sold you a car can’t sell you a lemon, because of gov-

ernment. The restaurant where you eat can’t serve you spoiled food, because of gov-

ernment. We live in homes that are built according to legal codes, codes that punish

builders who use shoddy workmanship and toxic materials. These benefits also come

from government. We are paid regular wages by employers who are obligated to do

so by law. Because of government oversight, the police [officer] who pulls you over

can’t punch you in the stomach just because he’s in a bad mood. When we go to the

hospital, we are treated according to standards that carry the force of regulations

that come from government. When we hire a lawyer, he or she must do the same, or

risk disbarment. The elderly among us are not obliged to beg, or die in the streets

when they get sick, because a government program takes care of them. When we turn

on the radio or TV, the airwaves broadcast as expected. Programs not suitable for

families are labeled accordingly, and aired only when the kids are (supposed to be)

in bed. Despite all our complaints, our lives are improved greatly by that evil boogey-

man, “government,” the institution we love to hate, those mousy regulators that are

the butt of everyone’s jokes. These faceless, plodding, uninspiring bureaucrats that

we endlessly make fun of actually make it so that our lives run relatively smoothly.

Claim 4: Before [President Ronald] Reagan came along and reduced government and low- ered taxes, America was worse off. Although it’s true that in the 1950s–70s, Amer- ica enjoyed a heyday, with a healthy middle class, lots of well-paying union jobs, few economic worries, where the average worker could raise a family in a nice neighborhood, buy a home, and afford to send his kids to college. However, these salad days were built on comfortable union deals and high taxes that were only sustainable because America was the sole economic engine of the West. Enter the mid-1970s, with its crippling inflation, expensive foreign aid commitments, and the resulting Carter-era “stagflation,” and it became clear that America’s experiment with high taxes and liberal big government was coming to an end. The allies Amer- ica helped rebuild were challenging our economic dominance, and no Democrat had the guts to propose scaling back government and union power. When Presi- dent Reagan was elected, he bucked all trends and lowered taxes, especially on the wealthy, and on corporations. Reagan ordered The Fed to tighten money, which

(continued)

41Public Administration: An Indispensable Part of Society

unfortunately ushered in three years of painful unemployment, but the final result was an unprecedented economic boom that made money for everyone and gener- ated wealth in all quarters. There can be no doubt that Reagan’s brave medicine of tax cuts in the face of almost universal Democratic opposition turned the nation around, so that the America that Reagan left us, awash in national pride and wealth, bore no resemblance to the sorry state given him by the outgoing President Carter in 1980.

Answer: There’s certainly some truth to the above. It’s true that by 1980, America’s allies were becoming industrial powerhouses, and wiser heads predicted a day when

the world would no longer buy all our cars, absorb our exports, and thus finance Big

Labor’s expectation of cradle-to-grave comfort for America’s workers. Reagan’s an-

swer was to radically cut taxes. In doing so, he created massive deficits. America

quickly learned that deficits would balloon and become unmanageable, so in 1983,

Reagan backed off his tax cuts and raised the amount that each worker had to con-

tribute to Social Security. He also raised the Social Security deduction ceiling to

$90,000 (before this, you didn’t have to pay Social Security tax on yearly income

over $30,000). However, Reagan continued to cut corporate taxes and taxes for the

very wealthy, so the deficit grew. To curb it, he borrowed hundreds of billions from

the Social Security trust fund, the first president to do so in significant amounts.

Americans still pay 100 billion dollars a year in interest on the money that Reagan

took from Social Security. This deficit-fear and all the creative bookkeeping required

to paper over the deficit has clouded every presidency since. There was, however,

lots of money floating around in the ’80s. The shifting of the tax burden to regular

workers and away from corporations and their owners resulted in a rush of new cash

that required investment, capital that had to be stashed in some way. What’s more,

other nations were coming into their own, flush with cash, and were eager to loan it

to us so America could skip down its merry high-borrowing ways. Thus began the

now-familiar scenario of foreign investors owning an ever-increasing portion of the

American pie. And around this time, since banks and corporations and the wealthy

were flush with cash, common-sense investment regulations were tossed aside. Cap-

italization/reserve requirements of banks were reduced. Banks began bundling debts

from various sources and swapping them for other commodities (sound familiar?),

making billions of dollars in the process. Wealthy players were encouraged to bet on

energy futures, and one result was the collapse of Enron, half a generation later,

which cost taxpayers billions. Thus, Reagan’s newly minted billionaires played Wall

Street like a casino, and Wall Street’s character changed from the stolid, relatively

boring institution it had become in the postwar world. We see the results of such

gambling today, when Goldman Sachs testified before Congress that they thrived (continued)

42 CHAPTER 1

during the 2008 meltdown by betting that their own investors would fail. And under

Reagan, for the first time, pension funds and bond markets were encouraged to begin

playing these risky financial games. These staid pillars of prudence were no longer

content with slow growth, while the rest of the big players were making billions. So

they tossed money into the pot as well, and one result was the financial near-collapse

of Orange County, California, in 1994. All of this was presaged by the Reagan-era

Savings & Loan scandal, which was but the first of the now-familiar bankers’ games

that cost the taxpayer hundreds of billions of dollars. The 2008 and 2009 “bailouts”

were not the first time the taxpayers footed the bill for Wall Street’s betting frenzy.

They were only the first giveaways to be called what they really were. But it was under

Reagan that taxpayers began shoring up bankers after they failed at dice. Before his

presidency, such a practice was unheard of.

What else did the Reagan-rich do with their newly minted billions? Buy other compa-

nies. The phenomena of eliminating companies and product lines because they weren’t

profitable enough, of forcing every company to do what it must to maximize profits or

risk being taken over, all that started under Reagan. The Reagan billionaires didn’t buy

other companies for the good of the nation, so that America could run fit and trim on

the open seas of tough competition, but instead, they treated newly acquired firms as

if they were ATMs, firing employees, gutting communities, stripping legacy businesses

of their assets, and draining money to the new corporate headquarters. The resulting

dearth of small businesses, the lack of local flavor, the corporate bigness that reduces

every town to a series of strip malls each with a Starbucks and a Subway and a Block-

buster Video, that all started under Reagan. The mega-rich reasoned that the purpose

for all the easy money Reagan gave them was to make more. We Americans didn’t no-

tice the trends right away, the corporate acquisitions that gradually touched every cor-

ner of America over three decades. Therefore, it’s hard for us to imagine an America

that doesn’t resemble an ever-shrinking portfolio of corporate logos dotting the high-

way. There was a time when a community’s livelihood had a lot more to do with what

actually happened in that community (no matter how small), not a corporate board-

room in a different state, or different country. Can you imagine a world in which CEOs

could grow their company at a manageable pace over a number of years, focusing on

sustainability rather than obsessing over quarterly profits? Before Reagan, such goals

were the norm. Of course in 2010, in the wake of the Enron scandal and the 2008 Melt-

down, we are careful to lament the obsession for fast profits at the expense of common

sense, but such wariness is only hindsight. Beginning under Reagan and through today,

profit-mania is viewed as a patriotic duty. Many have also lamented the loss of small,

local industries, local food and power production—but these had been deemed “inef- (continued)

(continued)

43Public Administration: An Indispensable Part of Society

ficient” by the still-popular Reagan business model, and so, we find that they’ve gone

the way of the typewriter and the dial-up modem. This notion that maximum prof-

itability must be the Golden Mean for all commerce was not popular until the Reagan

presidency sanctioned pure profitability for its own sake. A local industry that employs

perhaps a few hundred people can seldom compete with the profitability of its global

brethren. But so what? Should that assessment be regarded as the final word on its

value? Reagan convinced America that it was.

In the short run though, Reagan’s America was indeed awash in cash. We were

wealthy on paper, but those billions created relatively few jobs, and the ones created

were usually not robust. The 1980s saw the decline of well-paying manufacturing

jobs and the rise of the “service sector.” American workers emerged from early 1980s

recession to find themselves wearing aprons and colorful hats and serving ham-

burgers. But rather than invest in industries that would create good jobs, rather than

building industries that required highly educated workers in a multi-step produc-

tion chain that would put lots of people to work, the Reagan-rich invested in finan-

cial schemes that created a quick buck. Why didn’t the rich invest in stable,

multifaceted industries that created a vast array of products that regular people could

actually buy? Because during the Reagan years, regular people couldn’t afford to buy

much of anything. During Reagan’s first term, 10 percent of all working Americans

had no job, and the jobs they found later didn’t pay very well. Thus, industry had lit-

tle incentive to re-invent the Boom Years of 1955–75, during which products and all

their parts were made at home. During that era, regular Americans could afford to

buy the things they manufactured, a dual role which encouraged industry to manu-

facture more, creating a healthy cycle. But under Reagan, the middle class lost buy-

ing power, making up for this loss only by going into debt. The result was that the

Reagan-rich saw little incentive to finance what might have been a rejuvenated in-

dustrial base, a new economy that created long-term, nonexportable jobs, rather than

electronic trinkets that could just as well be manufactured overseas.

It’s quite true that in 1980, taxes needed to be cut, but America had other options be-

sides setting the rich loose on some sort of extended Las Vegas vacation at our ex-

pense. What if Reagan had cut taxes but created strong incentives to reinvest in

America? By now, we’d be energy-independent, a nation of producers as well as con-

sumers, and this notion of America going bankrupt because the Chinese market blinks

would be the subject of a novel, not our reality. How? By doing what America does

best: invent what is next. Ever hear of Bell & Howell? A joint business-government

think tank that developed technologies that shaped the world. We got there first.

America did it by combining brains and skill with manufacturing know-how. We could (continued)

44 CHAPTER 1

do that again by developing renewable energy sources, for example biomass fuels,

which only need a bit of tweaking to be profitable. America under Reagan, flush with

cash from tax cuts, could have begun such a partnership, getting a jump on fuel-effi-

cient cars (by now, we’d all have one, and oil-producing nations would have no power

over us at all). Under Reagan, we could have used all that cash to develop small in-

dustries with minimal environmental impact that could be controlled locally, which

matches the goal of both the Right and Left—to keep our affairs small and control-

lable. If Reagan hadn’t simply handed over tax cuts to the rich, giving them play-

money to manipulate stocks and housing, but had instead put America first, today,

we’d have broadband in every corner of America, we’d have small rural industries ef-

ficiently run off biomass fuels and computer technology, and students that could look

forward to jobs in these new burgeoning sectors, instead of working at Starbucks and

flipping houses. Under Reagan, America’s prisons grew by 90 percent. Imagine if the

percentage of Reagan Youth that spent its years behind bars could have, instead, been

given a low-cost education, then put to work developing tomorrow’s technologies. Ex-

pensive? Not as expensive as incarceration. Incarceration is much, much more ex-

pensive than education. The rush to lock up citizens is a problem of mindset, a

problem that results when you listen to an actor, not a thinker. We can do better.

Claim 5: Small government is good government.

Answer: Because of the atmosphere described in the above paragraphs, the need to squeeze every dollar spent for maximum profit, businesses can’t function with a lot

of common sense. In such a go-getter environment, a company is tempted to make-

believe that their employees can actually live on 8 dollars per hour, or that, by cut-

ting health insurance, their employees will magically stay healthy and productive. A

company is tempted to pretend that water runoff from animal waste will magically

avoid the lettuce crops nearby, or that customers who purchase your pharmaceuti-

cals will magically not notice the nasty side-effects that you’ve been hiding for years.

The breakneck rush for profits, the need to avoid being taken over by a larger com-

pany who’s willing to be nastier than you are—well, those realities make it too tempt-

ing for a large business to engage in predatory and unsafe practices. Business critics

on the Left often characterize corporate leaders as evil human beings. That’s not fair.

They’re just people who want their companies to survive, who believe that by firing

300 employees today, they’re doing right by the 800 employees who remain. Today’s

corporate heads did not make these rules. Reagan and his cronies did, and today’s

businesses must survive by them. I once worked at a fiber-optic cable company, and

one day, a particular salesman was lauded for making our product the dominant

(continued)

45Public Administration: An Indispensable Part of Society

player in Australia and Oceana. “Good show,” everyone said. “Now, go out and do it

again. And we’ll fire all your colleagues that can’t keep up with you.” For a moment,

you could see the weariness in his eyes, the realization that his own demise was only

a matter of time, the realization that this is not a way to do business.

But, regardless of whose fault it is, it’s fair to say that, given the atmosphere described

above, big companies cannot function with our best interests at heart—“our” mean-

ing the regular people who drive their cars and buy their products and work at their

factories and offices. Therefore, some entity needs to watch for stuff, watch for the

salmonella in the lettuce, the shoddy workmanship in the cars, the pollutants in the

air, the side effects in the medications, and so forth. Of course, a person might live

each day eating food that’s relatively free of poisons, living in a home constructed

with safe materials, and believe that the world of commerce proceeds smoothly as if

by magic. That’s not true. It’s because of “government.” This fact won’t be obvious

until you become one of those sad statistics whose plane trip ended in tragedy, whose

liver was ruined from unlabeled medication, whose shoreline is covered with oil,

whose daughter died from E. coli in the cheese. You see them on TV, and it’s easy to

assume they’re just trying to squeeze money from a company that made an honest

mistake. But when you find yourself in a similar situation, you realize how easy it is

for big companies to get away with… well, murder. You realize it is perfectly fair to

expect government to protect us from these economic entities that have such control

over our daily lives. Such “government” oversight is indeed necessary.

Of course, if you read the news, you’d think all big companies practice careless dis-

regard for our lives. That’s silly. People are people. But regardless of the exaggera-

tions, it should be obvious America needs corporate watchdogs, unless you believe

that CEOs are saints who would never cut corners on safety reports or produce

shoddy ingredients. That, too, is silly. Society just runs much better if somebody’s

keeping the big guys honest. And not just anybody. The task requires a powerful en-

tity outside a company’s corporate structure, an entity accountable only to “the peo-

ple” (at least on paper), and not corporate boardrooms. We would call that

“government.” Now, does all this mean government should be “big?” Not necessar-

ily. But regulatory agencies should be well-funded and staffed, empowered with the

right technology and skills to do their job, and enough regulatory teeth to make their

findings legally binding and enforceable. If regulation agencies are not “big,” then

they are no match for the corporations they much watch over, who are getting big-

ger and more concentrated by the minute. Still, in America, we don’t like to interfere

with a man and his right to make a dollar. We’re inclined to side with the bloke who

made the machine, rather than the guy who wants to burden him down with “safety” (continued)

46 CHAPTER 1

this and “safety” that. What this means, then, is that the public supports regulations,

but unfortunately, only toothless ones, regulations with huge loopholes. If politicians

try to design regulations that honestly do the job, for example, force oil companies to

install safety mechanisms so that oil spills can be contained, the companies complain

of overregulation and start ragging on “government,” and usually get the support of

the public. From there, it gets worse: these toothless, ineffective regulations give the

public more reason to complain “government can’t do anything right.” Sometimes,

it all seems like a game of cat and mouse, and it’s only after you’ve been screwed out

of your life savings, lost your house, a limb, or a family member, or had your coast-

line polluted by oil that you realize that it’s not a game at all.

Claim 6: Government is more secretive and less answerable to the people than business.

Answer: In reality, businesses routinely hide data that would be of great interest to the general public. Goldman Sachs claims that they had no obligation to reveal that

they were betting against their own investors. During the recent financial meltdown,

firms routinely cooked the books to hide their losses, claiming such deceptions were

legal. Food companies claim they have the right to call their products “organic” when

they are anything but, and bottled water companies can legally lie about the source

of their natural spring (city tap) water. Car companies will hide data about their un-

safe vehicles until the resulting injuries and deaths can no longer be plausibly de-

nied. Companies routinely hide the anticompetitive results of their mergers and

acquisitions, and mask the deceitful means they use to drive competitors out of busi-

ness. Businesses claim these rights because they don’t want to reveal trade secrets,

or reveal their true financial health to competitors. In any event, right or wrong, big

corporations believe they don’t have to reveal facts that might be harmful to their

bottom line, regardless of the central roles their products play in our lives. Govern-

ment, however, does have an obligation to be transparent, and when it refuses, we

can fire officeholders who refuse to be accountable. Whistleblowers at government

agencies are protected by law and have at least some recourse when they are harassed

for speaking up. Although government regulators lie as much as anyone, there are

pathways for concerned citizens to get to the bottom of these deceptions. Raise sim-

ilar charges against a large private company, and they can stonewall until the money

runs out (forever).

Claim 7: Anything government can do, business can do better.

Answer: In America, we don’t look to government to take on money-making, po-

(continued)

47Public Administration: An Indispensable Part of Society

tentially profitable ventures. We leave that for the private sector, with its healthy,

profit-seeking motivation. We look to government to do things that all citizens re-

quire, even those citizens that can’t pay. The postal service delivers mail to everyone,

because not everyone can afford UPS and Fed Ex. Public schools have to let in all the

kids, even those who might never read or write or do math very well. Not everyone

can afford a car, so you have to have busses. Not all goods can be delivered on air-

planes, so you have to have trains, even though they’re not profitable. Since we

haven’t found a way to keep germs on the poor side of town, we have to have hospi-

tals where poor people can get treated. Notice every institution I just mentioned is the

frequent butt of anti-government jokes. It’s true that none of these ventures make

money, because they’re not allowed to choose whom they treat, educate, deliver mail

to, or drive around town. Now, businesses often say that they can run these ventures

“at a profit,” and do them “better than government.” What they mean is that they

can cut people off who can’t pay. But profitability is not the point of these services.

They are necessities and are provided by government, for everybody, without regard

to profit. Therefore, they will forever be considered “money losers” and “inefficient.”

Source: Cohen, Gail. 2010. “Government-Bashing: 7 Myths.” Daily Freep, June 4. http://dailyfreep.blogspot.com/2010/06/government-bashing-7-myths.html.

Organizational Theory and Management

CHAPTER 2

Chapter 2 presents the literature on administrative and

organizational theory and behavior relating to the challenges

and opportunities of public management. The information in

this chapter will enable students to identify and discuss major

authors, concepts, and terms associated with organizational

theory and management. Some of these theories relate to

efficient administration of an organization—the so-called

classical and neo-classical management theories that intro-

duce readers to Max Weber’s idea of bureaucracy, Frederick

Taylor’s assembly-line approach to managing organizations, as

well as Herbert Simon’s skepticism of these approaches. The

discussion then shifts to the human side of organizations,

where Mary Parker Follett, Abraham Maslow, and Douglas

McGregor show us that organizational management must take

into account the feelings and needs of people. We conclude

with an examination of more modern organizational theories.

48 CHAPTER 2

49Organizational Theory and Management

“Management is the science of which organizations are but experiments.”

JOHN CONSTABLE English Romantic Painter

(1776-1837)

“When in charge, ponder; when in trouble, delegate; when in doubt, mumble.”

JAMES H. BOREN Author; Founder of the International Association

of Professional Bureaucrats, 1970

Postal Workers Sorting Mail – Mural, Ariel Rios Building, Federal Triangle, Washington DC.

50 CHAPTER 2

The Classical Management Movement Frederick Taylor Frederick Taylor’s 1911 monograph, The Principles of Scientific Management, rev- olutionized the idea of optimizing productivity. His four principles of scientific man-

agement are the hallmark of the classical management period of public

administration. The first principle encompasses the adoption of laws and formulas

to determine the most efficient ways of completing tasks. Standard work proce-

dures were believed to engender productivity—and more importantly profit. Taylor,

a mechanical engineer by profession, implemented the use of time-and-motion

studies to determine the highest level of worker output in accordance with a par-

ticular procedure. To motivate workers and maximize output, Taylor advocated ad-

herence to stringent working procedures and tied employee production levels to

earnings: he paid workers on a piece-rate basis.

The second principle of Taylor’s scientific management theory entails studying the ca-

pabilities of workers. By doing so, management can better identify the inherent

strengths and limitations of each worker and offer special training to maximize his or

her capabilities. Specialization is paramount within the context of Taylorism, a notion

first embraced by the eighteenth-century Scottish economist Adam Smith in The Wealth of Nations (1776/2003). Smith believed that specialized work increased or- ganizational productivity by increasing the “dexterity” of its workers, allowing them

to become as proficient as possible in completing their task. Also, according to Smith,

much time is saved by eliminating the need to change tasks, tools, and the like.

Taylor’s third principle of scientific management is the fusing together of work pro-

cedures and specialized training. “You may develop all the science that you please,”

noted Taylor (1911), “and you may scientifically select and train workmen just as

much as you please, but unless some man or some men bring the science and the

workmen together all your labor will be lost.” The fusion of procedures and train-

ing is arguably the most important responsibility of management, and the success

of scientific management is contingent upon an equal division of responsibility be-

tween management and workers. This is the fourth, and final, principle of Tay-

lorism. An equal division of labor is advantageous, given the fact that management

can better supervise its workers, thereby ensuring adherence to standard proce-

dures. Moreover, according to Taylor, dividing labor promotes cooperation and in-

terdependence, which reduces the likelihood of serious disputes. Productivity and

efficiency are the primary ends of scientific management. Standard work proce-

dures, as developed through empirical examination, specialized training, and di-

vided labor serve as the means to those ends. Taylor’s organizational components,

THEORIES OF MANAGERIAL EFFICIENCY

51Organizational Theory and Management

and the subsequent relationships they manifest, correspond to a bureaucratic

framework defined by Weber and discussed later in this chapter.

Frank and Lillian Gilbreth: Stewards of Scientific Management As associates of Frederick Taylor, Frank and Lillian Gilbreth operated their own

management consulting firm, Gilbreth, Inc., from 1910 to 1924. They taught work-

ers how to be more productive and efficient. The Gilbreths were employed as effi-

ciency experts by several major industries both domestically and internationally.

Frank Gilbreth’s work as a building contractor inspired him to conduct time-and-

motion studies in order to decrease the number of motions a worker would need to

complete a given task. The results of his studies led to the redesign of machinery op-

erated by factory workers. Lillian Gilbreth was an engineer and a trained psychol-

Workers on the first moving assembly line put together magnetos and flywheels for 1913 Ford autos. By an unknown photographer, Highland Park, Michigan, 1913. Source: National Archives, Records of the U.S. Information Agency (306-PSE-73-1534).

52 CHAPTER 2

ogist, and she and Frank coauthored several books on motion studies, including

Fatigue Study: The Elimination of Humanity’s Greatest Unnecessary Waste; A First Step in Motion Study (1919). The Gilbreths had twelve children—most likely

a motivating factor in their work on efficiency and time

management. Two of their children, Frank Gilbreth, Jr.,

and Ernestine Gilbreth Carey, chronicled their parents’ use

of scientific management principles in the context of child

rearing in the book Cheaper by the Dozen, which was first made into a film in 1950.

Frank Gilbreth believed that what worked in a factory could

work as effectively in a household. For example, he adapted

industry process charts for use in the home. These charts

listed each of his children’s duties and when they were to be

done. Throughout the film version of Cheaper by the Dozen, one can see Taylorism at work. Particularly memo- rable scenes include showing his children’s school principal

the most efficient way to take a bath (fully clothed, of

course), as well as the application of motion studies to re-

duce the recovery time required for his children’s tonsil-

lectomies. Frank Gilbreth died in 1924, only days before he

was scheduled to lead an assembly of the World Congress

of Scientific Management in Prague. At this assembly,

Gilbreth was to be honored for his work on the elimination

of fatigue in industry through motion study. Lillian

Gilbreth ultimately attended the conference in his place.

The story of the Gilbreth family subsequent to Frank’s death is told in the book

Belles on Their Toes, which was adapted for film as well.

Lillian Gilbreth had trouble continuing the work of Gilbreth, Inc.—not for a lack of

expertise, but because many clients in the 1920s doubted that a woman could com-

mand the respect of factory foremen and workers. She started a motion study

school in her home in Montclair, New Jersey, believing that even if companies felt

she was incapable of implementing scientific management theories within the

workplace, they might be willing to send their engineers to her for training.

Gilbreth reached out to women, as well, designing blueprints for an efficiency

kitchenette that remains the standard for studio apartments even today. She was

awarded a contract from General Electric, and the publicity from her kitchenette

design caused enrollment in her motion study school to increase substantially.

Gilbreth later became a professor of management at Purdue University, and dur-

ing World War II she was recruited by the War Manpower Commission to help

with the rehabilitation of amputees. The American Society of Mechanical Engi-

neers awarded the Henry Laurence Gantt medal to Lillian Gilbreth, and posthu-

“We don’t have plush office space. For many years we weren’t treated as professionals, but this office is very

professional… We have to take everybody who

comes here. Unlike private agencies, we cannot pick and choose our clientele. You’ve got to love it to stay… I’ve been here 25 years.”

MARY VIRGINIA DOUGLASS Social Worker

53Organizational Theory and Management

mously to Frank Gilbreth, in 1944. This medal recognizes exemplary work in man-

agement and community service. In 1966 Lillian Gilbreth became the first woman

elected to the National Academy of Engineering.

The Weberian Bureaucracy Max Weber was a German sociologist and educator. His model of bureaucracy in-

cludes several components that mirror Taylor’s principles. According to Weber in

his influential book Economy and Society (1922, published in English translation in 1978), bureaucratic models possess stringent hierarchical components, whereby

authority is centralized. Bureaucracies are “jurisdictional” structures that afford

modest, if any, individual latitude (1922/1978). This notion of bureaucracy man-

dates uniform procedures, which are to be executed in an impersonal fashion. For

example, Weber advocated the use of written documents as a means of establish-

ing formal lines of communication, which ultimately reinforce a member’s powers

and responsibilities within the context of the organization’s hierarchical structure.

The viability of a bureaucracy is contingent upon technical expertise and appro-

priate training. While this notion of expertise is thought to be common within cor-

porate structures, Weber believed it was paramount that governmental

bureaucracies follow suit. In addition to technical expertise, bureaucracies func-

tion best when responsibilities are divided in accordance with competence. Weber

championed a bureaucratic model where hierarchy, technical expertise, and merit-

based appointments, in conjunction with uniform and impersonal procedures, pro-

duce greater organizational output. The Weberian bureaucracy is a machine-like

structure under which efficiency is paramount (1922/1978).

Luther Gulick, Lyndall Urwick, and Henri Fayol Building on the principles of Taylor and Weber, Luther Gulick and Lyndall Urwick

(1937) developed the notion of POSDCORB—a set of organizational processes that

offer executives a tangible understanding of administration. POSDCORB stands for

planning, organizing, staffing, directing, coordinating, reporting, and budgeting, all of

which are functional responsibilities of a chief executive. Gulick and Urwick’s major

goal was to develop the framework for designing and running the most effective or-

ganizations. Besides POSDCORB, other equally important principles of administration

are discussed by the French executive engineer Henri Fayol in his major work, Gen- eral and Industrial Management (1916, published in English translation in 1949).

Henri Fayol’s 14 Principles of Management 1. Division of work. Specialization allows for continuous improvement in

skills and methods, which leads to increased productivity.

2. Authority. The right to give orders and the expectation that they will be followed comes with responsibility.

54 CHAPTER 2

THE PAPER “STREAM” Artist: V. Kunnap; Poet: V. Suslov; “The Fighting Pencil” group, 1960. Look! This is the method of a conveyer belt, But it seems to resemble more of a red tape, And if we want to be more precise and less cautious, We can call the method what it is – just VICIOUS.

55Organizational Theory and Management

3. Discipline. Employees are expected to obey the rules. At the same time, the management should provide good leadership.

4. Unity of command. This is the “one master principle.” That is, a worker should answer to one superior and only one superior to avoid conflicting

lines of command.

5. Unity of direction. A single mind establishes a single plan that every- body in the organization has a role in. Unity of direction assumes a strate-

gic planning focus.

6. Subordination of individual interest to the common interest. When at work, employees must focus only on work-related activities, while

the management ensures that they stay focused on achievement of organi-

zational goals.

7. Remuneration of personnel. Payment is an important motivator and should be fair, although Fayol points out that there is no perfect system of

remuneration.

8. Centralization refers to the consolidation of management functions. De- cisions flow from top to bottom.

9. Scalar chain (or line of authority) is a formal chain of command running from top to bottom of the organization whereby superiors have authority

over and responsibility for a number of subordi-

nates, while the span of control suggests that a

manager should not have authority over and re-

sponsibility for too many subordinates, as this can

adversely impact the reach of a manager. Hierarchy

is necessary for unity of direction. However, lateral

communication is also important as long as superi-

ors know that it is taking place. Scalar chain should

not be overstretched or consist of too many levels.

10. Order. All materials and personnel have a proper place.

11. Equity means equality of treatment (not to be con- fused with identical treatment). In running a busi-

ness, a “combination of kindliness and justice” is needed. Treating personnel

“well” is paramount for achieving equity.

12. Stability of personnel tenure. Employees work better if they have some measure of job security and future career prospects. High employee

turnover will deleteriously affect the organization.

“Leaders work on the culture of the organization,

creating it or changing it.

Managers work within the

culture of the organization.”

EDGAR H. SCHEIN Author, Organizational

Culture and Leadership

56 CHAPTER 2

13. Initiative. Affording employees opportunities to take initiative is a means of building a strong organization.

14. Esprit de corps or unity of employed people. Management must fos- ter the morale, harmony, and cohesion among its employees. As Fayol sug-

gests, “Real talent is needed to coordinate effort, encourage keenness, use

each person’s abilities, and reward each one’s merit without arousing pos-

sible jealousies and disturbing harmonious relations” (1916/1949).

Fayol believed his principles of management were universal and applicable to any

type of organization. The most important among them are specialization, unity of

command, scalar chain, authority, and unity of direction (the last two are referred

to as “coordination” by managers).

Drawing from and building on Fayol’s theories, Urwick (1952) established “Ten

Managerial Priorities The principal responsibilities usually assigned to a manager are listed below. Re- view the list and add any responsibilities that you think are missing. Then, rate the five most important managerial responsibilities in descending order from 1 to 5. _____ Communicate to each worker what the organization expects

from him or her. _____ Interpret policies and procedures. _____ Plan the work. _____ Assign the work, providing instructions and explanations to employees. _____ Provide ongoing guidance to workers. _____ Maintain quality standards. _____ Observe and evaluate worker performance. _____ Correct difficulties as they arise. _____ Use criticism constructively to improve performance. _____ Keep records and do required paperwork. _____ Provide incentives. _____ Administer and maintain discipline. _____ Train and orient personnel. _____ Plan and carry out programs to stimulate employee improvement

and growth. _____ Communicate employees’ feelings up the line. _____ Communicate management’s feelings to employees. _____ Display a keen interest in the work. _____ Improve your own effectiveness.

EXERCISE 2.1

57Organizational Theory and Management

Principles,” which are now regarded as classical guidelines for organizational man-

agement.

1. Principle of the Objective: Organizations and each organizational sub- division must be guided by a central purpose.

2. Principle of Specialization: Limiting workers to a single responsibility engenders greater pro-

ductivity.

3. Principle of Coordination: The purpose of or- ganizations is to unify workers’ efforts.

4. Principle of Authority: In any organization, it is imperative that ultimate authority rest with some-

one. Further, there should be a clear command

chain that runs from supreme authority to each in-

dividual in the organization.

5. Principle of Responsibility: Managers must be held accountable for their subordinates.

6. Principle of Definition: All workers must be informed, in writing, as to the nature of their respective positions. This includes ensuring that work-

ers understand their duties and responsibilities, as well as their working re-

lationship with other positions, both superior and subordinate.

7. Principle of Correspondence: There should be continuity between re- sponsibility and authority. In other words, the more authority an individ-

ual is given, the more responsibility that individual has.

8. Span of Control: The number of subordinates a manager oversees should not exceed six.

9. Principle of Balance: Organizational subdivisions must be kept in balance.

10. Principle of Continuity: Organizations must recognize that “organiz- ing” is a never-ending process.

Fayol, Urwick, and Gulick’s theoretical principles were put into action through the

Committee on Administrative Management, also called the Brownlow Commis- sion, which was established by Congress in 1936. Under the direction of Gulick, the recommendations set forth in the Brownlow Commission Report (1937) sought to

apply classical management principles to public sector institutions. Highlighting

the need for reorganization within the executive branch of the federal government,

the report recommended an expansion of the White House staff. Additional exec-

utive officers would serve in an administrative capacity, providing the president

with necessary information so that decisions could be made more responsibly and

“A good plan is like a road map: it

shows the final destination and usually the best

way to get there.”

H. STANLEY JUDD Author; Communications

Consultant

58 CHAPTER 2

efficiently. Other Brownlow Commission recommendations included the consoli-

dation of government agencies, an alteration of the fiscal system, and civil service

reformation that called for greater emphasis on attracting the most capable indi-

viduals for administrative posts.

The Neo-Classical School Herbert Simon’s Skepticism Widely accepted classical management principles suggest that productivity and ef-

ficiency are a function of specialization, hierarchy, a limited span of control, and

unity of command and direction. According to Herbert Simon (1946), however,

these principles are merely “proverbs,” as they are not grounded in scientific re-

search. Simon believed that the classical management principles of administra-

tion should be tested empirically, embracing the quasi-scientific methods of

controlled experimentation and quantitative analysis. “It is necessary that the ob-

jectives of the administrative organization under study be defined in concrete

terms so that results, expressed in terms of these objectives, can be accurately

measured,” Simon wrote in his now-famous article for Public Administration Re- view, “The Proverbs of Administration.” He further noted that “sufficient experi-

mental control be exercised to make possible the isolation

of the particular effect under study from other disturbing

factors that might be operating on the organization at the

same time” (1946). Descriptive summaries and best prac-

tices research, according to Simon, were inadequate. In

particular, Simon argued, “What does it mean, for exam-

ple, to say: ‘The department is made up of three bureaus.

The first has a function of…, the second the function of…,

and the third a function of….’ What can be learned from

such a description about the workability of the organiza-

tional arrangement? Very little, indeed… Administrative

description suffers currently from superficiality, oversim-

plification, [and] lack of realism” (1946). Best practices introduce the notion of

subjective realism, whereby one operates under the assumption that an organiza-

tion is a model of success, regardless of whether there is a factual basis for such an

assumption.

Simon further advocated what became known as the fact-value dichotomy (1946), based on the premise that management science inquiry be concerned only with facts.

The employment of quasi-scientific methods would afford scholars and practition-

ers an enhanced understanding of public administration’s most productive and effi-

cient practices, and thus the so-called “proverbs” of administration could be replaced

with true principles. Simon’s quasi-scientific approach to the study of administra-

tion—and especially his fact-value dichotomy—engendered significant criticism.

“Anything that gives us new

knowledge gives us an opportunity

to be more rational.”

HERBERT A. SIMON Nobel Laureate; Artificial

Intelligence Expert

59Organizational Theory and Management

Public administration scholars like Robert Dahl (1989) argued that values were im-

portant to the study of public administration, while Dwight Waldo maintained that

value-free research undermines the inherent importance of morality and ethics.

Underscoring this point, Waldo wrote the following in American Political Science Review: “To maintain that efficiency is value-neutral and to propose at the same time that it be used as the central concept in a ‘science’ of administration is to com-

mit one’s self to nihilism, so long as the prescription is actually followed” (1952).

Earlier, he had criticized Simon’s fact-value dichotomy as

implausible, arguing that “administrative study, as any ‘so-

cial science,’ is concerned primarily with human beings, a

type of being characterized by thinking and valuing. Think-

ing implies creativeness, free will. Valuing implies moral-

ity” (Waldo, 1948).

Robert Merton’s Challenge Like Simon’s challenge of the classical principles, Robert

Merton challenged the Weberian model of bureaucracy

during this neo-classical period. As discussed in the con-

text of classical management, the Weberian model of bu-

reaucracy is hierarchical: power is centralized, individual

responsibilities are jurisdictional, and uniform procedures

are executed in the interest of efficiency. Weber champi-

oned rationalization and legal order. According to his model, control and power

are sources of stability, and they exist within the context of a dominant-subordi-

nate relationship. The inherent complexity of interpersonal relationships neces-

sitates a measure of coordination, and the Weberian model serves as a means of

that coordination.

Merton acknowledged the inherent tension between bureaucratic and democratic

principles, most notably because the Weberian model is predicated on secrecy.

Transparency and citizen participation are seemingly nonexistent within the context

of Weber’s model, as Merton points out in his book Social Theory and Social Struc- ture (1957, p. 102): “Bureaucracy is administration which almost avoids public dis- cussion of its techniques.” Merton considers this condition antithetical to democratic

governance. He further contends that the Weberian bureaucracy engenders organi-

zational rigidity, whereby an organization’s members are unable to adapt to chang-

ing conditions because patterns of behavior are programmed. While programmed

patterns of behavior foster greater administrative efficiency, consistency, and pre-

cision, there is a disadvantage: behavior that is programmed to the point of being

machine-like severely compromises an individual’s administrative capacity, perhaps

to the point where nothing can be accomplished. Merton refers to this as “trained in-

capacity” (1957). For example, police officers trained to faithfully cite all traffic vio-

lators are unlikely to be successful in enforcing more serious laws.

“The threat of people acting in their own enlightened and rational

self-interest strikes bureaucrats,

politicians and social workers

as ominous and dangerous.”

W.G. HILL

60 CHAPTER 2

Merton emphasizes the administrative implications of overconformity; that is, the

nature of Weber’s bureaucracy cultivates a culture of conformity to the point where

groupthink is omnipresent. Organizations, then, become overly conservative and re- sistant to change. Irving L. Janis (1972) describes “groupthink” as a specialized kind

of conformity. It occurs only in highly cohesive groups that operate in an environ-

ment where there is a feeling of security. The primary goal of this particular decision-

making group is to maintain its power and cohesiveness. Groupthink is characterized

by extreme conformity that gets in the way of any critical analysis. In the wake of Sep-

tember 11, 2001, the U.S. intelligence community was criticized in this regard, espe-

cially the Central Intelligence Administration (CIA), where secrecy and conformity are

believed to be pervasive. Further, the standardization of the Weberian model creates

a tendency toward depersonalized relationships, the implications of which are felt

most at the grassroots level. The routine and depersonalized

nature of street-level bureaucrats propagates the impression

that public administrators are altogether haughty and un-

caring, which reflects poorly on government in general.

A recurring theme throughout public administration is rec-

onciling the inherent conflict between administrative bu-

reaucracy and democratic governance. Bureaucracies are

synonymous with a managerial approach, which is predi-

cated upon a hierarchical structure, formalization, and uniform procedures that are

carried out rather impersonally. Representative bodies are political in nature, which

suggests a certain measure of transparency and accountability. This is in contrast

to the Weberian bureaucratic model, where a premium is placed upon secrecy. Fur-

thermore, expertise is the hallmark of a bureaucracy, which affords bureaucrats a

monopoly of power. Bureaucracies are closed systems that execute policies in a

technical rationalist manner—a manner antithetical to the nature of democratic in-

stitutions, which ideally emphasize openness and citizen participation.

Philip Selznick Philip Selznick’s discussion of informal organizations within the formal organiza-

tion departs from classical principles (1949). Selznick notes that the “classical” for-

mal organization is comprised of a certain number of managers and staff, each of

whom has specific duties and responsibilities, a chain of command, and some hi-

erarchical arrangement that is reinforced through formal rules and procedures.

However, according to Selznick, embedded within this “formal” organization are

informal organizations that can either buttress the formal organization’s goals and

functions, or in some cases serve as tools of resistance, impeding what the formal

organization is trying to accomplish (1949). In simplest terms, informal organiza-

tions are cliques that are grounded in personal relationships. These cliques can cut

across the formal organizational hierarchy—as vice presidents, managers, and rank-

and-file employees can form an informal organization.

“What you cannot enforce, do not

command.”

SOPHOCLES Greek playwright

(c. 496–406 B.C.)

61Organizational Theory and Management

Selznick also introduces the concept of organizational co-optation (1949). Co-

optation deals with bringing new or outside elements into an organization’s lead-

ership or decision-making structure. The purpose of doing so is to protect the or-

ganization from potential threats. A concrete example will help clarify the idea:

Suppose that a state’s department of transportation (DOT) has plans to construct

an additional highway to alleviate traffic congestion from the suburbs to one of its

major cities. Let us assume that this highway project will cut through several resi-

dential areas and some parkland throughout a number of municipalities. Even

though the new highway is thought to be largely positive in that it will help shorten

commute times for workers, its construction will displace a certain number of res-

idents and destroy park land. This is very likely to spark some controversy from

local residents and environmentalists. In an effort to minimize the controversy, the

DOT will co-opt local residents and environmentalists by giving them a formal voice

within the DOT’s decision-making and planning structures relating to the highway

project. This could be done by simply creating a temporary (or ad hoc) advisory

committee that provides input and expresses their concerns regarding the highway

project. By having a voice, certain concession from the DOT might be gained. For

example, environmental representatives on the ad hoc committee may influence

the DOT to pay for the planting of three trees for every one tree destroyed by the

highway’s construction; or, perhaps the DOT could partially fund the construction

of a new park altogether.

Chester Barnard Chester Barnard’s management insights stem from his experiences as president of

New Jersey Bell Telephone Company. Barnard differs from the classical theorists

in that he stresses the importance of monetary and nonmonetary work incentives

in an effort to secure greater worker cooperation. This, in turn, leads to greater or-

ganizational stability and improved worker performance. Classical theory assumes

that worker cooperation is a function of money and negative reinforcement (e.g.,

wage reductions, punishment, threats of punishment). In The Functions of the Ex- ecutive (1938), Barnard discusses eight types of worker incentives:

• Material inducements

• Personal nonmaterial opportunities

• Desirable physical conditions of work

• Ideal benefactions

• Habit and attitude conformity

• Opportunity for participation

• Associational attractiveness

• Condition of communion

62 CHAPTER 2

A material inducement refers to money. Personal nonmaterial opportunities are

synonymous with work-related power, prestige, and the opportunity to distinguish

oneself. Desirable physical conditions of work can be taken at face value: If an in-

dividual works in a factory, a safe working environment may be an important in-

centive. If an individual works in a white-collar setting, a comfortable office or

workspace might be important. The notion of ideal benefactions refers to the belief

that your work makes a difference or has a societal purpose. Pride in your work is

central to this notion. Habit and attitude conformity is Barnard’s way of suggesting

that organizational members need to embrace a core set of beliefs. The opportu-

nity for participation coincides with the feeling that one’s voice is being heard. And

while most workers would not expect to have significant influence in decision mak-

ing, knowing that their concerns and ideas do not completely fall upon deaf ears

can prove to be a cooperative incentive. Associational attractiveness and condition

of communion refer to the interpersonal dynamics at work in an organization.

Specifically, associational attractiveness assumes that creating a good work envi-

ronment is a function of everyone “getting along,” despite any personality or com-

-- WHY ARE YOU LURING MY PEOPLE AWAY FROM ME? Artist: V. Travin; Poet: V. Shkliarinsky; “The Fighting Pencil” group, 1973. The people choose to work in those places That have well-organized and clean workspaces.

63Organizational Theory and Management

patibility differences that could be a source of friction. Condition of communion

takes things a step further. Instead of merely getting along, an optimal work envi-

ronment can be created if workers are afforded the “opportunity for comradeship.”

Associational attractiveness and condition of communion is the difference between

getting along with your coworkers and actually liking them (Barnard 1938).

Barnard’s notions are a departure from classical management principles. Barnard

acknowledges that workers are motivated by more than money, as workers have

more complex needs and those needs should be addressed in the interest of fos-

tering cooperation and loyalty to the organization and its goals. It is important to

note that while Barnard injects more humanistic views into the broader manage-

ment literature, the organization remains of paramount importance (1938). People

are still thought to be cogs—albeit more complex cogs that can be motivated to co-

operate through nonmonetary incentives.

The Human Side of Organizational Management Mary Parker Follett Throughout history, friction between upper management and the proletariat has been

common. This friction, if not mitigated through proper leadership, can adversely in-

fluence the productivity and efficiency of an organization. Organizational leaders are

responsible not only for overseeing operations but also for delegating authority. Ac-

cording to Mary Parker Follett in “The Giving of Orders” (1926/2008), authority

must be exercised in an impersonal fashion if a leader is to avoid being perceived as

overly authoritative or obsequious, as both extremes are counterproductive. The no-

tion of depersonalized orders originated from scientific management. The deper-

sonalization of orders coincided with the notion that workers were like machines.

Follett sought a way to reduce management-worker conflict, recognizing that nega-

tive behavioral responses are more likely to emerge with superiors who embrace an

overly authoritative leadership style. More specifically, Follett wrote:

What happens to a man, in a man, when an order is given in a disagreeable

manner by foreman, head of department, his immediate superior at the

store, bank or factory? The man addressed feels that his self-respect has

been attacked, that one of his most inner sanctuaries is invaded. He loses

his temper or becomes sullen or is on the defensive… the wrong behavior

pattern has been set…. He is now set to act in a way which is not going to

benefit the enterprise in which he is engaged.

Follett stressed the importance of effective leadership. Organizational leaders must

be able to unify individuals, resolve conflicts, demand performance, and delegate

authority without dehumanizing an individual. Having written during the height of

the classical management movement, Follett interjected humanistic considerations

into classical principles.

Stumbling Upon Human Relations Theory Human relations theory emerged with the Hawthorne experiments, which were conducted for studying productivity in accordance with Taylor’s scientific man-

agement principles. For example, the Western Electric Company conducted an ex-

periment that examined the impact of light amplification differences on worker

productivity. Workers were divided into two groups: the treatment group and the

control group. The treatment group was exposed to changing light amplifications,

while the control group was exposed to a constant light am-

plification. Curiously, productivity increased in both

groups. Further examination by Elton Mayo and Fritz

Roethlisberger determined that social-psychological fac-

tors impact worker productivity. In other words, the work-

ers at Western Electric were more productive because of

the attention paid to them.

The Hawthorne experiments further demonstrated that,

under Taylorism, worker-management relationships fos-

tered behaviors that adversely affected organizational effi-

ciency and productivity. The solution was not to increase

wages, as Taylor would have prescribed. On the contrary, it was discovered that

workers’ needs extend beyond economic considerations. Organizations are social

institutions, and the classical management theories proved inadequate for satis-

factorily explaining organizational dynamics. Such theories failed to acknowledge

how complex human nature can be and how a changing environment can impact

workers’ performance.

Abraham Maslow and Douglas McGregor The unanticipated results of the Hawthorne experiments engendered a scholarly

movement that altered the dynamics of organizational theory. This, in turn, fostered

the ascendance of scholars such as Abraham Maslow (1943) and Douglas McGregor

(1960), whose theories of motivation were credible enough to rival the orthodoxy.

Maslow’s theories pertaining to human motivation have been recognized as a hall-

mark of the human relations movement. In his 1943 article “A Theory of Human

Motivation,” Maslow states that motivation is predicated upon five fundamental

needs, known as the needs hierarchy. At the lowest level of the hierarchy are the physiological needs necessary to sustain life (e.g., shelter, food, and clothing). Given

the fulfillment of physiological needs, safety needs emerge. Safety needs refer not

only to personal security but also to the desire for an “ordered” and “predictable

world.” Should one’s physiological and safety needs be fulfilled, the need for love is

next on the hierarchy. In this instance, love refers to acceptance, affection, and a

64 CHAPTER 2

“Nearly all men can stand

adversity, but if you want to test a man’s character, give him power.”

ABRAHAM LINCOLN 16th President of the

United States

65Organizational Theory and Management

sense of belonging. Fulfillment of an individual’s need for love and affection gives

way to esteem needs, which are divided into two subgroups. The first accounts for a

person’s need to be recognized as strong, confident, and autonomous, while the sec-

ond encompasses a desire for prestige and appreciation. Gratification of esteem

needs produces feelings of self-worth and efficacy. Representing the apex of the

needs hierarchy is the desire for self-actualization. Individual happiness, according

to Maslow, requires that an individual recognize his or her societal niche. As Maslow

wrote in “A Theory of Human Motivation” (1943), “A musician must make music, an

artist must paint, a poet write, if he is to be ultimately happy. What a man can be, he

must be. This need we may call self-actualization.” Proving to be the most complex

need, the fulfillment of one’s inherent potential epitomizes self-actualization.

Classical management theories assume that individuals are motivated primarily by

money. Maslow undermined this notion. He contended that individuals are moti-

vated by social and psychological needs, which served to reaffirm what was ob-

served during the Hawthorne experiments. Maslow’s needs hierarchy legitimized

the human relations school as an alternative to classical management. Several

human relations theorists were propelled to the forefront of the management arena,

most notably McGregor. Regarded as one of the most influential organizational hu-

manists, McGregor offered two conflicting management theories, each of which

Source: P. Diñoso (2006). School of Public Affairs and Administration, Rutgers University-Newark.

FIGURE 2.1 – CHANGES IN PUBLIC PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT

Federalist Period, 1789-1800

The Jeffersonians 1801-1829

Era of the Spoils 1829-1865

The Road to Reform 1865-1883

Informal Organizations

Perscnal -contacts & interactions & -associated groupings of people

Establishes certain habits, attitudes, customs, etc.

Creates conditions for Formal Organizations

Downsizing 1990s

Retrenchment 1980s

Psychological Needs

Safety Needs

Theory Y Carrot-Stick Approach

Civil Service Reform Early 20th Century

Formal Organizations

Necessary for informal organizations Wartime and

Peacetime Needs 1940sExample:

"Invisible Government:"

Reform Accountability, slow Growth in Govt 1970s Equity & Justice 1950s

1960s

Theory X Motivation Seff-Fulfillment

Ego Needs

Social Needs

makes specific assumptions regarding human nature. They are Theories X and Y. Theory X assumes that individuals dislike work, and they avoid it whenever possi- ble. This makes intense supervision necessary, because workers typically shun re-

sponsibility and are frequently incapable of solving problems. Under Theory X, workers are motivated by economic factors, threats, and punishment. This theory

represents a classical Weberian closed model, which is

reminiscent of a quasi-military structure.

Theory Y is an open model that assumes individuals enjoy work and they embrace responsibility. Most people are ca-

pable of self-direction and prefer not to be micromanaged.

Theory Y further assumes that individuals possess the in- genuity to solve complex problems through creative

means. According to this theory, management should af-

ford its workers the latitude to achieve individual goals

through self-directed efforts. This will help to achieve or-

ganizational goals. McGregor embraced Theory Y, as it of- fers more realistic assumptions regarding human nature and human motivation.

Theory X places a premium upon “external controls,” while Theory Y relies heav- ily upon “self-direction.” In other words, the difference between Theories X and Y is “the difference between treating people like children and treating them as mature

adults” (McGregor 1960). Theory X management principles hinder individual ca- pabilities and discourage personal responsibility through excessive control and

worker manipulation. As organizations become more complex, managing becomes

more complicated. As such, Theory X assumptions are less helpful, and Theory Y styles of management that recognize delegation of authority, job enlargement, and

participation must receiver greater attention.

Rensis Likert and Chris Argyris Rensis Likert (1961) developed an organizational model consisting of participative

work groups. These work groups were envisioned as important sources of individuals’

need satisfaction. Central to Likert’s model is the creation of “supportive relation-

ships,” which better allow managers to facilitate the productivity of such groups. Lik-

ert also constructed a typology of organizational leadership, distinguishing among

four types of management: (1) exploitative authoritative, (2) benevolent authoritative,

(3) participative consultative, and (4) participative management systems. Systems

three and four are ideal from both productivity and human relations standpoints.

Chris Argyris (1957) emphasized the importance of the human condition within or-

ganized settings. He viewed the individual and the formal organization as two ele-

ments that are often in conflict, ultimately seeking separate goals. Argyris argued

that the formal organization—with its chain of command, span of control, and task

specialization—can create individual feelings of failure and frustration. Employees

may feel deprived of their potential for growth and self-fulfillment. In place of in-

66 CHAPTER 2

“Never tell people how to do things. Tell them what to do and they will

surprise you with their ingenuity.”

GEORGE S. PATTON U.S. Army General,

1944

67Organizational Theory and Management

X-Y Theory Questionnaire Score the statements (5 = always, 4 = mostly, 3 = often, 2 = occasionally, 1 = rarely, 0 = never) to indicate whether your current work situation is X or Y: 1. My boss asks me politely to do things, gives me reasons why, and invites

my suggestions. 2. I am encouraged to learn skills outside of my immediate area of responsibility. 3. I am left to work without interference from my boss, but help is available

if I want it. 4. I am given credit and praise when I do good work or put in extra effort. 5. People leaving the company are given exit interviews to hear their views

on the organization. 6. I am incentivized to work hard and well. 7. If I want extra responsibility, my boss will find a way to give it to me. 8. If I want extra training, my boss will help me find how to get it or will arrange it. 9. I call my boss and my boss’s boss by their first names. 10. My boss is available for me to discuss my concerns or worries or suggestions. 11. I know what the company’s aims and targets are. 12. I am told how the company is performing on a regular basis. 13. I am given an opportunity to solve problems connected with my work. 14. My boss tells me what is happening in the organization. 15. I have regular meetings with my boss to discuss how I can improve

and develop. Total score [___]

60–75 = strongly Y-theory management (effective short- and long-term) 45–59 = generally Y-theory management 16–44 = generally X-theory management 0–15 = strongly X-theory management (autocratic; may be effective

short-term, poor long-term) Score the statements (5 = always, 4 = mostly, 3 = often, 2 = occasionally, 1 = rarely, 0 = never) to indicate whether the person prefers being managed by X or Y style: 1. I like to be involved and consulted by my boss about how I can best do my job. 2. I want to learn skills outside of my immediate area of responsibility. 3. I like to work without interference from my boss, but be able to ask for

help if I need it. 4. I work best and most productively without pressure from my boss or the

threat of losing my job. 5. When I leave the company, I would like an exit interview to give my views

on the organization. 6. I like to be incentivized and praised for working hard and well.

(continued)

EXERCISE 2.2

68 CHAPTER 2

centives to produce, there are often pressures to be mediocre. Otherwise intelligent

and enthusiastic new employees quickly receive messages not to overwork or out-

perform their superiors. Most important, bureaucrats do not “rock the boat.” This at-

titude is often reinforced by the knowledge that underperformers are seldom fired,

a consequence of Weberian-like bureaucratic mechanisms. Argyris suggests that a

worker’s participation in decisions affecting his or her work gives that individual

greater job satisfaction, which, in turn, will have a positive impact on productivity.

One other unanticipated consequence of bureaucracy is the creation of what is known

as the “organization man or woman.” The organization man is one who has bartered

his or her conscience for security. These individuals are survivors in that they are prod-

ucts of the necessity “to go along to get along,” which means compromising and com-

plying in the interest of protecting one’s position and work. They are cooperative, adept

at embracing colleagues, effective in establishing informal links within an organization,

and protective of their subordinates. In short, they are successful “bureaucrats.”

Others who may not be suited to bureaucracy include the “technical expert.” The or-

ganizational roles of technical experts are unique; they share a special commitment

to their skills and a primary identification with their professional peers. Their pro-

fessional values may conflict with bureaucratic claims for organizational loyalty and

adaptability. As a result, they often find it difficult to play the roles required to com-

(continued)

7. I want to increase my responsibility. 8. I want to be trained to do new things. 9. I prefer to be friendly with my boss and the management. 10. I want to be able to discuss my concerns, worries, or suggestions with

my boss or another manager. 11. I like to know what the company’s aims and targets are. 12. I like to be told how the company is performing on a regular basis. 13. I like to be given opportunities to solve problems connected with my work. 14. I like to be told by my boss what is happening in the organization. 15. I like to have regular meetings with my boss to discuss how I can improve

and develop. Total score [___]

60–75 = strongly prefers Y-theory management 45–59 = generally prefers Y-theory management 16–44 = generally prefers X-theory management 0–15 = strongly prefers X-theory management

EXERCISE 2.2

69Organizational Theory and Management

pete for organizational success and power. These technical experts differ from so-

called “locals” who identify with and stress loyalty to the bureaucracy.

Human relations theorists were critical of classical management approaches, par-

ticularly Taylorism, because they ignored the social and emotional impacts these

theories exerted on workers. Classical management underestimated the inherent

complexity of human nature; consequently, workers were not treated as human be-

ings. Rather, they were thought to be interchangeable cogs working within the

framework of a hierarchically rigid, machine-like organizational structure.

Structural Theory Structural theory assumes that organizations are rational in that they function to

accomplish specific goals and objectives. Further, for every organization there is

believed to be a “best structure,” and organizational dysfunction can be corrected

through structural changes. Structural theory is, by and large, grounded in classi-

cal principles of efficiency, effectiveness, and productivity. In their research on elec-

tronics firms in the United Kingdom, Tom Burns and G.M. Stalker (1961) describe

two disparate but complementary organizational management systems: mecha- nistic and organic systems. Mechanistic systems are Weberian in nature, and they are ideally suited for stable environments. In mechanistic systems, worker roles

and responsibilities are clearly defined, communication is formal and top-down,

the organizational structure is hierarchical, and the decision-making processes are

authoritative. Emphasis is placed on being able to efficiently repeat procedures, an

example of which is mass production or mass service delivery. Organic systems are

better suited for environments where instability and change are frequent. Worker

roles and responsibilities are less clearly defined and more flexible. Communication

is informal, and workers of different ranks exchange ideas through consultative

networks. The organizational structure is horizontal, and decisions are made on

the basis of knowledge and expertise as opposed to hierarchical position. Organic

systems emphasize adaptability and innovation over efficient repetition, example

of which may include IT systems. Burns and Stalker (1961) note that mechanistic

and organic systems are not mutually exclusive. In other words, the best organiza-

tions try to incorporate the best of both systems.

Henry Mintzberg (1979) identifies five fundamental parts of an organization. They in-

clude: (1) the operating core, (2) the strategic apex, (3) the middle line, (4) the tech-

nostructure, and (5) the support staff. The operating core represents the frontline

workers who are responsible for an organization’s production of goods or services.

The strategic apex—the organization’s upper-level or executive leadership—includes

CONTEMPORARY ORGANIZATIONAL THEORIES

70 CHAPTER 2

the chief executive officer, board of directors, and related executive level staff. Pri-

marily responsible for ensuring that the organization runs smoothly and in accor-

dance with a broader organizational strategy, the strategic apex is further charged

with managing outside stakeholder relationships that are critical to the organization’s

work. The third fundamental part of an organization, the middle line, represents mid-

dle management. These workers are charged with supervising the operating core

while simultaneously supporting and taking direction from the strategic apex. The

middle line is also responsible for managing relations with the technostructure and

support staff.

The technostructure and support staff are removed from the hierarchical structure

that encompasses the operating core, the strategic apex, and the middle line. The

technostructure represents analysts responsible for training, standardizing work

procedures, and general planning. This typically would include engineers, trainers,

accountants, and budget analysts. Finally, support staff ranges from public rela-

tions, legal aid, and personnel staff to mailroom, custodial, and foodservice work-

– TELL US EXACTLY IN WHAT WAY WE LIMIT YOUR INITIATIVE! Artist: E. Piho; Pikker (Estonia), the 1970s.

71Organizational Theory and Management

Source: Based on Tom Burns and G.M. Stalker, The Management of Innovation. Value-Based Management.net. www.valuebasedmanagement.net/.

Mechanistic Organization Form/ Management System

Organic Organization Form/ Management System

Conditions Stable Changing

Distribution of tasks

Specialized differentiation of functional tasks into which the problems and tasks facing a concern as a whole are broken down

Contributive nature of special knowl- edge and experience to the common task of the concern

Nature of individual task

The abstract nature of each individual task, which is pursued with techniques and purposes more or less distinct from those of the concern as a whole: i.e., the functionaries tend to pursue the technical improvements of means, rather than the accomplishment of the ends of the concern

The “realistic” nature of the individual task, which is seen as set by the total situation of the concern

Who (re)defines tasks

The reconciliation, for each level in the hierarchy, of these distinct perform- ances by the immediate superiors, who are also, in turn, responsible for seeing that each is relevant in his own special part of the main task

The adjustment and continual redefin- ition of individual tasks through inter- action with others

Task scope The precise definition of rights and obligations and technical methods at- tached to each functional role

The shedding of “responsibility” as a limited field of rights, obligations and methods (problems may not be posted upwards, downwards or sideways as being someone else’s responsibility)

How is task conformance ensured

The translation of rights and obliga- tions and methods into the responsibil- ities of a functional position

The spread of commitment to the con- cern beyond any technical definition

Structure of control, authority and communication

Hierarchic, Contractual Network, Presumed Community of Interest

Locating of knowledge

Reinforcement of the hierarchic struc- ture by the location of knowledge of ac- tualities exclusively at the top of the hierarchy, where the final reconcilia- tion of distinct tasks and assessment of relevance is made

Omniscience no longer imputed to the head of the concern; knowledge about the technical or commercial nature of the here and now may be located any- where in the network

Communication between members of concern

Vertical; i.e., between superior and subordinate

Lateral; i.e., between people of differ- ent rank, resembling consultation rather than command

Governance for operations and working behavior

Instructions and decisions issued by superiors

Information and advice rather than in- structions and decisions

Values Insistence on loyalty to the concern and obedience to superiors as a condi- tion of membership

Commitment to the concern’s task and to the “technological ethos” of material progress and expansion is more highly valued than loyalty and obedience

Prestige

Greater importance and prestige at- taching to internal (local) than to gen- eral (cosmopolitan) knowledge, experience, and skill

Importance and prestige attach to af- filiations and expertise valid in the in- dustrial and technical and commercial milieus external to the firm

TABLE 2.1 – MECHANISTIC VS. ORGANIC MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

72 CHAPTER 2

ers. When comparing technostructure jobs with support staff jobs, the distinction

we draw is that while members of the technostructure could, more than likely, do

the work of the support staff, the support staff would probably require some spe-

cialized training to do the work of the technostructure. Consistent with Taylor’s

principles of scientific management, organizations placed greater emphasis on stan-

dardization following World War II, and thus the importance of the technostructure

grew. The advent and growth of operations research and strategic planning further

enhanced the importance of the technostructure.

Systems Theory Systems theory is based on the premise that the organization is comprised of sev-

eral interconnected parts, each of which is designed to achieve broader organiza-

tional goals and objectives. Systems theory looks at the organization in terms of

inputs, processes, outputs, and feedback mechanisms. Inputs refer to an organiza-

tion’s resources, and processes refer to what an organization does with its resources,

while outputs are the goods or services that an organization produces. Feedback

mechanisms are the means by which an organization collects and analyzes data re-

garding the impacts of its outputs. Inputs feed into processes, which feed into out-

puts. Outputs generate feedback, which cycle around and feed into the

organization’s inputs. Systems theory is cyclical, and it assumes that organizations

are ever changing in order to respond effectively to environmental and intra-orga-

nizational changes. In other words, systems theorists argue that organizations must

be able to adapt to changing conditions.

W. Edwards Deming and Japanese Management Following World War II, General Douglas MacArthur, commander of the U.S.

forces occupying Japan, sought to do all he could to revive the Japanese economy

as quickly as possible. He saw that Japan, as an island economy, needed to trade

with other nations rather than rely upon its own natural resources. However, he

also saw that Japan’s poor reputation for quality would seriously hurt its trade ef-

forts. MacArthur asked the U.S. government to assign someone to teach better qual-

ity control methods to Japanese industrial leaders. American quality management

expert Dr. W. Edwards Deming, a statistician for the U.S. government, was sent

overseas to train Japanese managers in continued process improvement. Deming

served in this function from 1948 to 1950, and he performed his job so successfully

that he was asked repeatedly to train more engineers and scientists in statistical

methods. In 1951, the Japanese government honored his services by establishing the

Deming prize. Dr. Deming’s philosophy, also known as the Deming wheel, says that

everyone should plan, collect data, analyze, construct the work, and keep the circle

rotating to maintain quality properly in a company.

73Organizational Theory and Management

The “Quality Circle” Deming (1986) introduced the Japanese to the concept of statistical quality control

(SQC), which was immediately adopted by the union of Japanese scientists and en-

gineers (JUSE) as the cornerstone of their improvement program. Then, in 1952,

at a conference in Syracuse, New York, Dr. Deming introduced the founder of JUSE,

-- WHY ISN’T YOUR NEW EMPLOYEE SLEEPING? – HE’S A CLIMBER. Artist: O. Kornev; Krokodil [Crocodile] satirical magazine, 1970s.

74 CHAPTER 2

Mr. Koyanagi, to another American expert on quality control, Dr. Joseph Juran.

(2004) Over the next few years, Juran visited Japan several times, teaching the

Japanese his approach to quality improvement, an approach that stressed partici-

pative decision making (2004). Juran’s ideas served as the basis for the so-called

“quality circles” program that followed several years later. Dr. Juran lectured and

preached what is known as total quality control, which says that quality begins in

the design stage and ends after satisfactory services are provided to the customer.

An organization’s success depends, therefore, on “total quality,” not simply manu-

facturing quality (Juran 2004).

In order for an agency or organization to increase its effectiveness and productiv-

ity, careful attention must be paid to the nature and quality of employee commit-

ment and participation. Thus, the concept of the “quality circle” (or QC) emerged

as a management concept. A quality circle is a small group of employees who per-

form similar tasks and meet regularly and voluntarily to solve work-related prob-

lems. The overriding purpose of these meetings is to improve the quality of an

organization’s services or products by systematically involving employees in the de-

FIGURE 2.2 – A COLLEGE THROUGH MINZBERG’S LENS

Strategic Apex

President Provost and Deans

Faculty Senate

Technostructure

IT Department Accountants Budgeteers

Legal

Middle Line

Department Chairs Faculty Committees

Support Staff

HR Registrar Bursar

Alumni Relations/PR Buildinings and

Grounds MaiIroom

Operating Core

Adjuncts Professors Teaching Assistants

75Organizational Theory and Management

cision-making process. The underlying concept is that the employee is an expert:

the person closest to the work knows the problems best and can be trained to solve

them. Employees share with management the commitment to identifying and solv-

ing problems related to coordination and productivity. Decisions are made by con-

sensus, with broad participation and a long-term view. For some organizations,

QCs formalize informal or sporadic efforts already under way. They provide struc-

ture, continuity, and recognition to ad hoc attempts at employee involvement. Their

appeal and potential is in offering a theory and set of practices for effecting orga-

nizational change.

QCs are not gripe sessions, social hours, alternatives to unions, or substitutes for reg-

ular staff meetings. They do not focus on union or personnel issues such as wages,

benefits, and grievances. Discussion of specific personalities is usually forbidden, al-

though some QC programs allow it if the purpose is to solve a problem and not sim-

ply to vent. QCs address problems related to work processes: expediting the work

flow (processing of cases, forms, requests, complaints, and the like); bureaucratic

rigidity (e.g., unrealistic, time-consuming procedures); organizing physical facilities

and resources more efficiently; overstaffing/understaffing; lateness and absenteeism;

communication bottlenecks among work units/levels; clarifying organizational goals,

objectives, and methods; reducing costs in specific program areas; reducing waste;

and improving on-the-job safety. As the most widely used method of participatory

management, QCs have been instituted under various names, among them:

• Quality teams

• Employee teams

• Task force management

• Operations improvement

• Performance circles

• Z teams

• Employee participation groups

• Participative decision making

Potential Benefits of QC Programs Performance improves for the following reasons: Quality of information improves

because employees are typically closer to the problems than management. When

employees solve their own work-related problems, management has access to a dif-

ferent set of information and a wider range of problems can be addressed. Usually

a small percentage of the people in an organization are responsible for the vast ma-

jority of the problem solving. With QCs, however, problems become the responsi-

bility of the entire organization. Quality of decisions improves, time is better spent,

76 CHAPTER 2

and more and better information about a wider range of problems that everyone

works to solve gives management more time to manage.

Employees are more committed to decisions that they make for themselves. Most or-

ganizations have to spend too much time “selling” their decisions to resistant em-

ployees. But if employees see the connection between their own performance and the

organization’s success, they feel invested in the outcome and commit more of them-

selves to it. Attitudes change and the quality of services and products improves as

emphasis shifts away from performance. Quality improvement is the raison d’être for

QCs. Organizational tensions decrease when employees gain a stronger voice in de-

termining their work environment. Likewise, when the burden of problem solving

becomes shared, managers’ attitudes change. A “win-win” orientation develops. Both

sides benefit from an atmosphere of cooperation, mutual interest, and trust.

Through QCs, an organizational mission develops—a genuine mission, not just a

paper mandate. Employees develop a clear sense of purpose in terms of their specific

jobs. High performance standards emerge; communication increases and actually

FIGURE 2.3 – THE DEMING WHEEL

4. ACTION Make changes

1. PLAN

3. CHECK Analyze data collected, deliberate, decide on course of action

2. DO Collect data, measure performance

77Organizational Theory and Management

improves as problems arise; and more people are consulted to create ongoing

consensus and ensure that the best ideas are implemented. Career develop-

ment becomes a dynamic process by expanding skills.

QCs promote personal growth by enlarging the

bounds of routine work. They provide job enrich-

ment. These benefits are particularly important in or-

ganizations with limited avenues of vertical mobility.

Pride in performance increases, and employees gain

a sense of autonomy: they realize that they can influ-

ence how the job is done and that management will

help. Any dissatisfaction with the status quo moti-

vates them toward further improvement. At the same

time, managers feel better about their role by spend-

ing less time “managing by exception”—that is, emphasizing the negative side

of employees’ performance.

Organizational Economic Theory Organizational economic theory is primarily concerned with ensuring that

managers and rank-and-file employees are working for the betterment of the

organization. In other words, economic theory strives to ensure that worker

interests coincide with the organization’s interests, which are embodied in the

organization’s “owner.” This idea is best captured in what is known as princi- pal-agent theory. Principal-agent theory deals with the inherent challenges of motivating workers and controlling cooperative action. It holds that an orga-

nization’s principals—owners, stockholders, CEOs, government agency heads—

desire some organizational achievement. From a private sector perspective,

this could include greater profits and market share or higher stock prices. From

a public sector perspective, this could include more efficient and effective serv-

ice delivery or improved citizen satisfaction. Regardless of what the principals

hope to achieve, they need help from “agents.” Agents usually represent an or-

ganization’s employees, but they also include external players that provide serv-

ices to the organization but are not a part of the formal structure.

A fundamental problem is that both principals and agents are motivated by self-

interest. Principals are concerned about themselves in the context of how the or-

ganization is performing, while agents are simply concerned about themselves.

Another problem for principals is that they seldom know whether agents are

behaving in a way that benefits the organization. In short, principals are at a

significant disadvantage in terms of information. Principal-agent theory at-

tempts to reconcile the inherent conflict between principal and agent interests,

while at the same time addressing the information disadvantage of principals.

This is accomplished by (1) monetarily compensating agents in a manner that

“The disease which inflicts

bureaucracy and what they usually

die from is routine.”

JOHN STUART MILL Nineteenth-century English Philosopher

78 CHAPTER 2

influences the interests of the agents to converge with interests of the principals, and (2)

implementing oversight mechanisms that make sure agents are performing as expected.

Organizational Culture What is organizational culture? Does it refer to the customs and rituals that go on

within an organization? Does it refer to behavioral norms or the way people inter-

act with one another? Can organizational culture be defined as the values that un-

derpin how an organization operates? Or, as Joanne Martin (2002) suggests, does

it refer to “how things are done” within any organization? In short, organizational

culture is all of these things and much more. Edgar Schein (1993) believes that or-

ganizational culture refers to shared notions that bind together members of an or-

ganization, some of which include:

• Behavioral regularities when people interact: This could include

greeting a coworker with a “good morning” or asking about

someone’s family or weekend.

• Group norms and values.

• A guiding mission and formal rules that dictate what is and is not

appropriate behavior.

• Climate and environment. This typically refers to an organization’s

physical layout.

• Shared skills and modes of thinking.

An organization’s physical layout can tell someone a great deal about an organization’s

culture. New York City mayor and media mogul Michael Bloomberg believes that the

layout of an organization’s workspace significantly impacts worker morale and per-

formance. As former chief executive of Bloomberg, L.P., Mayor Bloomberg does not

believe in private, individual offices or closed-in cubicles; rather, he champions an open

layout, whereby rank-and-file and upper-level employees are given small, open work-

spaces within a large chamber. Dubbed the “bullpen,” Bloomberg’s open layout is rem-

iniscent of the trading floor of the New York Stock Exchange. From an organizational

culture standpoint, what does this convey? Most notably, it conveys the importance of

transparency and accountability. Furthermore, the open layout is conducive to em-

ployee interaction. City Hall employees are not forced to schedule time with the mayor

to ask his opinion or gain approval for something. All they need to do is stop by his

desk, which is in the middle of the bullpen, and talk to him face to face. When there is

a need for privacy, the mayor and his associates can retreat to conference rooms that

are surrounded by glass. Mayor Bloomberg does not believe in executive dining halls

or private parking spaces, as these types of things serve only to create class culture,

which can have a negative impact on employee morale (Bloomberg 1997, 2001).

79Organizational Theory and Management

The importance of organizational culture was thrust center stage following the ter-

rorist attacks on New York City’s Twin Towers on September 11, 2001. Specifically,

the CIA and FBI were highly criticized for their failure to cooperate with one another

regarding domestic terrorism. Any effort to get the CIA and FBI to work together goes

beyond mere edicts. The organizational cultures of the CIA and FBI differ fundamen-

tally, and this cultural rift makes collaboration and communication inherently difficult.

From an outsider’s perspective, it would appear that an ongoing clash exists between

the CIA and FBI—a clash that manifests itself in petty turf battles that are simply a

part of interagency competition. This, according to experts, would be oversimplifying

the problem, as members of the CIA and FBI view the world very differently.

The FBI’s mission is law enforcement, and success is measured in terms of the num-

ber of arrests, prosecutions, and convictions made. FBI agents tend to process infor-

mation in a linear fashion; that is, they have tunnel vision, only concerning

themselves with facts that are relevant to a specific case. Like all domestic law en-

forcement agencies, the FBI is guided by strict rules with regard to information gath-

ering (refer to the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution), while the CIA is not

bound by the same legal standards given its operations abroad. The FBI is case driven,

whereby emphasis is placed on gathering facts that lead to a suspect. In contrast, the

CIA is concerned not with facts of specific cases but rather with the relationship or

connection between facts and cases. This ideally enables the CIA to predict what

might happen in the future. The FBI’s world is real and tangible, while the CIA’s world

is hypothetical and predictive. In other words, FBI agents are not trained to predict

where the next bank robbery will take place; they are trained to react to the situation

once it occurs. In contrast, CIA agents are trained to be proactive, not reactive.

National Performance Review Given the public pressure on government organizations to perform more effectively,

Osborne and Gaebler’s Reinventing Government (1992) provides recommendations

Organization Effectiveness Simulator (Simulation) Test your understanding of organizational theory through a series of exercises pro- vided on the Booz & Company website. Identify the organizational flash points and create a strategy to address them. Using this simulator, test your strategy and eval- uate the results. After you have completed this exercise, analyze the process for di- agnosing the flash points, for creating the strategy, and for assessing the results. Would you have done anything differently?

Booz & Company, Inc., “Organization Effectiveness Simulator” www.simulator-orgeffectiveness.com/booz

EXERCISE 2.3

80 CHAPTER 2

for improvements. The “reinventing government” movement is a synthesis of varying

approaches. Specifically, Osborne and Gaebler (1992) argue that government should:

• Act as a catalyst

• Empower rather than simply serve

• Be competitive

• Be mission-driven as opposed to rule-driven

• Be results-oriented

• Be customer-driven

• Be enterprising

• Anticipate social problems

• Be decentralized

• Be market-oriented

As much as reinventing government has become part of the public management

lexicon, it is far from a new invention. For instance, the ideas of decentralization

and competition were taken from the public-choice school of thought (in the mid-

1960s). The reinventing government school of thought is more pro-government

than public choice, whose supporters tended to view government as inherently

problematic. Reinventing government calls for more discretion for public admin-

istrators, praise for entrepreneurial government, and support for preventive rather

than reactive government.

Central to reinventing government is competition. Competition, however, is not

limited to private sector organizations bidding to do the work of government or-

ganizations. Rather, the idea calls for competition within the public sector itself—

public organizations competing with other public organizations. Osborne and

Gaebler advocate competition as a means for improving government performance.

They further point out the strengths and weaknesses not only of the public sector

but also of the private and nonprofit sectors. The public sector, they argue, is bet-

ter suited toward policy management, regulation, enforcement of regulations, pre-

vention of discrimination and exploitation, and promoting social cohesion. The

private sector is better suited for generating profit and fostering self-sufficiency.

The nonprofit sector (which generates no profit and relies on huge numbers of vol-

unteers) is ideal for promoting social welfare, individual responsibility, commu-

nity, and commitment to society’s general welfare.

81Organizational Theory and Management

Argyris, C. 1957. Personality and Organization. New York: Harper.

Barnard, C.I. 1938. The Functions of the Executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Bloomberg, M.R. 1997, 2001. Bloomberg by Bloomberg. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Brownlow Commission. 1937. Report of the President’s Committee on Administra- tive Management (The Brownlow Report). U.S. Government Printing Office.

Dahl, R. 1989. Democracy and Its Critics. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Deming, W.E. 1986. Out of the Crisis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Center for Advanced Engineering Study.

Fayol, H. 1916. General and Industrial Management. Trans. C. Storrs. London: Pitman Publishing, 1949.

Follett, M.P. 1926/2008. “The Giving of Orders.” In Classics of Public Adminis- tration, ed. A.C. Hyde, J.M. Shafritz, and S.J. Parkes. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.

Brownlow Commission Report

Bureaucracy

Co-optation

Fact-value dichotomy

Groupthink

Hawthorne experiments

Informal organizations

Mechanistic systems

Needs hierarchy

Organic systems

Organizational culture

POSDCORB

Principal-agent theory

Proverbs of administration

Quality Circles (QCs)

Reinventing government

Scalar chain

Scientific management

Span of control

Systems theory

Theory X

Theory Y

Total Quality

Unity of command

Unity of direction

KEY TERMS

REFERENCES

82 CHAPTER 2

Gulick, L.H., and L. Urwick, eds. 1937. Papers on the Science of Administration. New York: Institute for Public Administration. See especially: “Notes on the

Theory of Organization,” pp. 1–46.

Janis, I.L. 1972. Victims of Groupthink: A Psychological Study of Foreign-Policy Decisions and Fiascoes. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Juran, J.M. 2004. Architect of Quality. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Likert, R. 1961. New Patterns of Management. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Martin, J. 2002. “Organizational Culture: Pieces of the Puzzle.” In Classics of Organizational Theory, ed. J.M. Shafritz, J.S. Ott, and Yong Suk Jang, 6th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.

Maslow, A.H. 1943. “A Theory of Human Motivation.” Psychology Review 50: 370–96.

McGregor, D. 1960. The Human Side of Enterprise. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Merton, R. 1957. Social Theory and Social Structure. New York: Free Press.

Minzberg, H. 1979. The Structuring of Organizations: A Synthesis of the Research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Osborne, D., and T. Gaebler. 1992. Reinventing Government: How the Entrepre- neurial Spirit Is Transforming the Public Sector. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Schein, E.H. 1993. Organizational Culture and Leadership, 2d ed. San Fran- cisco: Jossey-Bass.

Selzick, P. 1949. TVA and the Grass Roots: A Study in the Sociology of Formal Organizations. Berkley, CA: University of California Press.

Simon, H.A. 1946. “The Proverbs of Administration.” Public Administration Review 6, no. 1: 53–67.

———. 1947/1997. Administrative Behavior. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Smith, A. 1776/2003. The Wealth of Nations. New York: Bantam.

Taylor, F. 1911. The Principles of Scientific Management. New York: W.W. Norton.

Urwick, L.F. 1952. Notes on the Theory of Organization. New York: American Management Association.

Waldo, D. 1948. The Administrative State: A Study of the Political Theory of American Public Administration. New York: The Ronald Press Co.

83Organizational Theory and Management

———. 1952. “Development of Theory of Democratic Administration.” American Political Science Review 46 (March): 97.

Weber, M. 1978/1922. Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociol- ogy. Trans. and ed. Guenther Roth and Claus Wittich. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Etzioni, A. 1964. Modern Organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Gilbreth, F. and L.M. Gilbreth. 1919. Fatigue Study: The Elimination of Human- ity’s Greatest Unnecessary Waste; A First Step in Motion Study, 2d ed. New York: MacMillan.

Kanigel, R. 1997. The One Best Way: Frederick Winslow Taylor and the Enigma of Efficiency. New York: Viking.

Rainey, H. 2003. Understanding and Managing Public Organizations, 3d ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Robbins, S.P. 2005. Essentials of Organizational Behavior, 8th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall.

Waldo, D. 1961. “Organization Theory: An Elephantine Problem.” Public Admin- istration Review 21, no. 4: 210–25.

Weber, M. 1958. From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology. New York: Oxford University Press.

Carnegie Mellon School of Computer Science, “A Tribute to Herbert Simon,”

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/simon/index.html

The Department of Economics of the New School for Social Research, “Max

Weber, 1864–1920,” The History of Economic Thought Website

http://homepage.newschool.edu/het//profiles/weber.htm

Huitt, W. 2007. “Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs.” Educational Psychology

Interactive Website. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University, 2007

www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/regsys/maslow.html

SUPPLEMENTARY READINGS

ELECTRONIC RESOURCES

Managing Human Resources

CHAPTER 3

Chapter 3 examines the management of an organization’s

most important resource—its people. Upon reading this

chapter, students will be able to discuss the major concepts

associated with human resource management. Productive

human resource management and the cultivation of a high-

quality and diverse workforce are discussed, with emphasis on

the importance of recruiting the best and brightest workers

and devising employee development strategies. The chapter

then transitions into a discussion of employee motivation

theories, touching on employee assessment and counseling

techniques. To conclude, strategies for creating a quality work

environment are addressed.

84 CHAPTER 3

85Managing Human Resources

“Management is the science of which organizations are but experiments.”

JOHN CONSTABLE English Romantic Painter

(1776-1837)

Postal Workers Mural

“Management is the science of which organizations are but experiments.”

JOHN CONSTABLE English Romantic Painter

(1776-1837)

Postal Workers Mural

“No duty the Executive had to perform was so trying as to put the right man

in the right place.”

THOMAS JEFFERSON Third President of the United States

(1743–1846)

– I NEED THOSE WHO FIT THIS MEASURE… Arti st: Y. Cherepanov; Krokodil [Crocodile] satirical magazine, 1965.

86 CHAPTER 3

Twenty-first-century management is dynamic. It is characterized by competition,

increasing demands for improved and new services, budgetary constraints, calls for

higher performance, increased citizen involvement, and a variety of political pres-

sures. These demands present new challenges for managers within the public sector.

Public managers must attend to demands for responsive and effective government,

the citizenry’s demands for greater involvement in public decision making and gov-

ernance, and an evolving workforce that holds new attitudes and higher expecta-

HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT

Source: www.cartoonstock.com

EMPLOYEEOF THEMONTH EM

PLO YEE

OF THE

MO NTH

John Parker

87Managing Human Resources

tions. In addition, there exists a political-administrative dynamic that is embodied

in the demand for open and transparent governance, while simultaneously charged

with providing more and better services with fewer resources. Public managers are

now forced to respond with novel and groundbreaking ways of managing their

human resources. High-performing public organizations are using innovative ap-

proaches to create and maintain a productive workforce.

The most important resource of any public organization—indeed, the public sector’s

most critical investment—is its people. In fact, employee

salaries and benefits make up between 50 and 85 percent of

government budgets. Guy (1992a) underscores the impor-

tance of people in high-performing public organizations:

“The easiest way to make quick productivity gains is to mech-

anize a process. The most difficult, but most enduring, way to

make productivity gains is to develop each worker’s desire

and ability to be maximally productive. The reason is simple:

It is people who, in the long term, control the productivity of

any organization” (p. 307).

According to Mintzberg (1996), an organization without

commitment to its human resources is analogous to a body

that has no soul. Flesh, bones, and blood may be able to

consume and to exert energy, but without a soul there is no

life force. Public organizations, notes Mintzberg, need a

life force, so to speak. Thus, acknowledging and respond-

ing to emerging human resource management needs is di-

rectly tied into improving government performance.

High-performing organizations are compassionate and demonstrate concern for

meeting the needs of their employees. This coincides with the view that productive

organizations have a vested interest in satisfying human needs. In other words,

productive human resource management balances a worker’s needs and an orga-

nization’s goals.

Human resource management encompasses managing people’s concerns. Man-

agers who deal effectively with these concerns are more likely to achieve organiza-

tional goals, in addition to satisfying employee needs, which range from job

satisfaction, to recognition for personal and group achievements, to a competitive

salary and a safe work environment. Public organizations are dependent on knowl-

edgeable, industrious, enthusiastic workers and harmonious relations between

managers and employees (Isaacs 1996).

At one time, human resource management dealt with standardizing personnel

processes. Twenty-first-century human resource management, however, is not just

about safeguarding employees and upholding the integrity of personnel systems

“Leadership is all about people. It

is not about organizations. It is not about plans. It

is not about strategies. It is all

about people— motivating people

to get the job done. You have to be people-

centered.”

COLIN POWELL U.S. Army General;

Former Secretary of State

88 CHAPTER 3

from management exploitation. With more traditional management models, ad-

herence to strict processes was paramount. Under more contemporary public man-

agement paradigms, where performance improvement and the achievement of

organizational goals are vital, the focus of human resource management is to enable

managers and employees to better serve the public (Cooper 1998). This requires

the traditional human resource elements of

• Hiring the right workers to achieve an organization’s goals and fulfill

its mandate;

• Training and developing workers; and

• Rewarding workers using monetary, as well as non-

monetary, psychological rewards—i.e., creating an or-

ganizational environment that engenders loyalty and

cooperation.

In this era of scarce resources, increasing cynicism and dis-

trust of government, and demands for improved perform-

ance, human resource management systems have

additional concerns. Key among those concerns, notes Naff

(1993), are:

• Creating and maintaining a diverse workforce;

• Affording workers a measure of power in the workplace;

• Enabling workers to fulfill and balance both work and family respon-

sibilities;

• Enabling workers to hold their managers accountable for merit prin-

ciples;

• Taking into account different ways of motivating workers; and

• Identifying ways of fostering a culture of cooperation and teamwork

in the workplace.

Productive Human Resource Management Overall, productive human resource management can be thought of as a lively, open

system (Cooper 1998) in which external and internal environments are intercon-

nected. Such a system is likely to influence a public organization’s capacity to attract

and hold on to workers who take on new and more complex responsibilities. This

occurs in an environment where the public sector often competes with private sec-

tor organizations for human resources. Also, ongoing changes in and increasing re-

“The growth and development

of people is the highest calling of

leadership.”

HARVEY S. FIRESTONE Industrialist; Founder

of Firestone Tire and Rubber Co.

89Managing Human Resources

liance upon technology have resulted in a greater need for knowledge workers and

information systems that support management decisions. Sherman, Bohlander,

and Schnell (1998) argue that rapid technology change requires a superior work-

force. Productive human resource management reflects societal demographic

changes as well. As society becomes more diverse, it is imperative that public sec-

tor employees reflect a similar measure of diversity. Human resource management

systems must embrace all employee differences. This view is supported by Sher-

man, Bohlander, and Schnell (1998). Public organizations have been shown to ben-

efit from diversity by acknowledging and embracing the differences and concerns

of their employees. The increasing presence of females and racial and ethnic mi-

norities in public administration has led to a significant amount of academic work

on the value of diversity in organizations (Golembiewski 1995; Rainey 1997).

Porous department and unit boundaries of public organizations pose human re-

source challenges that can best be met by adopting a “team player” approach.

Human resources must work with other departments and units in achieving or-

ganization-wide goals. Clearly, internal factors—most notably the values held by

an organization’s upper management and by extension the organization’s culture—

—THE WORK IS IN FULL SWING, BUT THERE’S A SHORTAGE OF PEOPLE! Artist and Date Unknown; “The Fighting Pencil” group.

90 CHAPTER 3

influence human resource management. Upper-management leadership deter-

mines the extent to which human resource management is viewed as important.

Schuler and Huber (1993) argue that if upper managers downplay the importance

of workers to the organization’s overall success, so will line

managers. If line managers do the same, then the human

resource department will be less likely to embrace innova-

tive and productive human resource policies. On the other

hand, upper management’s support of and commitment to

employee-centric human resource policies does not neces-

sarily ensure that the organization will be productive. Per-

formance improvement in public organizations requires a

commitment from all employees.

The culture of an organization embodies its value system. In-

dividual-level and organizational-level performance can only

be understood if that organization’s culture is taken into ac-

count (Schein 1988). As one of the key factors influencing

employee motivation (Romzek 1990), organizational culture,

to some measure, indicates how organizations treat their em-

ployees (Schuler and Huber 1993). Organizations possessing

a culture of concern and respect for individuals are likely to

have policies that address employee needs specifically. Em-

ployees, too, learn a great deal about an organization’s culture

through human resource practices—for example, how the or-

ganization chooses people for hiring and promotion, what

criteria are used to evaluate employees, and how well it com-

pensates its employees both monetarily and nonmonetarily.

These indicate a great deal about an organization.

The political-administrative interconnection has profound

human resource implications. Thompson (1990) is among

the theorists who maintain that human resource manage-

ment may well have political consequences. Processes such as hiring and firing are

no longer clandestine activities; such policies must now withstand public and in-

terorganizational scrutiny. Depending on the human resource issue, several public

agencies may have a role to play. For example, when policy questions are raised re-

garding employee performance appraisal in the federal government, the Equal Em-

ployment Opportunity Commission, the Office of Personnel Management, the

Federal Labor Relations Authority, and the Merit Systems Protection Board all have

a vested interest in the issue. In such organizations, politicization must be balanced

with principles of merit and equal opportunity for employment.

An organization’s environment—both internal and external—influences human re-

source management. Recognizing internal and external environmental factors pre-

“You know the type. They bank vacation days.

They hand in slips of paper noting how many half- days or holidays they’ve worked.

They remind bosses and

colleagues of company policies regarding over-

time. They are little technocrats who show time and time again that

they are not working for fun or

the passion to win. They’re just

logging hours.”

JACK WELCH Retired CEO of

General Electric

91Managing Human Resources

pares human resource managers to address the challenges inherent in their field. In

high-performing organizations, human resource managers look at these factors as op-

portunities, not problems. Responsibilities for human resource (HR) management

are spread out in the organization: organization heads and their upper managers, mid-

dle managers, and HR managers share these responsibilities. According to Naff (1993),

virtually all managers are dependent on human resource management. In fact, man-

agers are an HR department’s most important customers. Human resources support

enables managers to cultivate and sustain a quality workforce; develop and prepare

employees for more advanced positions; and preserve the principles of merit and fair

play within the organization. Human resource departments provide invaluable sup-

port services so that managers may deliver more efficient and effective services.

Among the strategies to effectively manage human resources in high-performing

organizations are:

• Cultivating and maintaining a high quality of work environment, and

• Creating satisfying work relations through teamwork and

collaboration.

Cultivating and Maintaining a High-Quality Diverse Workforce While challenging and time-consuming, the task of improving performance re-

quires the capacity and motivation of the workforce to operate at high levels. In-

novative public sector strategies for managing human resources show that

cultivating and sustaining a high-quality and diverse workforce is indeed an at-

tainable goal. Doing so entails identifying and hiring the right people, systematically

preparing them for their roles, providing them with sources

of motivation, and then evaluating them fairly. Workforce

planning involves more than estimating the number of

workers needed in various capacities now and in the future;

it deals with personnel development, the optimal utiliza-

tion of each worker, and employee retention. Workforce

planning also has prospective and evaluative components,

as it addresses the future impacts of employment based on

present-day decisions.

Recruiting the Best and the Brightest Sustained attacks on public servants dissuade the best and

the brightest students from pursuing public sector careers

(Holzer and Rabin 1987). The importance of recruiting and retaining exceptional

employees cannot be overstated; yet, public organizations risk losing many of their

most talented people to alternative employment (Romzek 1990, p. 374). According

to research conducted by Jurkiewicz, Massey, and Brown (1998), there are 15 fac-

“People often say that motivation

doesn’t last. Well, neither does

bathing—that’s why we recommend

it daily.”

ZIG ZIGLAR Corporate Trainer;

Motivational Speaker

92 CHAPTER 3

tors relevant to the motivation of public employees. Of those factors, high prestige

and social status ranked fifteenth (Jurkiewicz, Massey, and Brown 1998, p. 235).

Identifying and hiring the right people have emerged as significant issues that war-

rant innovative approaches. Public organizations need to woo the so-called “best

and brightest” from multiple recruiting pools—from new graduates, to private sec-

tor employees who have been “downsized,” to older workers looking for a second ca-

reer, to civic-minded volunteers. Some organizations have implemented innovative

hiring practices that are more user friendly. Holzer (1991) recommends several

strategies for persuading the best and the brightest into government, namely ad-

vocacy activities that keep the idea of public service on the forefront of people’s

minds. Central to this is educating and reminding people that public service is both

a necessary investment and a civic duty. Of course, appealing to an individual’s civic

virtues will accomplish only so much. More competitive salaries, increased em-

ployee discretion, and the power of resources all play important roles in attracting

the best and the brightest to government.

Employee Development In high-performing public organizations, training and development are never-end-

ing processes. Twenty-first-century organizations operate in a climate that requires

constant organizational learning (Mills 1994). Training begins with employee ori-

entation as an individual begins work, and it continues throughout that individ-

ual’s career in order to fulfill the need for new knowledge, skills, and

attitudes—commonly referred to as KSAs. Employee de-

velopment encompasses a long-term agenda of activities

(that is, training and education) to prepare workers for ca-

reer advancement within the organization. Training is cen-

tral to improving performance and lessens the probability

of employees becoming obsolete in an increasingly chang-

ing environment. Training and development are vital to ac-

complishing workforce plans, as well as improving

individual competencies.

Training employees is of the utmost importance, as public

employees work within politically charged environments. Be-

cause of the traditional separation between politics and ad-

ministration, the legislative—or lawmaking—environment is often unfamiliar to public

employees, and they tend not to work as effectively in it. Public employees will perform

better if they have a better understanding of the legislative environment (Lewis and

Raffel 1996). Clearly, according to Isaacs (1996), the effectiveness of training and de-

velopment programs affects employee performance. Not to be overlooked, however,

is how receptive trainees are to training and development programs. The training pro-

gram design, delivery, and evaluation—as well as whether employees are afforded op-

portunities to use their newly acquired skills—also affect organizational performance.

“There are incalculable

resources in the human spirit,

once it has been set free.”

HUBERT H. HUMPHREY

38th Vice President of the United States

93Managing Human Resources

New in Hiring Practices— A Strategic Approach to Hiring A MAKEOVER THAT MATTERS: THE EXTREME HIRING MAKEOVER Current events have raised the stakes on government’s success—and to perform ef-

fectively, government needs top talent. But the federal government is in double jeop-

ardy: More than half of all federal employees will be eligible to retire within the next

five years, and there is a very thin pipeline of talent waiting in the wings to replace

the skilled and experienced workers who will walk out the door. Worse yet, the way

the federal government hires is often inadequate—it takes too long, is cumbersome,

and may fail to produce quality results.

The federal hiring process is one of the biggest impediments to attracting new em-

ployees to government service. In some cases, federal job application instructions

run 35 pages long—and applicants often have to wait six months to a year before get-

ting a federal job offer, sometimes with little or no communication from agencies.

There is also growing concern that methods used by federal employers for assessing

the skills of potential employees are among the least effective available. If it takes

federal agencies a year to hire, and they don’t properly assess applicant skills, they

will lose the most highly qualified candidates to more nimble organizations.

Project Overview Modeled after the popular Extreme Makeover television shows, this project united

some of the nation’s premier experts on recruiting and assessment with three federal

agencies to implement some of the most effective hiring practices used in any sector.

Like the television shows, participating agencies boldly and bravely came forward

with a simple desire to improve. But unlike the TV show participants, their measure

of success is not cosmetic, but something far more important: bringing the best tal-

ent into the federal government by improving the way the government works. This

is a makeover that matters.

Agencies The three participating agencies are the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

(CMS), within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS); the Depart-

ment of Education (ED); and the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA),

within the Department of Energy.

Partners The Extreme Hiring Makeover project was enhanced by the participation of world-

(continued)

94 CHAPTER 3

class experts in the area of recruiting and hiring. Whether the issue is planning, mar-

keting, assessment, or selection, the Extreme Hiring Makeover (EHM) team has the

skills and knowledge to help participating agencies improve their practices. In addi-

tion to the Partnership for Public Service, this team included: Monster Government

Solutions, ePredix, CPS Human Resource Services, AIRS, Brainbench, the Human

Capital Institute and Korn/Ferry International.

Approach This project was launched in the summer of 2004 with a phased approach. From

July to January, the EHM team helped agencies diagnose the key issues they face

through a series of interviews and by mapping the hiring process. Also, “quick wins”

were implemented to demonstrate rapid progress. Those included creating new

looks and marketing appeal for vacancy announcements, targeting passive candi-

dates for existing positions, helping to script communications for job fairs, and

providing interview guides for managers. From January through the end of April,

the project participants constructed short-term fixes—designing the new hiring

process, creating a new front-end toolkit to facilitate better planning for managers

and HR teams, tightening up the pre-screening and assessment process, designing

new recruiting materials, and training the agency’s recruiting experts. The re-

maining portion of the project focused on long-term planning for building on and

sustaining change.

At all three organizations, mapping the hiring process allowed them to gain a real-

istic and practical understanding of their hiring issues. While it is difficult to pre-

scribe the optimal number of steps for any given agency, this exercise highlighted

areas where non-value added steps had crept into the process over a period of years.

Many of those steps were not generated by statute or regulation, but through a lay-

ered history of Department, agency, and functional practice. Most important, it al-

lowed the collective leadership of the organization to understand each other’s

activities and where to hunt for real process improvements. The simple visual of

this multi-step process evoked enthusiastic commitments for change from all the

Makeover teams.

Key Lessons While this project illustrated several areas where rapid improvement can be achieved,

it also underscored the obstacles facing government agencies as they try to imple-

ment and manage change initiatives. To improve their hiring results, each agency

could improve the planning phase of their process, better sell their job opportuni-

ties, and focus on quality. To enable these changes, the involvement of top leadership

(continued)

95Managing Human Resources

was clearly the most critical factor leading to success, but it was also apparent that

staff members implementing such efforts must support the project. In effect, agen-

cies need to change from the inside out. Though the Extreme Makeover showed focus

on the surface, this project pushed agencies to review their deeper internal practices

to find better ways to present themselves to the public. Some team members called

this “battling inertia,” daring to do things differently.

Even with notable accomplishments at all three participating organizations, each

agency team can identify specific areas where they could have improved their results.

Team members agreed that enhanced internal communication, extending to those

outside the project, would have benefited the outcome. Further, there was consensus

that dedicated project resources, specifically assigning staff members solely to this ef-

fort, would have eliminated competing priorities and allowed the team to focus ex-

clusively on their intended goals.

Across government, agencies post vacancy announcements and assume top-flight

candidates will apply. Each agency in this project has benefited from outreach to can-

didates who may not regularly seek government work, broadening their reach and ex-

panding their organizational capabilities. Through a variety of means, agencies can

market their job openings to new and diverse sources of candidates, often with ex-

ceptional results. While targeted recruiting promotes agencies, it also demonstrates

the appeal of serving our nation. When Uncle Sam calls, top talent answers.

THE SCIENCE OF MARKETING: NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION While almost every organization sees itself as unique, the National Nuclear Security

Administration (NNSA) is truly one of a kind. Where else can you harness nuclear en-

ergy for security and scientific advancement, and save the world from nuclear pro-

liferation and terrorism? Established in March 2000, NNSA merged the efforts of

several federal programs responsible for nuclear security: defense nuclear weapons,

nuclear non-proliferation, the naval nuclear propulsion program and other support-

ing efforts.

Just as NNSA’s mission is highly specialized, so are the skills and talents that it needs

in its federal workforce. Given the critical shortages in scientific and technical talent

in America and a rapidly changing security environment, recruiting needed talent

presents a major challenge for NNSA.

For national security reasons, NNSA did not maintain a highly visible public pos-

ture. Potential candidates for employment were not aware of NNSA’s exciting and (continued)

96 CHAPTER 3

challenging programs. Compounding the difficulty of hiring the right talent is the

challenge of finding people to work in remote locations. To overcome these chal-

lenges, NNSA needs world-class recruiting capabilities. Agency leaders recognized

that old methods would not allow them to compete effectively for their highly sought-

after talent.

Challenges NNSA leaders had already begun to take a close look at their hiring process when the

Extreme Hiring Makeover (EHM) team arrived.

The multiple-page job announcements did not capture the power of the critical mis-

sion that NNSA serves, did provide an overly extensive list of job duties that obscured

the major features and selling points of the job, and did not highlight the most im-

portant skills and experience that the candidate needed to bring to the organization.

As a result, some of NNSA’s critical positions went unfilled. In launching the Extreme

Hiring Makeover effort, Mike Kane, the Associate Administrator for Management

and Administration, used the example of a nonproductive effort for a senior scientific

position as a proxy for their larger issues. After looking for months, using the current,

longstanding, job announcement formats, they had only three candidates and none

fit the bill. How could the Makeover turn that situation around?

Solutions Extreme Makeover Team members rose to the challenge. After reviewing the prior

vacancy announcement for the senior scientific position and meeting with the hiring

manager and HR team, the root of the problem became clear: NNSA was not selling

or marketing its unique employment opportunities. When asked about the vacancy,

the hiring manager could describe the position at length in technical terms but had

not considered how to convey the job in such a way as to excite a potential applicant.

So, the Extreme team led him through a series of questions to elicit what the position

really entailed, why a candidate would want to work there, and what competencies

and credentials were most important for the job.

NNSA Gets a Face Lift Following the manager interview, the team worked with NNSA to produce a mar-

keting pitch and targeting strategy. Monster Government Solutions helped to create

a new look and language for their position announcement that conveyed the impor-

tance and excitement of the position. Not only did the new announcement start with

a description of why NNSA is a great place to work, but it utilized a user-friendly,

five-tab vacancy announcement format developed for the Office of Personnel Man-

(continued)

97Managing Human Resources

agement’s (OPM’s) USA Jobs website. The announcement was also written in plain

English—no government jargon. The web-based posting also included photos of the

unique work environment at NNSA that would appeal to the scientists and engineers

it sought to attract.

To further improve NNSA’s odds of attracting highly qualified applicants, AIRS

helped to implement an Internet-based targeted recruiting strategy. They searched

various job boards and other Internet sources for experienced candidates who met

the highly skilled NNSA criteria. A senior NNSA official then called the most desir-

able candidates that came out of this targeted search to encourage them to apply.

The new look for the announcement and the proactive outreach approach produced

a slate of 28 qualified candidates.

Emboldened by this success, NNSA leaders took up their own sales and marketing ef-

forts. They developed an advertisement that ran in Government Executive magazine featuring the new face of NNSA—”Where Engineering, Science and National Security

Intersect in a Challenging Career.”

Engaging the Next Generation To build a pipeline of future leaders, NNSA also launched an emerging leaders pro-

gram that took the recruiting message to a new level. NNSA recruiters targeted fif-

teen universities, many in the South and West, with an emphasis on diversity.

Building on some of the lessons from the EHM, professional recruitment materials,

including a state-of-the art Flash presentation, were prepared for use in on-campus

(continued)

WHERE ENGINEERING, SCIENCE A N D NATIONAL SECURITY

INTERSECT I N A CHALLENGING CAREER Come help the National Nuclear Security Administration manage highly visible programs involving nuclear weapons and controlling nuclear threats, both here and abroad. We offer careers where you are compensated for your performance. We also oversee national laboratories that help maintain U.S. leadership in science and technology. NNSA is an agency of the U.S. Department of Energy.

For more information, visit us on the web at: www.nnscr.cfoe.gov Specific job opportunities can be found at: jobsonline. doe.gov

National Nuclear Security Administration

98 CHAPTER 3

recruiting efforts. NNSA developed a core intern-training program built around three

separate functional curricula tracks in facility oversight, business functions, and in-

formation technology.

To compete successfully with private sector organizations, NNSA now aggressively

employs a wide range of recruiting flexibilities and benefits. They tackle the money

issues head-on by offering candidates the possibility of student loan repayment, sign-

ing bonuses and relocation assistance.

Partnering with Managers Effectively The NNSA HR team is constantly looking for ways to enhance their service to man-

agers and forge a collaborative working partnership. They have worked with man-

agers to reexamine their hiring process to reduce the time and effort required to bring

someone on board while improving the quality of candidates delivered by the process.

Extreme Makeover sponsor CPS assisted NNSA in mapping their existing process

and identifying areas for improvement. Managers and HR representatives agreed

that engaging in a comprehensive strategic conversation at the outset would speed

the process, eliminate redundancies and guarantee improved quality of outcomes.

Providing Great Recruiting Resources Also in the course of the diagnostic phase, NNSA determined that they needed to en-

hance their human resources staff, and the HR Director took action. As part of their

targeted approach to address that issue, a new position was created to lead HR op-

erations. Additionally, the HR team embarked on renewed workforce planning to

identify current and future skills gaps; provide training where needed; and improve

its use of automated HR systems and tools, including a new, consolidated approach

to performance management and recognition.

Results Science and marketing do mix to create a potent force.

• The pilot project to fill a senior scientific position yielded an eight-fold

increase in the number of applicants.

• Selecting officials have chosen the first class of about 30 interns, and

their feedback indicates that the candidate pool was of a very high qual-

ity. Having heard about the success of this program, leaders recruiting

candidates in other functional areas have asked for a custom program

of their own.

Perhaps the best example of success comes from the HR Director himself. Having

(continued)

99Managing Human Resources

participated in the first pilot effort to recruit the senior scientist, Ray Greenberg de-

cided to set an example by revamping his own approach to hiring. He needed an HR

operating executive who was ready to embrace a challenge and help make change

happen in this new organization. Ray spent time upfront in developing a clear posi-

tion description and an effective marketing pitch, job announcement and recruiting

strategy. It worked. His final candidates were so good that he faced an entirely new

kind of challenge: how to select the best from a range of outstanding candidates.

Lessons Learned Top Leadership Commitment Is Critical As with the other participating agencies, NNSA witnessed how the commitment of

top leadership within their organization could advance the goals of the project.

Everything Flows from Strategy The HR staff saw the benefits of having a deeper knowledge of the business of NNSA,

including the type of talent they need to attract, where to look for ideal candidates,

and what top talent would find attractive about working at NNSA. This foundational

understanding of the organization helps the HR team enhance its partnership and

collaboration with management. By building their own organization, they help build

NNSA in its entirety.

New Ideas Fuel Innovation Openness to external assistance and seeking outside expertise is extremely valu-

able when tackling major change initiatives. Many agencies don’t have the re-

sources to hire outside consultants or expand their operational practices. In this

project, NNSA had access to both the pro-bono assistance provided by the EHM

partners as well as to further outside assistance to produce recruitment materials

for the intern program. This openness to outside assistance helped to improve its

internal practices.

A Picture Speaks a Thousand Words Mapping the hiring process provided a shared understanding of current activities

across the HR and management teams. The visual of the process facilitated efforts to

develop a shared vision for improvement, and enabled NNSA to smartly target areas

for training and development—for both HR staff and hiring managers—as they seek

to make improvements in the recruitment process.

Recruiting Flexibilities Make a Difference NNSA has committed to optimizing its use of available flexibilities. In each compo-

nent of this project, where applicable, NNSA has interwoven the application of stu-

dent loan repayments, recruitment bonuses and relocation payments along with (continued)

100 CHAPTER 3

special hiring authorities. This both heightens NNSA’s appeal to potential applicants

and brings the agency toward its goal of recruiting and retaining top talent.

What’s Next? As with many federal agencies, NNSA has seen that successful transformational ef-

forts require follow-up and follow-through. To achieve the goals outlined in this ef-

fort, and to encourage enduring change, the team is prepared to make a long-term

commitment to improvement. NNSA will map a plan to institutionalize the changes,

folding them into their standard hiring process and spreading their knowledge

throughout the agency by communicating more broadly with agency staff.

Inspired by their own progress in this effort, NNSA has launched an “Employer of

Choice” initiative, demonstrating its commitment to recruiting and retaining top tal-

ent. The agency will begin with a survey of all employees, using the Partnership for

Public Service’s Best Places to Work in the Federal Government analysis of employee

satisfaction data as one benchmark. From those results, the team will assess its

strengths and weaknesses and craft corresponding efforts to address key issues.

Building on the foundational elements of the Extreme Hiring Makeover project, the

NNSA team also plans to expand and address efforts central to human capital issues,

including a major workforce planning effort. This will help identify the skills and

competencies needed in the workforce, identify skills gaps, and fine-tune future

workforce planning. On a parallel track, the team is developing a “one-NNSA” ap-

proach to HR systems that emphasizes linkages between HR initiatives and the or-

ganization’s strategic goals. This will include implementation of a single performance

management system to replace eight different legacy systems. To deepen collabora-

tion with managers, the HR team will also begin to use additional automated tools.

NNSA may be unique in many ways, but its experiences in the Extreme Hiring

Makeover and its additional efforts to improve its practices offer lessons that are ap-

plicable to any agency across government.

PRESCRIPTION FOR HIRING SUCCESS: CENTERS FOR MEDICARE & MEDICAID SERVICES Responsible for programs like Medicare, Medicaid, the State Children’s Health In-

surance Program, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act

(HIPAA), CMS touches the lives of nearly 1 in 4 Americans. CMS processes more

than 1 billion claims per year, providing service to nearly 42 million beneficiaries

who receive Medicare benefits.

The agency’s mandate was recently expanded with the enactment of the Medicare

(continued)

101Managing Human Resources

Modernization Act (MMA)—the most extensive modification to the Medicare pro-

gram since its inception in 1965. The MMA includes a drug discount card in 2004,

new preventive benefits including a “Welcome to Medicare” physical for new

Medicare beneficiaries in 2005 and a prescription drug benefit plan by 2006.

Challenges CMS had a pressing need for change in staffing to meet the requirements of the

MMA. Implementation of the new law demanded significantly increased hiring,

growing the size of the workforce by approximately 500 professionals within two

years. This increase constituted 10 percent of the existing workforce and twice the

agency’s normal annual hiring. Such changes involved not only consideration of

new lines of business but also new skills and competencies to effectively rollout

provisions of the MMA.

Among other hiring challenges, the agency’s managers were very vocal about their

dissatisfaction with both the length of time it took to hire and the quality of applicants

that emerged through the certification process. Moreover, like the rest of govern-

ment, CMS has an aging workforce and will likely face significant retirements in com-

ing years. It must attract and retain a highly skilled workforce to address the

increasing pressures of America’s aging population.

Hiring challenges were further compounded by the introduction of a new automated

staffing system and the transition to a new human resources servicing model as the

Department of Health and Human Services consolidated staffing and other services

at the Department level. Given the considerable amount of change taking place in

the organization, volume hiring for MMA and anticipated retirement turnover, it was

clear the old system would not meet the needs of the new CMS.

Solutions At CMS, a focus on effective selection and assessment processes was central to ad-

dressing managers’ concerns. They wanted to ensure that the CMS of the future

would have top talent to meet changing circumstances and their increasing mission

requirements. With high volumes of applicants for many CMS positions and an au-

tomated staffing system that few understood how to use effectively, screening and

assessing candidates for quality were often a challenge.

Analyzing the Process All of the Makeover efforts included an “end to end” mapping of the hiring process

and identification of short-term and long-term fixes. With resources from across the

agency and partners at CPS Human Resources Services, the hiring process was (continued)

102 CHAPTER 3

mapped from end to end—starting when a manager identifies his or her need and

concluding when the person reports for duty. That is notable because the effort ex-

tends well beyond the traditional HR functions.

Focusing on Quality Concurrent with the process mapping and diagnosis, CMS conducted a demon-

stration hiring process for one of its components. This demonstration process em-

ployed a selection of successful pre-screening and assessment processes from best

practice organizations, thereby providing a model on which other CMS groups

could base their practices. This demonstration also presented the opportunity to

test category rating, demonstrating greater flexibility in considering a range of qual-

ified candidates.

CMS identified the position of health insurance specialist as the best candidate for the

test process for several reasons:

• It was the most common occupation series across the organization.

There will always be hiring needs in this area.

• There were immediate hiring needs for multiple positions.

• Many of the projected retirements are expected to deplete these posi-

tions going forward, so the work done in this area could benefit future

hiring.

• There were no special flexibilities or direct hiring authorities for these

positions, so positive results might benefit all hiring efforts and be even

more significant for MMA positions.

The EHM team began the demonstration effort with a strategic conversation with

the hiring manager to clearly define the needs of the position. Information gathered

during this critical discussion and during job analysis enabled the team to:

• Market the position using a visually appealing, plain-English vacancy

announcement,

• Proactively target qualified candidates via a number of Internet acces-

sible resume databases, and

• Build tools to effectively screen applicants and assess their skills and fit

for the position, combining several different approaches to enhance re-

sults.

(continued)

103Managing Human Resources

Results Results from the demonstration process were very impressive. In the first round,

more than 200 people applied for the GS-13 health insurance specialist position (the

average number of applicants for similar positions in HHS was slightly more than

50). Of that population, 33 applicants were a direct result of the team’s proactive re-

cruiting efforts using Internet-accessible resume databases.

Pursuing a phased approach to screening and assessment, CMS required the appli-

cants to complete a questionnaire in QuickHire. The well-crafted questions screened-

out about 15 percent of applicants, a significantly higher percentage than in most

other CMS efforts. The remaining applicants were then required to complete an on-

line skills test. Applicants were ranked based on the combined score from the ques-

tionnaire and skills test.

Applying category rating, the hiring manager was presented with 24 applicants to

consider rather than three as in the conventional process. Finally, candidates in-

vited to interview were required to complete an additional assessment. Whereas the

first online skills test reviewed specific knowledge and writing skills, the final as-

sessment was predictive, reviewing behavioral competencies and cognitive abilities.

In the final analysis, the hiring manager was able to hire seven people—the first within (continued)

Demonstrating Success

Increase # of Qualified Applicants • Better Sales Pitch • Enhanced Marketing • Targeting

• 227 applicants verses the average 53

• 33 applicants from the target pool

• 15% screened out in pre-screening, up from 6%

• 169 applicants took the online skills assessment

• 24 individuals deemed “well qualified” in category ranking

• 6 new employees hired in the 1st round

Early Involvement of Managers

Clarified Roles for Candidates

Marketing & Targeted Outreach

Automated Pre-Screening

Web-Based Skills Assessment

Category Ranking

Cognitive Screen

Interview

Offer

Efficiently Select the Best Applicants • Pre-Screening • Skills Test • Predictive Assessment • Interviews

104 CHAPTER 3

22 business days of closing the vacancy announcement—and was extremely pleased

with the caliber of candidates. Having committed significant time to the project, he

stated, “The process produced great candidates and was well worth the effort!”

In addition to conducting the pilot, CMS also implemented some “quick fixes” to the

hiring process. This included modifying the vacancy announcements to better mar-

ket the agency and streamlining the hiring process to eliminate redundancies and

unnecessary handoffs. In streamlining the hiring process, more than 60 steps were

identified that represented a series of actions involving the hiring managers, their

executive officers, budget resources, agency and HHS executives, EEO and multiple

HR resources. Illustrating the steps highlighted some of the inefficiencies that had

crept into their practices over time and helped each function better understand its in-

volvement in the overall process.

The illustration also led to a focus on accountability. Experts helped CMS reduce the

steps in their hiring process by more than 20 percent. The agency has since taken

steps to further streamline the process.

Source: This is an abridged and modified version of the case studies published 02/20/2004 by the Partnership for Public Service. The full version can be found at the following web address: http://www.ourpublicservice.org/OPS/publications/viewcontentdetails.php?id=85.

(continued)

High-performing organizations tailor their training and development programs with

emphasis on satisfying the needs of both the organization and the individual. In an ideal

world, these programs are not based on imagined needs or “a wish list” (Isaacs 1996). In-

struction must be carefully monitored to make sure that stated training objectives are

met. Experience dictates that when organizations make use of employees’ new skills and

knowledge, the employees will perform at higher levels. Similarly, performance will likely

suffer when there is resistance to applying these skills or employees are made to feel

powerless and discouraged in their efforts to utilize the skills (Isaacs 1996).

On-the-Job Methods of Employee Development On-the-job methods for development can be very effective if used properly by the

supervisor. Five techniques are available: delegation, coaching, special assignments,

job rotation, and understudy.

1. Delegation: Can be utilized when an employee exhibits potential. The su- pervisor can delegate as much authority and commensurate responsibility

as possible to his or her subordinate. Exercising authority helps an indi-

vidual to grow. This technique also encourages self-confidence.

105Managing Human Resources

2. Coaching: Giving an individual an assignment and then personally as- sisting them in its completion allows the subordinate to learn by doing. It

further encourages the subordinate to seek advice from the supervisor as

often as needed. Coaching is a delicate art and must be practiced with a

keen sense of understanding. A good coach reviews the subordinate’s

progress and provides constructive criticism and praise when needed.

3. Special assignments: Can increase an employee’s usefulness and self- confidence. Presenting a plan to a group or the department, correcting of-

fice or production problems, and helping to develop new product ideas are

examples of special projects that can be assigned. The challenges of a spe-

cial assignment can stimulate the subordinate.

4. Job rotation: Refers to moving an employee from one responsible job to another. Job rotation can expose him or her to different problems, deci-

sion processes, and solutions.

5. Understudy: Is a term that refers to the supervisor’s choice of a subordi- nate to succeed him or her. When the supervisor receives advancement,

the subordinate chosen for this type of development must possess the

skills, ability, and common sense necessary to fill a leadership position.

Delegation There are several reasons why supervisors should delegate more. For one, it frees

them of time-consuming tasks that would otherwise keep them from supervisory

work and overall planning. In addition, delegation demonstrates trust. By delegat-

ing, supervisors show that they have confidence in their subordinates. Developing

one’s subordinates is, perhaps, the most important skill a

manager can have. Delegation allows a supervisor to take

time off for business or just a vacation. Delegation also

helps in the process of compiling performance appraisals,

giving a manager tangible ways to observe and measure the

performance of delegated assignments. Similarly, delega-

tion facilitates promotions. An organization runs more

smoothly when subordinates can step into other positions.

Supervisors may get some good ideas by delegating work to their employees. Sub-

ordinates may approach a task with a fresh eye, coming up with ways to do things

better or faster. Delegation also increases the efficiency of the manager, since he or

she is forced to communicate the assignment clearly and precisely.

The Role of the Boss in Delegating. A delegator must accept the fact that effective delegation is critical to agency success and a key factor in improving organizational

performance and productivity. He or she must communicate goals and tasks clearly;

set high performance standards; know employees’ work backgrounds, strengths,

and interests; encourage participation in objectives and gain commitment to them;

“Government is only as good as the men in it.”

DREW PEARSON Journalist

106 CHAPTER 3

establish communication (or feedback) systems and expectations; provide neces-

sary supports (i.e., coaching and training); exhibit confidence and trust at all stages;

be aware of progress and be available for backup help; review results, not methods;

and evaluate the completion of each task and provide feedback to the workers.

The Role of the Employee in Delegating. Employees must know organizational and unit goals and priorities; take the initiative and determine personal goals; be sure

the delegation is realistic; check for complete understanding of the following: (a) re-

sources available, (b) performance standards, (c) potential problems, (d) new

ideas/techniques to use, and (e) possible personal outcomes; establish a commu-

nication (or feedback) system; report to the boss (i.e., allow for no surprises); and

submit completed project, including all paperwork.

Why Supervisors Do Not Delegate. Supervisors who are reluctant to delegate are usually fearful of the consequences of delegation, do not realize the benefits of del-

egating, or do not know how to delegate effectively. The reasons why supervisors do

not delegate enough typically include:

• Fear of mistakes: Since supervisors are still accountable, they will likely be blamed for mistakes made by their subordinates. However,

by learning through experience, employees will make fewer mistakes

with time.

• A supervisor may delegate him or herself out of a job: However, by being indispensable, workers at all levels are actually less likely to be promoted.

• The job can be done faster by the supervisor than by subordinates: Perhaps, but the supervisor is robbing him or herself of time that could be spent

doing managerial tasks—for instance, planning ahead.

• A supervisor will lose prestige by foregoing certain decisions: A supervisor who must make all decisions—even minor ones—usually earns a reputa-

tion for lacking confidence in his or her subordinates.

• A supervisor will not be able to check up on delegated assignments: This is a flimsy excuse—a supervisor should establish deadlines, set performance standards, keep in touch,

ask for progress reports, etc.

• Delegation forces a supervisor to give up favorite parts of the job: Supervisors do not have to give up everything. However, all of their tasks should be cast in the role of the supervisor.

• Subordinates will have too much to do if more work is dele-

“Our progress as a nation can be no swifter than our progress in education… The human mind is

our fundamental resource.”

JOHN F. KENNEDY 35th President of the

United States

107Managing Human Resources

The Knowledge Transfer Dilemma Although we can’t train people in relationship management or create an instant his-

tory, there are structured, methodical approaches we can employ to accomplish the

transfer of knowledge.

• Job Analysis—This helps identify job duties and the skills, knowl- edge, and abilities needed to accomplish those duties. There are a num-

ber of methods for conducting a job analysis, including observations,

questionnaires, and work logs. Some models are quite complex, but for

the purpose of knowledge transfer, a simple questionnaire and inter-

view will probably suffice.

• Job Shadowing—This is something that we haven’t always been able to do in the public sector. Typically, budget constraints and human re-

source policies present problems in hiring a replacement before the re-

tiree has departed. However, many organizations are recognizing the

value in overlapping the incumbent with the newcomer and HR offices

are developing methods for accomplishing the overlap.

• Process Documentation—Clear process documentation can be very helpful in both storing and passing on job requirements. Process flow

charts, desk procedure manuals, critical event calendars, and other

documents can be very helpful for passing information from a more ex-

perienced worker to their replacement. With jobs that are very depend-

ent on relationship management, a network journal can be helpful.

This document is a method for capturing whom the incumbent deals

with and for what purpose.

To be successful, there must be several factors at play in making knowledge transfer

part of the culture of your organization.

• Performance appraisals for managers should include objectives focused

on succession planning and knowledge transfer plans.

• Retiring and TERI employees should be required to develop and imple-

ment structured knowledge transfer plans.

• Training departments should be co-opted to help with conducting job

analysis and developing learning plans.

• The organization’s policies and procedures should be reviewed to en-

sure that they support knowledge transfer. (continued)

108 CHAPTER 3

gated to them: Supervisors who think this way should ask them- selves the question: Since I have been doing the job instead of super-

vising it, am I sure that I have reviewed my operations to determine if

it is really operating efficiently?

• A supervisor does not really know how or what to delegate: Anyone can learn how to delegate from articles, books, a boss, or sem-

inars.

• A supervisor’s boss will be annoyed if he or she delegates the job instead of doing it: Bosses are typically most interested that a job is done well, not in who does it.

• Subordinates don’t really want more work: A supervisor who gives people an opportunity to make decisions themselves may find

that many of them actually enjoy it.

Delegating Effectively. Meaning what you say is imperative. In other words, once you have given someone full authority through delegation, that authority should

never be taken back without good cause. Ensure that subordinates know exactly

what tasks have been delegated. Soliciting a subordinate’s ideas regarding the del-

egated task can be helpful in this regard. Managers with knowledge on how best to

accomplish a given task can use delegation as a way to develop alternative skill sets

and workplace proficiencies. Similarly, delegating tasks that subordinates are not

necessarily familiar with can prove useful in long run; that is, this enables workers

to cultivate new skills. Not insisting that the delegating task be done “your” way is

important to effective delegation. People have their own ways of working. A man-

So far we have not seen a mass exodus of retirees. Many of our retired employees

have returned to the workplace. However, that will not always be the case, and we

need to focus on the processes needed to transfer knowledge from our experi-

enced workforce to our newer employees. Not only do we risk the inability to

carry out our missions when people do leave our organizations, we may struggle

to retain talented potential leaders. When employees don’t see an opportunity

for moving into leadership roles because retirees are staying in key roles, these

potential leaders will move on to other organizations, exacerbating the current

problem.

Source: Reprinted from article appearing in Impact—The South Carolina State Government Improve- ment Network Newsletter, September 2007. http://www.scsgin.org/newsletter/XVI_III.pdf.

(continued)

109Managing Human Resources

ager may find that a subordinate’s way of doing things is, perhaps, a better way.

Delegation must be a sustained process—a way of doing business in the depart-

ment. Those who delegate must show that they want feed-

back. Managers must work to create an organizational

climate where subordinates will seek assistance when

stymied, confused, or apprehensive about proceeding. Fi-

nally, following up after the task is completed is necessary.

Managers must inform subordinates precisely how well

they have performed.

Employee Motivation Motivating employees to perform at a high level goes be-

yond competitive pay and benefits. What Carl Stone’s

Work Attitude Survey (1982) emphasized more than two decades ago still holds true today: greater numbers of workers are driven by the desire to find a societal

niche where their talents are recognized, where they are treated as human beings

who have deeply held desires, where they view their work as having a greater pur-

pose, and where they are afforded the opportunity to be consulted on those matters

that have influence on their work lives. Healthy worker-management relationships,

clear lines of communication, more training to cultivate and improve skills, and an

attractive physical work environment may all motivate the workers in high-per-

forming organizations.

Managers should hold responsibility, punctuality, and the yearning for accom-

plishment in high regard. Most managers feel that they underscore these quali-

ties when supervising their workers. All too often, however, workers fail to

What Motivates You? Complete the following sentences with the first words or phrases that come to mind: 1. I go to work because . . . 2. Work to me means . . . 3. The best part about work is . . . 4. The worst part about work is . . . 5. My job is . . . 6. Motivation to work comes from . . . 7. If I made one change to make my work more interesting, I would . . . 8. My motivation at work would improve if . . . 9. My motivation would decline if . . .

10. My ambition is to . . .

EXERCISE 3.1

“No executive has ever suffered

because his subordinates were strong

and effective.”

PETER DRUCKER Economist; Author

110 CHAPTER 3

execute their tasks as effectively or efficiently as a manager might like. The con-

cept of motivation can be thought as “something” that triggers a person to act in

a certain way. From a manager’s perspective, motivation means coexisting with

workers in a way that causes them to be responsible, punctual, and productive

Job Satisfaction and Fulfillment This article offers some simple suggestions to facilitate “Joy Building” within the

work environment:

1. Be here now. Employee appreciation days do not make up for otherwise in-

sincere or abusive behavior. What do you do every other day of the week?

2. Don’t be a fair weather friend. Keep your employees engaged in good times

and bad.

3. See team members as individuals. Define your goal and use each employee’s

strengths to get there.

4. Remember that silence is not golden. Talking to employees only when they

make a mistake alienates them.

5. Let friendship ring. When employees find friends at work, they feel con-

nected to their jobs and will likely be happier and more productive em-

ployees.

6. Let the outside world in. Asking employees about their weekends or their

kids shows that you see them as people, not just slots on an organizational

chart.

7. Be yourself. What works for celebrity CEOs doesn’t always work for every-

body else. An honest, low-key chat can be as effective as a high-voltage

pep rally.

8. Make it meaningful. Tell the mailroom clerk why that package is so impor-

tant. Let people know The Big Picture. Everyone wants to feel that their work

matters.

Take a few minutes to rediscover your employees and customers before you tackle the

next crisis. Who knows, you might approach things from a different perspective and

achieve a greater sense of fulfillment, even happiness, with your accomplishments.

Source: Walter Caudel, Impact—The South Carolina State Government Improvement Network Newslet- ter, Spring 2005, XIV, I. http://www.scsgin.org/newsletter/XIV_I.pdf.

111Managing Human Resources

when completing job-specific tasks. Workers’ “lack of ambition,” absence from

work, and lackluster performance are outgrowths of negative job experiences.

Workers need to experience on-the-job rewards. This will foster more positive

worker behaviors. In order to use effective motivational techniques, a manager

need not know every detail about every worker; rather, the manager must under-

stand that worker motivation is tied to workers’ needs, and motivational tech-

niques that enable workers to have positive experiences will help cultivate a sense

of responsibility on the job.

Public organizations increasingly employ a host of innovative approaches mo-

tivating people. These organizations recognize that money, while no doubt an

important source of employee motivation, is certainly not the only source. Such

high-achieving organizations embrace an approach to human resource man-

agement that links HR management policies, plans, and

processes. According to Isaacs (2003), employees’ work

needs and expectations must be given constant attention

from the time they begin working in an organization

until the time they leave. Humanistic management ap-

proaches that account for employee needs, expectations,

and attitudes and recognize employees’ differing abili-

ties and knowledge likely improve worker performance.

Hierarchy of Human Needs Abraham Maslow, author of the groundbreaking 1943 ar-

ticle “A Theory of Human Motivation,” states that motiva-

tion is predicated upon five fundamental needs. . At the

lowest level of the needs hierarchy are physiological needs,

which deal with anything that is necessary to sustain life

(for example, shelter, food, and clothing). Given the ful-

fillment of physiological needs, safety needs emerge.

Safety needs refer not only to personal security but also

the desire for an “ordered” and “predictable world” (Maslow 1943). This includes

job security, financial security, and emotional security. Should one’s physiological

and safety needs be fulfilled, the need for love emerges in the hierarchy. In this in-

stance, love refers to acceptance, friendship, affection, and a sense of belonging.

Fulfillment of an individual’s need for love gives way to esteem needs, which are

divided into two subgroups. The first refers to one’s desire to be recognized as

strong, confident, and autonomous—in other words, feeling independent is central

in this case. The second encompasses a desire for prestige and appreciation—in

other words, anything that enhances one’s self-image. Representing the apex of

the needs hierarchy is the desire for self-actualization. Individual happiness, ac-

cording to Maslow, requires that an individual recognize his or her societal niche;

fulfilling one’s inherent potential epitomizes self-actualization.

“Most important, leaders can

conceive and articulate goals

that lift people out of their petty

preoccupations and unite them

in pursuit of objectives worthy

of their best efforts.”

JOHN W. GARDNER Government Official; Leadership Expert

Herzberg’s Satisfiers and Dissatisfiers In a 1959 study directed by Frederick Herzberg, psychologists interviewed 200

Pittsburgh-area engineers and accountants. Each was asked the following:

1. Think of a recent experience that made you feel particularly good about

your job.

2. Think of a recent experience that made you feel particularly bad about your

job.

3. What effects did these incidents have on your attitudes and performance?

4. How long did these effects last?

112 CHAPTER 3

FIGURE 3.1 – MASLOW’S NEEDS HIERARCHY

SELF-ACTUALIZATION Fulfilling one’s

potential

ESTEEM NEEDS Recognition as strong and confident Desire for prestige and appreciation

LOVE NEEDS Acceptance, affection, and sense of belonging

SAFETY NEEDS Personal security and the desire for an ordered world

PHYSICAL NEEDS Food, clothing, shelter

113Managing Human Resources

TABLE 3.1 – HERZBERG’S TWO-FACTOR THEORY

Satisfiers Dissatisfiers

Achievement Company policy and administration

Recognition Supervision

Work itself Working conditions

Responsibility Interpersonal relations

Advancement Salary

Growth Status

Job security

Herzberg (1966) found that when people felt good about their jobs, it was because

some event had revealed that they were doing their jobs well or becoming more ex-

pert in their field. Bad feelings, on the other hand, usually resulted from unfair

treatment rather than a factor specifically related to the content of the job. These

findings led Herzberg to conclude that two sets of factors affect performance:

• Job content factors (satisfiers) and

• Hygiene or maintenance factors (dissatisfiers)

Employee Motivation and Theories X and Y Regarded as one of the most influential organizational humanists, McGregor (1960)

offered two conflicting management theories, each of which makes specific assump-

tions regarding human nature. According to Theory X, the average person dislikes

work and will avoid it if possible. Because of this, most people need to be coerced, con-

trolled, or even threatened with reprimand to motivate the

effort needed for the achievement of organizational goals.

Theory X further argues that people prefer being directed,

avoid responsibility at all costs, have few ambitions, and de-

sire job security above all else. In contrast, Theory Y argues

that work comes naturally to most people. Under this theory,

external control and coercive threats of reprimand are not

necessary for the achievement of organizational goals; rather,

workers will exercise self-direction in the interest of achiev-

ing organizational goals to which they are committed. Commitment to organizational

goals is a function of the rewards associated with goal attainment; that is, the oppor-

tunity and capacity to exercise high levels of imagination, ingenuity, and creativity in

“Management is nothing more than motivating other people.”

LEE IACOCCA American Automobile-

industry Leader

solving organizational problems. Finally—according to Theory Y—the intellectual po-

tential of the average person is only partially developed.

How might the above assumptions affect employees’ behaviors? Let’s take a specific

example. Let’s suppose that we—the authors—are supervising you—the reader. As

your supervisor, we make the following assumptions about you:

• You dislike work.

• You are lazy and avoid responsibility.

• You are incapable of directing your own behavior and prefer to be led.

• You avoid making decisions.

• You are unconcerned about organizational goals and objectives.

We may not actually say such things to you, but the following behaviors make our

attitudes quite clear:

• We don’t tell you anything.

114 CHAPTER 3

Source: From Frederick Herzberg. 1966. Work and the Nature of Man. Cleveland, OH: World Publishing.

FIGURE 3.2 – SATISFIERS AND DISSATISFIERS

100% motivated

50% motivated

0% motivated

Satisfiers Achievement Recognition The Work Responsibility Status Advancement Opportunity for Growth

Dissatisfiers Agency Policy Supervision Skill Salary Working Conditions

SATISFACTION SCALE

Fully Satisfied

Can fully satisfy or dissatisfy if absent

Can only dissatisfy or move the worker to zero on the satisfaction scale

Fully Dissatisfied

MOTIVATION SCALE

115Managing Human Resources

• We don’t allow you much latitude in your work: we tell you what to

do, how to do it, and when to do it.

• We accept your ideas, but only when they agree with our ideas.

• We take care of all important communications.

• In order to minimize favoritism, we communicate with all employees

individually.

Our various acts or behaviors will have a direct effect on your behavior. It is likely

that you will react in the following ways:

• Since we don’t tell you anything, you begin to “leak” information to

prove your own importance.

Actions that reveal needs Needs revealed by actions

Does extra work Self-actualization

Takes fixed positions and refuses to

evaluate others’ positions Esteem

Overly agreeable Love, affection, belongingness

Wants step-by-step instructions Safety

Uses new or difficult methods to

complete assignments Self-actualization

Resists control and structure Esteem

Aloof, inwardly directed Safety

Volunteers for group work Love, affection, belongingness

Argues rather than listens Esteem

Keeps low profile Safety

Brags about accomplishments Esteem

Asks for feedback on progress Self-actualization and love,

affection, and belongingness

Asks for lots of structure Safety

TABLE 3.2 – ACTIONS/NEEDS ANALYSIS TABLE

• Since we determine what you do on the job, you don’t develop new

work interests.

• Since we reject your ideas, you stop giving them.

• Since we accept your recommendations only if they agree with ours,

you try to anticipate what our position will be.

• Since we don’t communicate with your group, you and your cowork-

ers develop informal coalitions to “keep us guessing.”

It would be natural for you to become frustrated, apathetic, and resistant to organi-

zational goals in such an atmosphere. As a result—to complete the circle—we will see

you as lazy, incapable of making decisions for yourself, and unwilling to assume re-

sponsibility. Through a self-fulfilling prophesy, you will have proved our original as-

sumptions. This example illustrates how behavioral assumptions held by managers

have a direct influence on the organizational climate. These attitudes, behaviors, and

communication characteristics essentially make up the organizational climate.

Assessing Employee Performance High-performing organizations implement well-conceived and well-managed per-

formance appraisal systems to act as developmental and motivational tools. These

systems recognize that mutually dependent factors help create a work environ-

ment conducive to high performance (Guy 1992b). Among these factors are an or-

ganizational culture that depends on team building, takes advantage of employee

116 CHAPTER 3

Appraisal Communication Role Plays 1. You are Supervisor John Samuels. Your secretary has informed you that Mike

Adams has requested to see you immediately concerning his performance evaluation. You rated him unsatisfactory for the following reasons:

• He is consistently late, thereby holding up unit production. • He has not gotten along well with his coworkers, thus creating morale

and assignment problems. • His unit assignments are oftentimes late and of poor quality.

2. You are Supervisor Jim Thompson. Henry Johnson requested an appointment to see you four days ago concerning his performance evaluation, which you rated satisfactory. You have no information as to the reason for Henry’s request to see you.

3. You are Supervisor Michele Davis. You have asked to speak to Amy Brennan concerning her performance evaluation, which you rated “satisfactory.” You do not have any problems with Ms. Brennan as her work is always done in a satisfactory manner; however, you feel you should give all your workers an opportunity to discuss their performance evaluation.

EXERCISE 3.2

117Managing Human Resources

Identifying When Counseling Is Necessary 1. Mr. Brown always arrives 10 to 15 minutes early for work and starts his

assignments immediately. Frequently, he stays at least a half an hour after working hours to complete a special project. Despite the extra time he works, the quality and quantity of his work is average. [__] Counsel [__] Do Not Counsel

2. Ms. Jones is a clerk in a small office that faces frequent deadlines. There is constant pressure on the staff to increase production. Very often there are arguments among the staff; more often than not, Ms. Jones seems to be the instigator of the arguments. Although Ms. Jones’s work is satisfactorily completed, the unit’s production is often late and incomplete, and morale is very low. [__] Counsel [__] Do Not Counsel

3. Mr. Kavech is a professional employee who is assigned to travel within New York State, auditing work for the local social services districts. This auditing requires a team of three employees. It is rumored that Mr. Kavech is gay. His work is satisfactory. However, because of these rumors, certain employees do not want to travel with Mr. Kavech. [__] Counsel [__] Do Not Counsel

4. Ms. Carey is always volunteering to help other workers catch up on their assignments. The staff seems to seek her guidance constantly. She also appears to be very effective in assisting new employees. Additionally, Ms. Carey’s own assignments consistently far exceed the standard. [__] Counsel [__] Do Not Counsel

5. Mr. Ett is responsible for traveling within New York State to implement an automated eligibility system in the local Social Security districts. Because of the political ramifications involved in the process of a state organization working with a county organization, Mr. Ett is required to be courteous, tactful, and aware of the sensitive nature of his position. Although Mr. Ett’s work as a technician is excellent, he is discourteous and abrupt with the county employees, including some of the local district commissioners. [__] Counsel [__] Do Not Counsel

6. Ms. Caliber is a longtime employee of your office. You are her newly appointed supervisor. Ms. Caliber is an average employee who gets the work done. She does not practice the personal hygiene habits that would normally be accepted in an office setting. It is apparent that she doesn’t bathe regularly and she does not use deodorant. Ms. Caliber has been around for so long, the other employees have learned to work around her offensive nature. [__] Counsel [__] Do Not Counsel

EXERCISE 3.3

118 CHAPTER 3

strengths while compensating for employee weaknesses, maintains open and

transparent communication channels, and balances organizational needs with em-

ployee needs.

Organizational mandates at the operational level equate to on-the-job tasks for

work teams or individuals. These tasks serve as a starting point for the perform-

ance assessment process. Now, both employer and employee may discuss and set-

tle on the distribution of these tasks to the employee’s work team or position.

When a performance standard for completion of those tasks is established, an op-

portunity is provided for an inventory of the skills or training that the employee

Purposes of Performance Appraisals 1. To assure an employee a regular, formal opportunity to discuss his/her per-

formance, achievements, difficulties, and goals.

2. To provide a regular, formal opportunity for a supervisor to discuss his/her

view of an employee’s performance and present standing.

3. To improve employee performance through recognition, encouragement,

constructive criticism, or personal counseling.

4. To establish goals or performance standards to be followed until the next

evaluation.

5. To offer a periodic, formal means of identifying training needs and fostering

employee development.

6. To offer a periodic, formal means of gathering employee suggestions for im-

proving methods, procedures, performance, or morale.

7. To demonstrate that the employee’s contribution matters, and that the su-

pervisor is concerned about him/her as an individual.

8. To deepen the employee’s job satisfaction and his/her commitment to the

organization.

9. To help determine employee potential for advancement.

10. To help provide an objective, equitable basis for making compensation,

transfer, and other decisions.

119Managing Human Resources

needs. After this, the appropriate employee developmental plans are established

and implemented (McDonald 1995).

In high-performing organizations. performance assessment is used to cultivate first-

class employees and improve performance. The success of performance assessment

as a developmental tool relies on sincerity between manager and employee. Assess-

ment is a way of identifying employee strengths and weak-

nesses on a continual basis, providing performance feedback

to employees regularly, counseling employees, and identify-

ing ways to improve performance. If carried out effectively,

performance assessments make employees aware of

whether or not they are fulfilling job expectations. Success-

ful performance assessments may bolster an employee’s

confidence and morale, both of which are likely to positively

affect performance (Isaacs 1996).

Inherent to the assessment process is conflict. There are,

however, ways of minimizing this conflict. To begin with, em-

ployees must have an understanding of their job expectations. This can be done by:

providing job descriptions that underscore expectations; having discussions with em-

ployees regarding reachable performance standards; and developing performance

standards that measure work quality, work quantity, and the timeliness of the work to

be completed. According to McDonald (1995), identifying performance standards is an

essential precursor to the performance assessment process in that it gives the em-

ployee a framework within which to conduct self-assessments. It also establishes the

agenda for the formal assessment session. Delineating clear job expectations and per-

Appraisal Communication—Exercise in Counseling Supervisor Role You are Jo Davis. You have arranged to meet with Sandy Donaldson, your subordi- nate, to follow up on his/her performance appraisal interview of two months ago; you had rated him/her satisfactory at that time. Lately, though, you have been noticing that Sandy has not been returning to work after lunch on the average of twice a week and passed out at work just the other day. Rumor has it that Sandy has been drinking heavily.

Employee Role You are Sandy Donaldson. You have agreed to meet with your supervisor, Jo Davis, to follow up on your performance appraisal interview. You are anxious because you know you haven’t been at your desk during the busy time of the day lately. You have not been feeling well and are bit bored with work. Only an innocent drink or two at lunch seems to dull the strain of the workday.

EXERCISE 3.4

“Not surprisingly, work-life moaners

tend to be a phenomenon of below-average performers.”

JACK WELCH Retired CEO of

General Electric

120 CHAPTER 3

formance standards removes the subjectivity and ambiguity that all too often under-

mine the performance appraisal process. Clear goals, then, reduce the likelihood of

manager-worker conflict. In an effort to reduce conflict even further, some organiza-

tions may hire professional appraisers to assess performance accurately. Professional

appraisers champion a problem-solving approach to formal assessment (Isaacs 1996).

Employee Counseling Performance problems need to be faced as early as possible before they turn into

disasters. Usually when a supervisor counsels with a subordinate, it is about a

particular problem such as the worker’s tardiness, inability to complete assigned

work, or his or her personality conflict with a coworker. Counseling may also be

used to give feedback on performance and to plan for employee development

when those opportunities exist. As in all management, counseling involves hav-

ing an impact on others so that the task of the group is accomplished. The pur-

pose of the counseling session is to determine the cause of an employee’s

behavior, give feedback, and guide subsequent efforts. Counseling should not be

viewed as punitive, but as a problem-solving session. The supervisor’s goal is to

help employees to help themselves in resolving existing problems, avoiding po-

tential problems, and making future decisions. When the supervisor approaches

the counseling situation, he or she stands to benefit for many reasons: Counsel-

ing can accomplish many objectives that fall within supervisor’s responsibility.

It provides:

• The most direct and efficient means available to improve employee

performance;

• A vehicle for planning and monitoring staff development;

• An effective way of identifying necessary avenues for improvement

(e.g., training);

• An excellent means to get to know employees and build credibility

into the employer-employee relationship;

• A way to reduce on-the-job anxiety;

• A means for recognizing serious employee problems that require re-

ferrals;

• A means of identifying and offsetting potential problems.

On the other hand, the counseling situations contain many risks. Counseling can:

• Be time consuming;

• Be personally unpleasant;

121Managing Human Resources

• Uncover deep-rooted problems that are difficult to cope with;

• Reveal problems that both the employer and employee contribute to;

• Worsen the problem if mismanaged.

There is always a risk of mismanaging counseling when the supervisor miscon-

– GOOD WORK, PETROV. YOU WENT A WHOLE MONTH WITHOUT MAKING A SINGLE DEFECTIVE PART! – YEAH, I WAS ON VACATION! Artist: V. Bokovnia; Krokodil [Crocodile] satirical magazine, mid-1980s.

122 CHAPTER 3

Sample Counseling Sessions Example 1 Circumstances: Supervisor Jackson discovers that employee Wray is late for work again. This is the sixth time in the last month that the employee has been late. Wray

did not call to inform Jackson that she would be late.

Scene: Outer office about 3 minutes after Wray gets back to her desk, Jackson en- ters as Wray is assembling some of her typing materials. The rest of the secretarial

staff are at their desks, and three or four other individuals wander in and out of the

office during the following discussion.

Wray: Hi, Ms. Jackson. Sorry I’m late. The subways were really slow this morning.

Jackson: Look, Wray, I don’t know why you can’t get in here on time. Everyone else does.

Wray: Well, you know I live way out . . .

Jackson: (Interrupting) Don’t give me that. You’re just irresponsible. Do you know what is going to happen if you don’t straighten out?

Wray: No, not really.

Jackson: Sure, you do. Don’t ever let this happen again.

Wray: But I really have a good explanation… Can’t you…?

Jackson:(Interrupting) I’ve heard all I’m going to. Don’t give me any more excuses. Just get to work.

Example 2 Circumstances: Supervisor Jackson discovers that employee Wray is late for work again. This is the sixth time in the last month that Wray has been late. Wray did not

inform Jackson that she would be late.

Scene: Supervisor’s office.

Jackson: Come in.

Wray: You wanted to see me?

Jackson: Yes. I noticed that you were late again this morning. I’m quite concerned.

Wray: Why? I got in. Didn’t I?

Jackson: Well, not on time.

123Managing Human Resources

Wray: Other employees are late sometimes. Why are you picking on me?

Jackson: Because you are making it a habit. This is the sixth time this month. Do you have a particular problem?

Wray: Well, I live up in the Bronx where the trains get backed up during rush hour. It takes a lot longer time to get here. All the others live a lot closer than I do.

Jackson: You are aware that you have a responsibility under the atten- dance rules to be here on time no matter where you live. Aren’t you?

Wray: You mean I don’t get any consideration?

Jackson: I’ve given you plenty of consideration to this point, but I cannot let you slip into a habit of arriving tardy. We have work to do, and sometimes other employees are unable to begin their work until you arrive.

Wray: Look. The subway is frustrating. If I leave any earlier, I will have to get up at five in the morning. Do you want me to come to work ex- hausted?

Jackson: No. But if you have to get up earlier in order to get here on time, I would suggest that you go to sleep earlier at night. If that poses too much of a problem, then you may want to consider transferring to an office closer to your home.

Wray: Does that mean you want me to leave?

Jackson: No. In fact, I’d hate to lose you.

Wray: Then why can’t I just start later and take a shorter lunch hour?

Jackson: Because, rules just don’t permit that and until they do, you have to be here on time. If your tardiness doesn’t improve, I will be forced to recommend that you be disciplined. You are too good an employee to go that route.

Wray: Okay. I get the message.

Jackson: I’ll tell you what. Let’s get together in about a month. I will re- view your promptness record before that meeting. I think by that time you will have corrected the problem.

Wray: Okay.

Jackson: Thanks for dropping by to speak with me.

124 CHAPTER 3

strues his or her role. Furthermore, it must be remembered that counseling is

not therapy. It is inappropriate for the manager to function as therapist. It is,

however, appropriate for the manager to arrange for help from someone else if

and when the employee’s problem warrants—such as when a worker has a drug

or alcohol problem that interferes with job performance. Also, counseling is not

discipline: it should not be threatening or punitive in tone. It is appropriate to

inform an employee that performance is below standard and that continued fail-

ure to perform adequately could lead to disciplinary measures. However, the

discussion’s main objective should be to uncover the causes for the undesirable

behaviors, and to spell out future courses of constructive action. Finally, coun-

seling is not coaching. Coaching employees is a day-to-day supervisory job that

involves giving employees clear directions and guidance in how to complete spe-

cific tasks. On the other hand, counseling is a discussion between employer and

employee that focuses more broadly on the employee’s performance and how it

can be improved.

Before you counsel a subordinate, you should plan an approach that will effectively

move the employee’s behavior in the desired direction. Although each counseling

session is unique, the following guidelines are always relevant:

• Conduct counseling sessions in private surroundings.

• Never schedule a counseling session when you are in a hurry.

• Be direct. Do not “beat around the bush” when talking to employees.

Be candid.

• Give an employee the opportunity to explain his or her version of the inci-

dent or circumstances about which you are concerned. Be a good listener.

• Keep an open mind. If after talking to the employee you determine

that your concern was misplaced, then say so.

• Explore means by which an employee can overcome a performance

shortcoming.

• Some employees may be hostile. In these cases, you should remain

calm, constantly trying to return the attention to your concerns. In

other words, refocus on what happened, why it happened, and what

can be done to improve it.

• Never characterize counseling sessions as “discipline.”

• Do not speak in a punitive or derogatory manner.

• At the conclusion of the session, thank the employee for seeing you

and establish an open-door policy should further problems arise.

125Managing Human Resources

The Problem Performer Most employees want to do a good job and intend to correct behavior that is un-

productive or unacceptable to their superiors. Some reasons why change does not

always occur include:

• Conscious and unconscious forces may interfere with the change, e.g., the need to be liked by a group;

• Rewards may reinforce old behaviors, e.g., the need to repeat pleasurable activity;

• Situational factors may control behavior, e.g., an employee feels that a work situation calls for be- havior that causes him or her discomfort.

Managers often need to have a job done correctly as soon

as possible, with no time for the effects of long-term positive

reinforcement to kick in. We know through behavioral re-

search that people behave differently in different situations.

For example, we behave one way when we feel safe and an-

other when we feel threatened. The following situational

controls can be used by managers to encourage behavioral change on the job:

1. Blend a new element into the situation—e.g., a change in work loca- tion that places the problem employee closer to the foreman or perhaps

near a highly productive fellow employee.

2. Create discomfort in the current situation—e.g., in a work area where loitering takes place, constrict the area so no more than one or two

can be comfortable in the area.

3. Generate conditions that create mild fear—e.g., remind a worker that a drop in productivity may lead to the loss of business orders and even-

tually to possible layoffs.

4. Assign a task that requires change—e.g., if one employee is working slowly and holding back the person who has the final piece of a task, the

slow worker should be given the end part of the assignment. A change in

behavior may be necessary to complete the final project, or the individual

may be indicated as the one holding up the work.

5. Eliminate situational supports for the undesirable behavior— “As long as an employee receives rewards—e.g., group approval/attention

for behavior—the behavior will continue. When rewards are given coinci-

dentally with hostile or aggressive behavior, the employee experiences this

as management support for the negative behavior” (Adapted from Don-

aldson 1928).

“There are three main ways

managers get firing wrong—

moving too fast, not using enough

candor, and taking too long.”

JACK WELCH Retired CEO of

General Electric

126 CHAPTER 3

Getting Along with People Theodore Roosevelt once said, “The most important single ingredient in the formula

of success is knowing how to get along with people.” I guess this depends on what you

call success. For me, success is about relationships. People. So how do you get along

with people?

1. First, you must be curious. Human beings are amazing works of art. Each

one has his or her own unique history. Just ask someone you don’t know a

couple of open-ended questions like, “What gets your best?” or “What kinds

of things do you do in your free time?” and actively listen to their response.

You’ll be amazed at what you will learn. Listen and learn.

2. Second, be willing to share. How can we expect to get to know people if we

aren’t willing to share information about ourselves? Let people see the real

you. A great way to reveal the real you is through a personal story. A per-

sonal story gives the listener a chance to visit a moment in time in your life.

People love stories.

3. Third, be compassionate. Practice the “platinum” rule: “Do unto to others as

they would have done unto themselves.” Breaking news . . . everybody is not

like me! We each have individual preferences and paradigms that make us

who we are. The more we understand, embrace, and respect the preferences

and paradigms of others the better we can connect with others—which leads

me to the next point.

4. Fourth, become a student of human behavior. Participate in a Myers-Briggs

Type Indicator (MBTI) workshop. Swiss physician-psychologist Carl Jung

believed people could be identified by their different and equally valuable

preferences for understanding and viewing both the world and themselves.

An understanding of type preference fosters self-awareness and increases

appreciation of others. The MBTI enables us to more easily see similarities

and differences in the mental processing preferences of others—their deci-

sion styles, approaches to team work, relationships with co-workers, and

communication styles. Seemingly chance variation in human behavior in fact

is not due to chance; it is the logical result of a few basic, observable prefer-

ences.

5. Fifth, practice positive talk with yourself and others. When engaged in daily

conversation with others, be a source of positive dialogue. Talk in terms of

solutions and what’s going right. Speak of the positives of every situation.

127Managing Human Resources

Turn the negative side of a situation around by practicing the “flipside” tech-

nique, a humorous approach useful in warding off the “negativity” virus. For

example, if someone cuts you off in traffic say, “Where have you been, I’ve

been saving this safe place in front of me for you for 10 minutes.” You get

the idea. Diffuse a bad situation with humor—which leads me to my last

point…

6. Laugh! Nothing builds relationships with people better than a shared laugh.

Research supports the point that laughter is actually a primal form of rela-

tionship building. Laughter is universal. It’s easy, contagious, good for you,

and fun. Make someone laugh and you make a connection.

In conclusion, be curious, share, be compassionate, be a student, be positive and

laugh. Now, get out there and get along with people. Please? Thank you!

Source: Bobby George. “Getting Along with People.” Impact—The South Carolina State Government Im- provement Network, XIII (IV) (December 2004), www.scsgin.org/newsletter/XIII_IV.pdf.

Creating a Quality Work Environment Creating a Team Mentality An organization’s upper management, middle and line managers, and human re-

source managers must cultivate and sustain teams in order to create a quality work

environment, thereby leading to organizational productivity. Productive human re-

source management fosters cooperative work relationships, a high-value and di-

verse workforce, and a work environment that enhances—or at least does not

detract from—an employee’s quality of life. Work relations in high-performing or-

ganizations require clear and open communication between employees and em-

ployers, as well as a working partnership. This ensures that employees understand

their rights, obligations to the organization, and job expectations. Balancing em-

ployee and organizational need is paramount. In this context, it is becoming more

obvious that high-performing organizations use “work teams” to complete tasks

and achieve objectives. As its name suggests, individuals within work teams work

cooperatively. They do not work as individuals competing against each other. Work

teams typically embrace a supportive philosophy for their members and can ac-

complish more than a group of individuals working independently.

Fostering Labor-Management Cooperation Public administration scholars tend to agree that harmonious labor-management

relationships are central to improving employee performance (Coleman 1990;

Hodes 1991; Grace and Holzer 1992; Herrick 1990). Obviously, labor and manage-

ment tension exists because of complicated workplace relationships, impasses, or

other disagreements. Adversarial relations between employer and employee pres-

ent the classic “no win” situation. Munroe (1992) argues that the development of

partnerships must replace adversarial factions and that cooperative work systems

must replace antagonistic ones. Building partnerships is likely to be difficult, as it

requires persistence, determination, time, and diplomacy. Munroe advocates for

Employee Involvement Programs, which are designed to bring all employees into

the fold when important decisions need to be made. These programs are likely to

minimize workforce demotivation, improve morale, and marshal human resources

for exigent labor-management problem solving.

Holzer and Lee (1999) maintain that employer-employee strain is likely to occur

when each views the other as an adversarial “out-group.” Harmonious labor-man-

agement partnerships might be established through a mindset change; that is, view-

ing the dynamic between labor and management not as a “conflict” but rather as a

mutually dependent and mutually beneficial “partnership.” This mindset change

can be accomplished only through open communication, the full support of upper

management, and a large supply of previous success stories. Open communications

will enable labor and management to better understand mutual problems. Provid-

ing success stories on labor-management partnerships will engender optimistic be-

liefs that labor and management can, despite their inherent differences, work toward

equally beneficial resolutions. Finally, upper-management support will lend needed

credibility about the seriousness of creating labor-management partnerships.

Although employer-employee cooperation is a condition for productive public man-

128 CHAPTER 3

Case Study: The Electronic Hallway Budget Reorganization in the Urbanopolis Human Resource Department (Simulation) As the human resource manager for an urban city, you are mandated by the mayor to reduce your budget. In this exercise you will tackle present-day human resource management decisions based on a myriad of both city government and human re- source management priorities, and civil service regulations. Read the case study and develop a staff reduction plan. This plan should include the positions you would eliminate and why. Also include the total dollar impact of your reduction plan. Compare your recommendations with other students in class and discuss your results.

The Electronic Hallway, Case Teaching Resources from the Evans School of Public Affairs https://hallway.org/cases/index.php

EXERCISE 3.5

129Managing Human Resources

agement, tension will continue to be part of the labor-management relationship. It

should be noted, however, that labor-management partnerships are possible, an ex-

ample of which is the Department of Public Works in the City of Portland, Maine.

Despite significant resource constraints, labor-management cooperation in the con-

struction of a sports venue enabled the project to be com-

pleted under budget and in record time. In order to facilitate

open communication, the city manager created a 26-person

labor-management working group, which included an

equipment operator, a working foreman, an assistant city

manager, an administrative assistant, an engineer, an ar-

borist, and the head of the department, in addition to the

president of American Federation of State, County, and Mu-

nicipal Employees (AFSCME) Local 481. As a result, em-

ployees came to view management as part of their team

rather than as outsiders and adversaries. No longer was the

dynamic between labor and management characterized as “us versus them.” Central

to this success story was strong leadership on the part of the mayor of Portland (U.S.

Department of Labor 1996).

Among the key factors in overcoming labor-management tensions is the formation

of partnerships—partnerships facilitated by open communication, the sharing of

previous success stories, and the support of upper management. It is important

that public managers appreciate the magnitude of labor-management partnerships

and emphasize these three factors for productive human resource management.

Fruitful human resource management is unlikely to exist without a harmonious

labor-management relationship.

Productive working relationships are not limited to employer-employee relations.

Relations between public organizations and the citizens they serve are important as

well. Productive relationships with both internal and external clients are important

in order to circumvent potential problems. Quality work relationships are necessary

to improve problem situations that may burgeon into conflict and become the basis

for litigation. It is vital that managers emphasize the importance of this relationship

to employees.

Productive human resource management exists in an open system in which inter-

nal and external factors are connected. People are the primary means to improving

organizational performance in the public sector. It is critical to be aware of how to

develop and effectively manage public employees, as well as to recognize what mo-

tivates these people to work at a high level. Effectively managing people will remain

a critical issue in public personnel administration. This chapter has presented

strategies relevant to creating and maintaining a quality and diverse workforce and

creating and maintaining a high quality of work-life environment.

“You may be the boss, but you’re only as good as the people who work for you.”

WILLIAM LEAHY U.S. Naval Officer;

White House Chief of Staff during World War II

130 CHAPTER 3

NOTHING YOU CAN DO Artist: V. Kunnap; Poet: G. Tumarinson; “The Fighting Pencil” group, 1968. The Wolf has an office and mouth very loud, He scolded the Hare and started to shout. Offended, the weeping Hare Brought his petition to the Bear. The Bear did not probe too deeply in the act, He resolved the problem as a matter of fact. The end is obvious for the Hare: He needed intensive health care. PEOPLE WHO EXAMINE GRIEVANCES SHOULDN'T FORGET INCIDENTS LIKE THIS.

131Managing Human Resources

In terms of creating and maintaining a quality and diverse workforce, discovering

ways to attract the so-called “best and brightest” is paramount to productive human

resource management. The next step is to provide these individuals with training

and development, enabling them to work effectively within what can be at times

both a rapidly changing and a politically charged environment. At the same time,

public managers must be mindful of a number of factors that have significant im-

pacts on employee motivation. In addition to rudimentary factors such as reward-

ing workers (using monetary as well as nonmonetary, psychological rewards),

public managers must recognize that employee commitment is not universal; that

is, workers may be differentially committed to their managers, work group, unions,

upper management, and clients. This multidimensional

outlook on employee commitment enables managers to

better identify what type of employee commitment serves

as a source of motivation at a given time within the organ-

ization. Employee commitment also varies with differences

in organizational culture.

Creating and maintaining a high quality of work life is cru-

cial. The significance of a worker’s physical surroundings—

workplace safety, ergonomically sound workstations, a

clean place to have lunch—are challenges for high-per-

forming organizations. Accidents, diseases and hazards,

and poor amenities generally result in lower performance, inefficiencies, higher

rates of worker turnover and absenteeism, and increased numbers of medical

claims. In dealing with these problems, it is necessary to have a variety of programs

available to assist employees. By taking steps to lessen the likelihood and severity

of these problems in the first place, both the workers and the organization benefit.

Finally, creating a cooperative workplace culture is essential. Organizational per-

formance improvement is not the product of one employee’s efforts. A collaborative

atmosphere helps employees to be more productive, making labor-management

partnerships imperative. These partnerships thrive on open communication, sup-

plying success stories, and upper management leadership. While no doubt difficult,

successful partnerships can be achieved when these factors are working simultane-

ously. Productive human resource management is more likely to occur when mul-

tiple strategies are pursued simultaneously, and throughout the rest of the

twenty-first century, such management must be alert, responsive, and committed to

its employees and to the demands of an ever-changing environment.

“Our chief want is someone who will

inspire us to be what we know we

could be.”

RALPH WALDO EMERSON

Author; Poet; Philosopher (1803–1882)

132 CHAPTER 3

Coleman, C.J. 1990. Managing Labor Relations in the Public Sector. San Fran- cisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Cooper, P.J. 1998. Public Administration for the Twenty-First Century. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace.

Donaldson, L. 1928. Behavioral Supervision. Addison-Wesley Publishing Com- pany, Inc.

Golembiewski, R.T. 1995. Managing Diversity in Organizations. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.

Grace, S.L., and M. Holzer. 1992. “Labor-Management Cooperation: An Opportu-

nity for Change.” In Public Productivity Handbook, ed. M. Holzer, 487–98. New York: Marcel Dekker.

Guy, M.E. 1992a. “Managing People.” In Public Productivity Handbook, ed. M. Holzer, 307–20. New York: Marcel Dekker.

———. 1992b. “Productive Work Environment.” In Public Productivity Hand- book, ed. M. Holzer, 321–34. New York: Marcel Dekker.

Herrick, N. 1990. Joint Management and Employee Participation: Labor and Management at the Crossroads. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Herzberg, F. 1966. Work and the Nature of Man. Cleveland, OH: World Publishing.

Coaching

Delegation

Dissatisfiers

Employee development

Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission (EEOC)

Federal Labor Relations Authority

Human capital

Human resource management

Job rotation

Merit Systems Protection Board

Office of Personnel Management

(OPM)

Performance appraisal

Personnel selection

Satisfiers

Understudy

Workforce planning

Workforce retention

KEY TERMS

REFERENCES

133Managing Human Resources

Hodes, N. 1991. “Achieving Quality through Labor-Management Participation in

New York State.” Public Productivity and Management Review 15, no. 2: 163–68.

Holzer, M. 1991. “Attracting the Best and the Brightest to Government Service.”

In Public Personnel Management: Current Concerns—Future Challenges, ed. C. Ban and N. Riccucci, 3–16. White Plains, NY: Longman.

Holzer, M., and S.-H. Lee. 1999. “Labor-Management Tension and Partnership:

Where Are We? What Should We Do?” International Review of Public Admin- istration 4, no. 2: 33–44.

Holzer, M., and J. Rabin. 1987. “Public Service: Problems, Professionalism, and

Policy Recommendations.” Public Productivity and Management Review 11: 3–13.

Isaacs, H. 1996. Personnel Management and Industrial Relations MS488 Study Guide. Kingston, Jamaica: University of the West Indies Press.

———. 2003. “Nonmonetary Incentives and Productivity.” In Encyclopedia of Public Administration and Public Policy. New York: Marcel Dekker.

Jurkiewicz, C.L., T.K. Massey, Jr., and R.G. Brown. 1998. “Motivation in Public

and Private Organizations: A Comparative Study.” Public Productivity and Management Review 21: 230–50.

Lewis, J.R., and J. Raffel. 1996. “Training Public Administrators to Work with

Legislators.” Case Studies in Productive Public Management: From the Public Productivity and Management Review, ed. M. Holzer and V. Gabrielian, 301– 9. Burke, VA: Chatelaine Press.

Maslow, A.H. 1943. “A Theory of Human Motivation.” Psychology Review 50: 370–96.

McDonald, N. 1995. “The Importance and Role of Performance Appraisal.” In

Personnel Management and Industrial Relations MS488 Study Guide, 71–72. Kingston, Jamaica: University of the West Indies Press.

McGregor, D. 1960. Human Side of Enterprise. New York: McGraw Hill.

Mills, O. 1994. “Leadership and the Culture of Change.”Caribbean Labour Jour- nal. 4, no. 1: 29–31.

Mintzberg, H. 1996. “Managing Government, Governing Management.” Harvard Business Review 74: 75–83.

Munroe, T. 1992. “Partnership in Labor Relations.” Caribbean Labour Journal 3 (September): 27.

Naff, K.C. 1993. “Human Resources Management Support.” In Public Adminis-

134 CHAPTER 3

tration for the Twenty-First Century, ed. P. Cooper, 285. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace.

National Partnership for Reinventing Government. 1998. “Vice President Gore’s

National Partnership for Reinventing Government Summary of Accomplish-

ments: 1993–1998.” http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/npr/whoweare/history-

ofnpr.html, accessed August 1, 2010.

Rainey, H.G. 1997. Understanding and Managing Public Organizations. 2d ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

“Report of Task Force on Work Attitudes to the Right Honourable Edward Seaga,

Prime Minister of Jamaica.” (March 1983): 11–12.

Romzek, B. 1990. “Employee Investment and Commitment: The Ties That Bind.”

Public Administration Review 50: 374–82.

Schein, E.H. 1988. Organizational Culture and Leadership: A Dynamic View. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Schuler, R.S., and V.L. Huber. 1993. Personnel and Human Resource Manage- ment, 5th ed. Eagan, MN: West Publishing Co.

Sherman, A., G. Bohlander, and S. Snell. 1998. Managing Human Resources. Cincinnati, OH: South-Western College Publishing.

Stone, C. 1982. Work Attitude Survey: A Report to the Jamaican Government. St. Anne, Jamaica: Earle Publisher’s Ltd.

———. 1983. Findings of the Stone Survey. Kingston, Jamaica: JIS Press.

Thompson , F. 1990. “The Politics of Public Personnel Management.” In Public Personnel Administration: Problems and Prospects, ed. S. W. Hays and R. Kearny.

U.S. Department of Labor. 1996. Working Together for Public Service. Washing- ton, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Ban, C., and N. Riccucci, eds. 2002. Public Personnel Management. 3d ed. New York: Longman.

Berman, E., J. Bowman, J. West, and M. Van Wart. 2001. Human Resources Management in the Public Service. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Condrey, S.E., and R. Maranto, eds. 2001. Radical Reform of the Civil Service. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

SUPPLEMENTARY READINGS

135Managing Human Resources

Gore, A. 1993. Creating a Government That Works Better and Costs Less: Rein- venting Human Resource Management. Washington, DC: Government Print- ing Office.

Lewis, G., and S. Frank. 2002. “Who Wants to Work for the Government?” Public Administration Review 62 (July/August): 395–404.

Mosher, F.C. 1982. Democracy and the Public Service, 2d ed. Oxford, UK, and New York: Oxford University Press.

Perry, J.L., and L.R. Wise. 1990. “The Motivational Bases of Public Service.” Pub- lic Administration Review 50, no. 3: 367–73.

Shafritz, J.M., N. Riccucci, D.H. Rosenbloom, K. Naff, and A. Hyde. 2001. Per- sonnel Management in Government. 5th ed. New York: Marcel Dekker.

Partnership for Public Service

http://www.ourpublicservice.org/OPS/

Society for Human Resource Management

http://www.shrm.org/

Uniform Guidelines.com—A Free Service for Human Resources Professionals

http://www.uniformguidelines.com/

U.S. Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration

http://www.doleta.gov/

U.S. Office of Personnel Management

http://www.opm.gov/

ELECTRONIC RESOURCES

Public Decision Making

CHAPTER 4

We are confronted with a relentless need to make decisions.

Virtually every day, a situation arises that does not conform to

our expectations. We then ask ourselves: What should we do?

How do we decide what to do? Each person has his or her own

approach to decision making. Some people panic, while others

automatically respond in a specific way. Some individuals try

one solution after another before they find the right one.

This chapter dissects the decision-making process and

examines each step in it. It further underscores various

theoretical models of decision making and concludes with

a discussion of dysfunctional decision making.

136 CHAPTER 4

137Public Decision Making

“Management is the science of which organizations are but experiments.”

JOHN CONSTABLE English Romantic Painter

(1776-1837)

Postal Workers Mural

“Management is the science of which organizations are but experiments.”

JOHN CONSTABLE English Romantic Painter

(1776-1837)

Postal Workers Mural

“Decision-making processes hold the key to understanding organizations.”

HERBERT A. SIMON Economist; Nobel Prize Winner

During the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, President John F. Kennedy authorized the creation of ExComm—or the Executive Committee of the President.

138 CHAPTER 4

The Nature of Decision Making In simplest terms, decision making entails choosing one course of action among

other competing courses of action. The decision process includes the following

steps: (1) pinpointing the problem; (2) identifying causes; (3) setting objectives; (4)

formulating alternative courses of action; (5) evaluating alternatives against orga-

nizational objectives; (6) choosing the best course of action; and (7) implementing

and evaluating the decision.

Step 1: Pinpointing the Problem In pinpointing the problem (Step 1), the decision maker compares an expected stan-

dard of performance to the actual standard of performance. In other words, what

is happening, and what should be happening? It is important to have a clear defi-

nition of a problem before looking for its solution. The analysis of a problem should

be specific and should indicate the desired behavior, as well as the present behav-

ior. This can be stated as follows:

The goals (desired condition) should be realized. One should also pinpoint the pos-

sible cause or causes for the disparity between the existing condition and the desired

condition, and then decide the most likely cause for the situation (Step 2).

Step 2: Identifying Causes In identifying possible causes, one may ask: “What are the causes for the deviation

between the actual and desired condition?” The most likely cause of the problem is

the one that most precisely explains all the facts about that problem.

• Has all the available information been gathered?

• Are there specific barriers to be faced in the process?

• Do strong individual member attitudes exist toward the situa-

tion?

• Are there important points of view not yet represented?

Actual condition Desired condition

What is happening? What should be happening?

Where it is happening? Where should it be happening?

When is it happening? When should it be happening?

To what extent is it happening? To what extent should it be happening?

HOW DECISIONS ARE MADE

139Public Decision Making

Step 3: Setting Objectives After the problem and its causes have been identified, the decision maker must set

objectives that the decision must achieve (Step 3). Effective objectives should:

• Be specific

• Be measurable (this implies an empirically-based performance

criteria)

• Indicate who, what, how much, when, and where

Examples of objectives: • Ineffective objective—Each respondent will receive an appropriate fi-

nancial evaluation interview.

• Effective objective—To decide the respondent’s support payments, the caseworker will interview him or her to determine his or her: age,

marital status, employment status, number of other children, finan-

cial resources, and eligibility for assistance.

After listing the objectives for a given course of action, those objectives should

be separated into objectives that are absolutely necessary (“must” objectives)

FIGURE 4.1 – DECISION-MAKING STEPS

PINPOINT THE PROBLEM

IDENTIFY THE CAUSES

SET OBJECTIVES

(“Musts” and “Wants”)

FORMULATE ALTERNATIVES

(Brainstorming)

EVALUATE ALTERNATIVES AGAINST OBJECTIVES

CHOOSE BEST ALTERNATIVE

ASSESS POTENTIAL CONSEQUENCES

140 CHAPTER 4

and those that are desirable but less pressing (“want” objectives). “Must” objec-

tives set limits that are nonnegotiable. “Want” objectives set limits that are, to

some extent, flexible.

Example: “Must” objective—All staff will remain with the unit for a minimum of

two years.

“Want” objective—All staff will remain with the unit for three to five years.

“Want” objectives need to be weighted as to their relative importance. There are

two methods for doing this: One method is to decide which objective is the least

important and give it a numerical weight of 1. Then, decide how much more im-

portant another “want” objective is compared to the one deemed least essential and

give the second objective a weight in accordance with that decision, for example a

2 or a 3. Continue on with each want objective, comparing it to the least important

one and ranking it accordingly. The other method is to use a straight interval scale

ranging from 1 to 10 as a means of rating the importance of “want” objectives. Less

important objectives are given scores of less than five, while more important ob-

jectives are given scores greater than five. The idea here is to establish a criterion

for determining which “want” objectives a decision maker should consider when

making a final decision.

Step 4: Formulating Action Alternatives When formulating alternative courses of action (Step 4), a decision maker should

ask whether the problem has existed before. If so, what was done and what was the

outcome? Has a related problem occurred? If so, what elements were similar? How

were they handled and to what effect? A primary method of formulating courses of

action includes brainstorming, which was developed to help generate ideas in the

field of advertising. The term means to use the brain to “storm” a creative problem.

Effective brainstorming entails the following:

• Criticisms of ideas must be postponed temporarily.

• Freewheeling is encouraged; that is, the wilder the idea, the better—

the logic being that it is easier to tone down wild ideas than to liven

up lackluster ones.

• Quantity is stressed over quality. The greater the number of ideas, the

more likely there will be potential winners in the pack.

• Combination and improvement are pursued. Not only should partici-

pants contribute ideas of their own, but also they should strive to use

other people’s ideas to make better ideas—i.e., combining two or

more ideas into an alternative idea.

In conducting effective brainstorming sessions, the problem should not be revealed

141Public Decision Making

before the session. The idea is to create an environment conducive to spontaneity,

which will help generate a free flow of ideas. During the session, however, the prob-

lem should be defined clearly. Within a brainstorming discussion group, it is ad-

vantageous to include people with experience and people new to the specific

problem. An eclectic group of participants is more likely to trigger a range of inno-

vative ideas. The flow of ideas can sometimes be increased

by presenting idea-spinning questions such as, How can

we adapt (modify, rearrange, reverse, combine, minimize,

maximize) any general solution? Finally, when the discus-

sion group seems to have run out of ideas, try reviewing the

list quickly, and then ask for a precise number of additional

suggestions.

Creativity and Formulating Decision Alternatives Creativity is an innate human capacity, not a gift of the tal-

ented elite. To become creative in our work and personal

lives, we must unlearn a range of limiting behaviors and at-

titudes and foster creative organizational sets. Creativity is

synonymous with seeing things in a new way; going out-

side of our own experiences for solutions; challenging as-

sumptions—which encompasses flexibility of thought, going beyond stereotypical

interpretations, questioning self-evident truths, and developing a healthy skepti-

cism. Making connections between seemingly unrelated ideas and/or events is cen-

tral to creativity. Taking risks is also central to creative decision making.

Several personality traits affect individual creativity. These traits include: a toler-

ance for ambiguity, a healthy self-concept, a reasonable focus of control, and a mod-

erate level of comfort regarding risk taking. The higher an individual’s tolerance

for ambiguity, the more patience he or she will have for systematically working

through the elements of the situation and then formulating and assessing alterna-

tives. The lower an individual’s self-concept, the more anxiety that individual will

have about how he or she is viewed by others. This leads to stress, preventing a

thorough search for decision alternatives. Also, the lower the self-concept, the more

sensitive a person will be to social pressure, causing that person to side with the ma-

jority. Additionally, people who believe they have little control over outcomes will

be less exhaustive in searching for alternatives. They may ask themselves, Why do

anything when the result is beyond my control, anyway? Finally, a person who is

neither a high risk taker nor a low risk taker will be the best decision maker. A high

risk taker is an inefficient decision maker because it is unlikely that the risky alter-

native will solve the problem. The low risk taker, on the other hand, plays it too

safe and is less likely to come up with a sufficient number of decision alternatives.

Blocks to Creativity. Creativity is an innate human capacity. People differ in the de- gree, not the kind, of creative resources available to them. In order for us to cultivate

“Indecision is debilitating; it

feeds upon itself; it is, one might

almost say, habit-forming.

Not only that, but it is contagious; it transmits itself

to others.”

H.A. HOPF Author

142 CHAPTER 4

our creative resources, we must overcome numerous creative blocks, among them:

• Overdominance of left side of brain

• Organizational and individual mindsets that impose immediate judg-

ment and evaluation of ideas

• Internal conflict between experimental and safekeeping selves

• Childhood conditioning

• Fear of mistakes

• Fear of risking self-esteem

• Need for control and conditioned responses

• Overly narrow or broad definitions of problems

• Competition

• Perfectionism

Source: Choo, C.W. 2006. The Knowing Organization: How Organizations Use Information to Construct Meaning, Create Knowledge, and Make Decisions (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

FIGURE 4.2 – DECISION PROCESS MODEL

IDENTIFICATION DEVELOPMENT SELECTION

Search Screen

Diagnosis Design Judgment Authorization

R e c o g n t i o n Analysis

Bargaining

Internal Internpt

New Option Interrupt

External I n t e r r u p t

143Public Decision Making

Costs of Creativity. Developing our creative resources may cause certain strains. Recognizing these potential stresses can help minimize blocks to our creative ef-

forts. Creative individuals face new frustrations because of increased problem

awareness. People who are highly sensitive to problems are likely to expose them-

selves to more and greater despair because they are struck

by the full complexity of the issues before them, as well as

the full scope of their new responsibilities.

Creative individuals face new frustrations because of in-

creased opportunity awareness. For example, they see new

opportunities to improve agency effectiveness, but often no

one in authority seems willing to dedicate the time or re-

sources to mine the gold that is there. Others will say that the opportunities are not

gold ore, but chunks of rock.

Creativity adds up to a lot of hard work. Many individuals feel overworked already.

Often, however, they have become overly busy with the 80 percent of the work

that—if done perfectly—accounts for only 20 percent of the results. They keep busy

to avoid the pain, frustration, and worry of tackling the important work, that is, the

20 percent that matters. Reweighing priorities is hard work. Implementing ideas is

even harder.

Creativity adds new risks to life, which brings new tensions and new anxieties.

Some individuals crave creativity and innovation, yet they are uncomfortable with

change. This is a contradiction, of course, as creativity implies something new, non-

conforming, or different. Also, the more confidence a person builds with creativity

tools, the more pioneering that person becomes. He or she will be taking the ini-

tiative, knowing full well who is accountable if the idea fails. An idea can fail. There

are no magic bullets for solving problems or making decisions creatively; there are

no magic potions for developing imaginative opportunities. A first try may be a dis-

aster—but that does not mean a second try will not bring success.

Steps 5 and 6: Evaluating Alternatives and Choosing the Best One Evaluating each course of action against the objectives (Step 5) allows the decision

maker to choose the best course of action (Step 6). To remain in the running, a

course of action should meet all of the “must” objectives, and it should meet some

of the “want” objectives. Moreover, it is important that decision makers take into

account the potential impacts each course of action may have on the organization

and its people. Some questions to consider include:

• Will the workers’ motivation, skills, or growth be affected?

• Will relationships among units, communication, responsibility, or

delegation be affected?

“If you chase two rabbits, both will

escape.”

CHINESE PROVERB

144 CHAPTER 4

• Will the organization’s image be affected, or will there be legal and/or

political ramifications of choosing one course of action over another?

By and large, the best course of action is the one that meets all of the “must” objec-

tives and the most number of “want” objectives, while at the same time engender-

ing the fewest disadvantages to the organization and its people. Using a balance

sheet is a good way of visually representing the benefits and burdens of one course

of action versus another. The balance sheet helps individuals to make more com-

prehensive appraisals of competing courses of action, as decision makers are bet-

ter able to think about possible trade-offs, concentrate on the major differences

between the choices, and think about the degree of importance of each pro and con.

Table 4.1 is an example of a balance sheet created by a manager who is considering

moving to a different job. The balance sheet is meant to evaluate his present posi-

tion. The matrix details the positives and negatives of staying with the current job.

Expected consequences Positives Negatives

Gains and losses

for self

1. Satisfactory pay

2. More opportunities to use

skills

3. Current status within the

organization is good

1. Long hours

2. Constant time pressure

3. Unpleasant paperwork

4. Poor prospects for ad-

vancement

Gains and losses

for others

1. Adequate income for fam-

ily

2. Family receives perks

given my position

1. Not enough free time for

family

2. Spouse forced to deal

with my work-related

irritability

Self-approval

or disapproval

1. This position allows me to

make use of full potential

2. Proud of my achieve-

ments

3. Sense of meaningful

accomplishments

1. Feel like a fool at times

for putting up with unrea-

sonable deadlines and other

work-related red tape

Social approval

or disapproval

1. Approval of members of

my team—who look up to

me.

2. Approval of my supe-

rior—who is a friend and

desires that I stay

1. Very slight skeptical reac-

tion from spouse

2. A friend who has wanted

to wangle a new job for me

will be disappointed

TABLE 4.1 – BALANCE SHEET

145Public Decision Making

Decision-Making Example: “Must” objective: All unit staff will remain with the unit for at least two

years.

“Want” objectives: (1) All unit staff will remain with the unit for at least

three years.

Weight = 3 (on a scale of 1–5, with 5 being the highest)

(2) All unit staff will remain with the unit for at least five years.

Weight = 1 (on a scale of 1–5, with 5 being the highest)

From the “must” and “want” objectives listed above, the following deci-

sion alternatives are formulated and evaluated.

Decision Alternatives: (1) Staff will sign two-year renewable contracts.

(2) Staff will sign one-year renewable contracts.

(3) Staff will sign three-year renewable contracts.

Decision alternative 2 does not meet the “must” objective sufficiently.

Rank of decision alternative 1 against “want” objective 1 = 4 (on scale of

1–5, with 5 being the highest).

Rank of decision alternative 1 against “want” objective 2 = 2.

Rank of decision alternative 3 against “want” objective 1 = 5.

Rank of decision alternative 3 against “want” objective 2 = 5.

Relative score of decision alternative 1 = (4*3) + (2*1) = 14

Relative score of decision alternative 3 = (5*3) + (5*1) = 20

Decision alternative 3 should be chosen.

Theoretical Models of Decision Making Rational Model The rational decision-making model is grounded in economic principles. The con-

cept of marginal utility, according to Verne Lewis (1952), brings pure rationality

into public decision making. Relative value, effectiveness, and incremental com-

parisons should determine which decision alternative is chosen. Relative value

refers to the “opportunity cost” of a particular policy decision. The opportunity cost

of a choice reflects the difference between one’s first and second choices. Consider,

for example, that Thomas chooses to pursue a Master of Public Administration

(MPA) degree after college. The cost of tuition and living expenses amount to

146 CHAPTER 4

$40,000 per year for two years ($80,000 total). This $80,000 total, however, does

not reflect opportunity cost. Let us further assume that by going to graduate school

for two years, Tom turned down a job that would have paid him $50,000 a year

with a 5 percent raise after the first year ($102,500 total). This $102,500 reflects the

opportunity cost of choosing graduate school instead of the job, and therefore the

total real cost of graduate school equals $182,500. So, why pursue an MPA degree?

The idea is that more education will afford Tom more earning potential long-term,

which will offset any lost wages in the short-term.

Effectiveness deals with evaluating a decision in terms of achieving a common pur-

pose. Lewis’s notion of incremental comparisons (1952) refers to comparing mar-

ginal value and costs, assuming that the value of anything decreases with increasing

quantity. In other words, as one acquires additional units of anything, an added

unit has decreasing value. Consider this: you need four tires on a car. You may need

a fifth due to the occasional flat tire. Having a sixth tire, however, does not seem

worth the cost relative to its value. While the policymaking process deals with value-

laden questions, economic and cost-benefit principles must remain dominant, ac-

Source: S-Y, Rho. 1998. School of Public Affairs and Administration, Rutgers University, Newark, NJ.

FIGURE 4.3 – DECISION MAKING BY HERBERT SIMON

Bounded Rationality

Cognitive limits on rationality

Organization as Decision Unit

Human Problem-Solving Process

Modes of Organizational Influence

1) Information

2) Organizational loyalties

3) Criterion of efficiency

4) Advice and information

5) Training

True Scientific Method

Principles of administration: inconsistent, conflicting, inapplicable

Logical positivism

1) Distinction between fact and value

2) The role of values emphasized the subjective elements of decision maker

3) Science is concerned with facts, not values

147Public Decision Making

cording to Lewis (1952). Much like Lewis, J.L. Mikesell (1978) maintains that the

decision-making process should try to identify valuable government activities. In

doing so, cost-benefit analysis (CBA) serves as a primary tool of the rational deci-

sion maker.

CBA is predicated on comparing the primary and secondary costs of a program or

policy, and comparing those costs to direct and indirect benefits. Both costs and

benefits are expressed in monetary terms. Typically, results are expressed in terms

of a benefit-cost ratio, which is equal to the benefits of a program divided by its

costs. If the benefit-cost ratio is greater than one, it can be said that the benefits of

a program outweigh its costs. CBA can be conducted on either an ex ante or ex post

basis. Ex ante analyses are prospective in that they try to estimate costs and bene-

fits of a program or policy prior to development or implementation. In contrast, ex

post analyses are retrospective, as they examine costs and benefits of programs and

policies that have existed for some time. Both ex ante and ex post analyses aid the

rational decision maker in determining whether a program or policy should be pur-

sued or continued. CBA is covered in greater depth in Chapter 8.

Herbert Simon (1947/1997) was somewhat critical of the rational model given his

belief that people’s cognitive limitations make it impossible to consider the full

range of decision-making alternatives and the information corresponding to each

Source: Choo, C.W. 2006. The Knowing Organization: How Organizations Use Information to Construct Meaning, Create Knowledge, and Make Decisions (2d ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

FIGURE 4.4 – BOUNDED RATIONAL DECISION MAKING

DECISION PREMISES

BOUNDED RATIONALITY

• Values • Information

• Skills

DECISION ROUTINES

• Performance Programs

• Satisficing•

Sequential Search

ORGANIZATIONALLY RATIONAL

DECISION BEHAVIOR

148 CHAPTER 4

alternative. This concept is known as bounded rationality. Decision makers are,

therefore, limited to a few courses of action and ultimately choose the one that is

most satisfactory or “good enough.” Simon terms this satisficing (1947/1997).

Satisficing and Incrementalism Policy changes occur little by little. According to Lindblom (1959), individuals tend

not to follow the rational model when making decisions. Instead, they avoid “ra-

tional” decision making through satisficing and incrementalism. From a practical

standpoint, Simon’s concept of satisficing entails lowering the bar in terms of goal

attainment, and then choosing a policy alternative that satisfies this lower stan-

dard. Furthermore, decision makers who satisfice choose policies that are thought

to be “good enough” for the time being, until a better policy alternative can be

found. The incremental decision-making model suggests that: (1) realistically, only

The Administrative (or Behavioral) Model • Is descriptive in that it describes how decisions are actually made.

• Decision makers seek to simplify problems and make them less com-

plex because they are constrained by their individual capabilities (e.g.,

limited information-processing ability) and by organizational condi-

tions (e.g., availability of resources).

• Assumes that decision makers operate with limited (or “bounded”) ra-

tionality; this means that decision makers are rational within a simpli-

fied model that contains fewer components (e.g., fewer

decision-making criteria, fewer options, and so on).

• Assumes that decision makers identify a limited number of decision-

making criteria, that they examine a limited range of alternatives (only

those that are easy to find, highly visible, have been tried before, or are

only slightly different from the status quo) and that they do not possess

all the information needed to make a decision.

• The decision maker selects a satisficing alternative. This is an alterna-

tive that is “good enough” or satisfactory in that it meets the minimum

criteria established for a desired solution.

• Decision making proceeds sequentially: alternatives are examined one

at a time and the first satisfactory alternative that is found is selected.

Source: CSWT Papers, “Group Decision Making Within the Organization: Can Models Help?” by Ryan K. Lahti (Center for the Study of Work Teams, University of North Texas).

149Public Decision Making

a few policy alternatives can be considered at one time, and (2) these policies do not

differ radically from existing policies. Change, therefore, occurs through decisions

that have an incremental effect. The incremental model is a more realistic approach

to public decision making, as it provides greater flexibility in coping with time-sen-

sitive policy problems (Lindblom 1959).

Incrementalism is often criticized, given that it perpetuates and condones the sta-

tus quo. In more extreme cases, it allows failing government agencies and programs

to continue and even expand. Fundamental change is difficult to achieve via incre-

mentalism (Dror 1964). One response to incrementalism is the use of sunset pro-

visions, under which an agency, program, or law expires automatically following a

specified period, unless the legislature votes to reenact it. This was the case with

many of the provisions of the USA Patriot Act, which was passed in the wake of the

9/11 terrorist attacks on the United States.

Revised Garbage Can Model In contrast to the rational decision-making model, Kingdon (2003) defies conven-

tional wisdom by claiming that the decision-making process is neither systematic

nor neatly defined within the context of the political arena. Rather, public admin-

The Implicit Favorite Model • Is descriptive in that it describes how decisions are actually made.

• The decision maker seeks to simplify the decision making process by

identifying an “implicit favorite” before alternatives are evaluated; this

often occurs subconsciously.

• The decision maker is neither rational nor objective and unbiased.

• After a “favorite” is selected, the decision maker tries to appear rational

and objective by developing decision criteria and by identifying and

evaluating various alternatives; however, this is done in a biased way so

as to ensure that the favorite appears superior on these criteria and

thus, can legitimately be selected as the “best” solution.

• In this model, “decision making” is essentially a process of confirming

a choice/decision that has already been made. The actual decision was

made in an intuitive and unscientific fashion.

Source: CSWT Papers, “Group Decision Making Within the Organization: Can Models Help?” by Ryan K. Lahti (Center for the Study of Work Teams, University of North Texas).

150 CHAPTER 4

istration decision making is chaotic. According to the revised garbage can model,

the decision-making process can be understood in the context of three separate

“streams” that operate independently. Specifically, the problem, political, and pol-

icy streams steer the decision-making process. The problem stream refers to an un-

derstanding of “how and why one set of problems rather than another comes to

occupy officials’ attention” (Kingdon 2003, p. 87). The political stream represents

the pulse of the nation as conveyed through public opinion, election results, or ide-

ological shifts as evidenced through public and special interest campaigns. Finally,

within the policy stream, administrators, technocrats, researchers, and political

Source: Choo, C.W. 2006. The Knowing Organization: How Organizations Use Information to Construct Meaning, Create Knowledge, and Make Decisions (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

FIGURE 4.5 – GARBAGE CAN MODEL

Problems

Participants

Participants Problems Solutions Participants Problems Solutions

COs Choice Opportunities

COs

PARs

COs Choice Opportunities

COMMITTEE

DEPARTMENT A DEPARTMENT B

Participants

Solutions

PARs

COs

PARs

COs

PARs

COs

151Public Decision Making

staffers formulate policy proposals. Policy advocates who have crafted specific pro-

posals wait for a compelling problem to emerge and present their respective pro-

posals as plausible solutions. In the absence of a societal problem with which

advocates can link their respective proposals, a change in the political climate is

necessary for certain policies to be given consideration. Policy advocates increase

their chances of influencing the agenda-setting process given the convergence of the

problem, political, and policy streams. That is, the policy window widens (i.e., the

likelihood that a policy will be given consideration) when a problem emerges and

the political climate is ripe for certain policy preferences. The three streams con-

verge at “critical times” (e.g., a crisis), according to Kingdon (2003).

The gun control movement moved to the forefront subsequent to the near-fatal in-

jury of White House press secretary James Brady during

an assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan in

1981. Arguably, it was this focusing event that served as the

impetus for more widespread gun control measures. In the

context of Kingdon’s framework, the problem was the

availability of firearms. The existing solution (or policy

preference) was the Brady bill (now the Brady law), which

requires a five-day waiting period and mandatory back-

ground checks prior to the purchase of certain firearms. It

was believed that these measures would reduce crimes of

passion and ensure that convicted felons or the mentally ill

were not able to purchase firearms. The policy window for the Brady bill widened

with the election of President Bill Clinton, as the bill was originally introduced in

1987 and was signed in November 1993.

The passage and implementation of the USA Patriot Act fits within the context of

Kingdon’s garbage can model. Passed shortly after the terrorist attacks on the

World Trade Center and the Pentagon in 2001, the Patriot Act expanded the au-

thority of U.S. law enforcement agencies to intensify the fight against terrorism in

the United States and abroad. The most notable provisions of the Patriot Act deal

with the federal government’s enhanced power in gathering information. For ex-

ample, the Patriot Act gives law enforcement agencies greater authority to search

telephone and e-mail communications, as well as medical and financial records.

Other surveillance provisions include what are called roving wiretaps—which give

the U.S. government the authority to wiretap all types of communication devices.

Previously, the government would need to obtain permission from a court to tap

each device (filing a separate request, for instance, for a phone, cell phone, per-

sonal computer, iPhone, and so on). With roving wiretaps, however, the govern-

ment can tap into any and all of a subject’s communications devices after receiving

blanket authority from a court. Now, consider this: The Patriot Act was written and

passed into law on October 24, 2001—only six weeks after the terrorist attacks. This

“For every complex problem, there is a

simple solution that is wrong.”

GEORGE BERNARD SHAW

Irish Critic; Poet (1856–1950)

152 CHAPTER 4

piece of legislation was a hefty 342 pages. How on earth could this have been writ-

ten and passed so quickly? The answer is that many of the Patriot Act’s provisions

were failed legislative proposals that were still floating around the legislature. These

ideas and proposals did not have any traction, so to speak, because there was never

any problem serious enough to warrant putting such ideas into place—not until

September 11, 2001, anyway. The problem, therefore, was domestic terrorism, and

the political window widened given the fear of another attack and people’s desire for

concrete action. The solution became a compilation of policies that previously had

not taken root but were nevertheless repackaged as the USA Patriot Act.

Participatory Model Participatory decision making assumes that a diverse group of individuals (or in-

dividuals representing a diverse set of interests) will act in a consultative capacity.

Typically, those people affected by a particular problem or a potential course of ac-

tion are afforded the opportunity to provide input. This input is documented

through public meetings or hearings, advisory boards, and citizen advocacy groups.

A classical example of participatory decision making deals

with the writing of federal regulations. Federal regulatory

agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the

Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)

are responsible for writing and rewriting what are known

as “rules.” Rules have the same impact as laws, and they

exist for purpose of protecting the citizenry. For example,

some rules stipulate that tests, trials, and other safety pre-

cautions be met prior to a new drug’s release; others mandate that automobile

plants must meet certain environmental and safety standards. Even though rules

are not passed by Congress (or the legislature at the state level), they possess the ef-

fect of law. As a result, individuals or corporations who, for instance, violate envi-

ronmental rules by dumping toxic waste into the oceans will be held accountable for

their actions. The federal government alone writes and rewrites thousands of rules

each year. Agencies like the EPA, FDA, and OSHA rely upon information and ex-

pertise from private individuals and business owners to craft these rules. In 2005

the federal government launched Regulations.gov, an Internet-based clearinghouse

that allows anyone to read and comment on proposed federal rules through an elec-

tronic template. From a more local perspective, participatory decision making oc-

curs when a parent-teacher association advises a school board or the

superintendent of schools. Binding referenda represent more extreme cases of par-

ticipatory decision making. Through referenda, citizens are given the authority to

accept or reject specific policy actions through the ballot box.

The participatory model is advantageous insofar as interest groups provide decision

makers with a wealth of information. Decision makers too dependent on informa-

“By failing to prepare, you are preparing to fail.”

BENJAMIN FRANKLIN American Statesman; Ambassador; Patriot

153Public Decision Making

Public Involvement Techniques for Transportation Decision Making: Citizens on Decision and Policy Bodies Who are citizens on decision and policy boards? Community people serve on policy and decision-making committees and boards.

They represent groups organized around civic, environmental, business, or commu-

nity interests, or specific geographic areas, or they serve as individual experts in a

field. They need not be elected officials or agency staff. The Connecticut Department

of Transportation (ConnDOT) appointed a community committee to develop and

recommend alternatives for reconstruction of a large I-95 bridge.

Some boards make decisions; others help formulate policy. Regional residents sit on

the decision-making Great Falls City/County Planning Board in Montana, and on

Washington’s Puget Sound Regional Council. The head of Georgia’s Chatham

County-Savannah Metropolitan Planning Committee sits on the Metropolitan Plan-

ning Organization’s (MPO’s) Project Committee. Citizens on such boards are distinct

from purely advisory groups, such as civic advisory committees, that are often part

of planning and project development.

These boards are established by statute, regulation, or political decision. Ad hoc com-

mittees are set up by legislative acts or executive decision to investigate specific sub-

jects. They may be temporary or permanent. In Portland, Oregon, a committee of

community members works with the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO)

staff to develop scopes of service for projects and to review and select consultants. For

the U.S. 301 corridor study, Maryland’s governor created a 76-member task force to

address regional transportation issues, develop and evaluate possible transportation

and land-use solutions, and recommend public policies. The majority of members

were private citizens.

The composition of a board varies, depending on its assigned task. A board may include

citizens and elected or appointed officials or be composed entirely of citizens. It may be

assisted in its task by staff members assigned from elected officials or agency represen-

tatives. The Airport Policy Committee of the San Diego, California, MPO has a mixed

representation of citizens and professionals. The Metro Council, MPO for Minneapolis-

St. Paul, Minnesota, has both citizens and elected officials on its 30-member Trans-

portation Board, including 10 municipal elected officials, 7 elected county officials, 9

private citizens (including the chair), and 4 representatives of state or regional agencies.

People are appointed to boards in a variety of ways. They are nominated or appointed (continued)

154 CHAPTER 4

to these positions by public officials, or they volunteer or are elected by their peers.

The ways they come to serve depend on the rules and nature of the policy body.

The board’s role establishes the amount of influence these citizens wield. The 76-

member task force overseeing the U.S. 301 Corridor Planning Study in Maryland has

virtually total decision-making power. Composed entirely of citizens appointed by

the governor, Arizona DOT’s Transportation Board has final say on the state’s five-

year plan, the transportation improvement program, and state transportation plan-

ning projects.

Why are they useful? Community people bring new points of view, new ideas, and a community perspec-

tive directly into the decision-making process. Little Rock, Arkansas, MPO found

that people were able to integrate political and technical engineering issues in solv-

ing problems. They focused on whether an idea made sense to them, their neighbors,

and the people most affected by the decision. Ad hoc committees help local people

participate in decision making. For the Albuquerque, New Mexico, MPO’s Urban

Area Truck Route Task Group, membership was solicited through more than 300

letters to neighborhood, advocacy, and business groups. Volunteers worked with

technical staff from the city and a neighboring county to develop a commercial vehi-

cle network plan processed as though it were an agency-prepared plan.

Decisions have greater legitimacy if residents are involved. Including local people in

decision making demonstrates an agency’s commitment to participatory planning. At

the contaminated U.S. Department of Energy site in Rocky Flats, Colorado, a com-

munity committee directed the planning of an off-site hazardous waste sampling pro-

gram. In essence, such empowerment validates the principle that people want—and

should be able—to decide what is best for their community.

Do they have special uses? Citizen committees oversee specific aspects of complicated programs. For the Hudson

River Waterfront Alternatives Analysis/Draft Environmental Impact Statement in New

Jersey, local residents directed agency staff in implementing air quality monitoring.

Community representatives work directly with project design consultants. For pro-

posed construction of I-70 through Glenwood Canyon in Colorado, the governor ap-

pointed area residents to work with the state’s highway planners and the principal

design consultants to address public concerns from the beginning of preliminary en-

gineering and highway design. Along with frequent public hearings, local represen-

tation served to satisfy public demand for a greater voice in the project.

(continued)

155Public Decision Making

Local people facilitate communication between decision-making bodies. The Airport

Policy Committee of the San Diego, California, MPO worked with officials to forge

consensus on several controversial issues. These people provided a free flow of ideas,

unconstrained by concerns for existing policies, and were able to help overcome po-

litical deadlock.

Community representatives serve as informed spokespersons for an agency’s pro-

grams. Individuals from the Boise, Idaho, MPO citizen committee host public meet-

ings, speak to other organizations, and attend neighborhood events. They use

nontechnical language to make citizens more comfortable and willing to participate

in discussion.

Residents help achieve an agency’s goals. For the Dade County, Florida, rail system,

a decision-making committee was appointed, composed of elected officials and

neighborhood representatives. These citizens subsequently provided leadership on

two referenda supporting funding for the new rail system.

Civic outreach committees assist with public involvement programs and provide ad-

vice based on what they hear in their own discussions with the public. Seattle’s Cen-

tral Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority (RTA) appointed a group of people to

assist in developing a ballot proposal for regional transit.

Who participates on these boards? People who serve on policy boards are drawn from many sources. They include com-

munity and business leaders, leaders from special interest groups, and interested in-

dividuals. Length of tenure varies, depending on tasks, but is generally one to five

years. It is important to recognize special interests. The Hartford, Connecticut, MPO

agency-wide technical committee includes representatives of four private groups: the

American Lung Association, the Chamber of Commerce, a construction industry as-

sociation, and a ridesharing corporation. The board of the Port Authority of Al-

legheny County, Pennsylvania, has long included representatives from the Sierra

Club and the League of Women Voters.

What are the costs? Monetary costs are usually nominal. Local people appointed to policy boards are sel-

dom paid. Costs to support their participation include agency staff time, postage,

transportation, and occasional meals. Many agencies economize by sending the same

information packages to both elected officials and boards that include citizens. Costs

of including community people on existing boards are likely to be lower than those

of forming an entirely new board or committee such as a collaborative task force. (continued)

156 CHAPTER 4

Staffing requirements may be very small. A 1995 nationwide survey of transit agency

policy committees showed that staff support to the committees averaged 12.4 hours

per month. Full-time staff members with assignments including support to these

committees averaged 1.2 people. However, even modest requirements of staff time

may pose a challenge to small MPOs.

How is this organized? The first step is to determine the need for local representation. Agencies may be

aware of the need because of comment or criticism from local people. The media

sometimes call for local representation when an agency undertakes a specific task. An

agency also becomes aware through discussions with peers in other areas.

Another step is to research legal requirements. State laws may specify whether indi-

viduals may sit on MPO boards. Participation may be limited by an organization’s

by-laws.

An agency devises a strategy for local representation, designing community positions to

suit the board’s functions and objectives. The Albany, New York, Capital District Trans-

portation Committee (CDTC)—all elected officials—puts local people on many task

forces, along with local agency representatives and institutional and business leaders.

An agency solicits local interests in a variety of ways. The media help by opening the

issue to public discussion. A letter soliciting interest in participation on boards or

committees might be sent in a general mailing. For a long-range planning effort, the

Albany CDTC took a sample survey of local people to determine potential interest in

participating on planning and policy committees.

An agency seeks a balance of various viewpoints. The nature of a task may draw vol-

unteers who represent only one side of an issue, yet a board should encompass many

stances.

A formal appointment process is established. A simple letter or a more formal event

lends legitimacy to the process and gives satisfaction and encouragement to an ap-

pointee. A written document formalizes the time frame, responsibilities, and the ex-

pected products. It is also important to point out the extent of the powers that

accompany the appointment and how the results of the task will affect further agency

actions. Agencies involve elected officials and keep them informed. Officials are often

able to provide helpful insight. They may also want to be apprised of the board’s

progress.

Agencies determine the nature of their involvement on boards. It may take the form

(continued)

157Public Decision Making

of representation, usually in an ad hoc and non-voting capacity. It may involve board

support, in the form of staff services, meeting space, and use of equipment for pre-

sentations and recording of proceedings. In some instances, agencies supply meals,

especially if participants travel long distances or a meeting is held during a conven-

tional meal hour.

A method of selecting a committee chair is determined. Often a board selects its own

chair, or the chair is appointed. If elections are to take place, introductions of board

member candidates are appropriate, so that an informed selection is made. Intro-

ductions can be informal or take a more formal approach, such as written position pa-

pers that define an individual’s expectations and goals for the processes and products.

Meeting frequency is derived from the size of the task and its deadlines. In order to ac-

complish an assignment, a board may need to meet frequently. Many citizen commit-

tees meet monthly, but specific projects or responsibilities may dictate different

schedules. Board members should play a major role in determining meeting frequency.

Communication is maintained between meetings. Minutes of each meeting are kept

for the record and distributed to remind participants of past events and decisions. Issue

papers are distributed prior to meetings to help people prepare and to aid discussions.

Many agencies keep local representatives informed with periodic status reports.

Decision-making bodies need time to adjust to the dynamics of public involvement.

In some cases, important informal communication occurs during breaks or outside

formal meeting hours. For effective communication among policy board members,

the sponsoring agency may take time to foster a positive atmosphere or use familiar

procedures. For guidance, many MPOs, such as those in Portland, San Diego, and

Phoenix, employ the commonly understood meeting procedures outlined in Robert’s

Rules of Order.

Ethical issues must be considered. Public agencies frequently have established rules

of professional ethics, and these rules extend to community participants. For exam-

ple, potential conflicts of interest need to be identified and addressed immediately.

How is this used with other techniques? Community representatives are important components of a public involvement pro-

gram and complement almost any other technique. However, local representation

cannot be the sole method an agency uses to involve the public in the planning

process. Community representatives are most effective if they relate continuously

with their constituent groups and participate in an agency’s other public involvement

outreach techniques. (continued)

158 CHAPTER 4

tion from interest groups run the risk of being swayed into making decisions that

serve the interest groups more than the organization itself. This is referred to as “cap-

tivity.” Captive organizations are more inclined to underemphasize organizational

values and goals and overemphasize the values and goals of clientele groups. The par-

ticipatory model is derived from a school of political-philosophical thought known

as pluralism. Contrary to the European oligarchies, the American system of govern-

ment was founded on the principle of popular sovereignty, the embodiment of which

is the right to participate in the electoral process. Participation ensures the stability

and prosperity of our political system, and within the context of a pluralistic society,

it is a vehicle by which factions compete for political access and policy preferences.

The notion of pluralism assumes that voluntary associations or interest groups par-

ticipate in the interest of persuading key players within the political arena. The out-

comes of participation include electoral majorities that support or compete against a

group’s interests. Pluralism is predicated upon collective behavior and compromise.

The ideal democratic system, according to R.A. Dahl (1982), is predicated upon “ef-

fective participation,” which assumes that all are afforded an equal voice and that cit-

Local representatives are ideal speakers. They are generally well informed and usually

have extensive experience and exposure to issues. They are good candidates for a speak-

ers’ bureau, but agencies must remain considerate of demands placed on their time.

What are the drawbacks? The selection and appointment process may be criticized, especially if the appointee’s

qualifications are questioned or if the process is seen as closed or unfair. To counter

such charges, an agency can develop a strategy for the process that is comprehen-

sive and well understood.

Board members may not be fully representative. Selected representatives may not

share the prevailing opinions of the communities they represent. An agency some-

times needs to expand the number of representatives to bring in underrepresented

interests. Balanced representation of interest groups is crucial in avoiding contro-

versy. Disputes over representation require skillful diplomacy to maintain the legit-

imacy of the process. Agency culture sometimes presents barriers. Agencies that

perceive themselves as empowered with sole decision-making responsibility are re-

luctant to share authority with non-elected citizens. An agency’s traditional organi-

zation or decision-making style may block efforts to increase the influence of private

citizens on decision or policy bodies.

Source: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, “Public Involvement Tech- niques for Transportation Decision Making,” www.fhwa.dot.gov/reports/pittd/citizens.htm.

(continued)

159Public Decision Making

izens share in the decision-making process. Within the context of pluralism, organ-

izations serve to “prevent domination and to create mutual control,” notes Dahl in

Dilemmas of Pluralist Democracy: Autonomy vs. Control (1982, p. 270).

Elite Theory In contrast to participatory decision making and pluralism, elite theory assumes

that a select few are afforded the privilege of making decisions. While the very na-

ture of a democratic system presupposes that a wide range of individuals will have

a voice in the decision-making process, elite theory assumes otherwise. A separa-

tion exists between the elite members of government and the masses, even though

greater public engagement in the policymaking process would allow government to

tap wider sources of information, thereby improving the quality of public policy.

Nevertheless, according to J.A. Schumpeter in An Elite Theory of Democracy (1942/1976), the term “democracy does not mean and cannot mean that the peo-

ple actually rule in any obvious sense… Democracy means only that the people have

the opportunity of accepting or refusing the men who are to rule them” (p. 81).

From a decision-making perspective, being one of the elite may center on an indi-

vidual’s knowledge level, education, or status within a public organization.

The Power Elite by C. Wright Mills (1956) contains a widely noted argument for an elitist determination of important decisions. Mills’s concept of decision making

within the arenas of government is one of executive rather than congressional de-

terminations; decisions by the electorate seem out of the question completely.

Within the executive branch, Mills feels that the professional bureaucrats and party

politicians are essentially subservient to members of the elite who move in and out

of government, pausing for relatively brief stays as opposed to the career orienta-

tions of professionals. Elites fill the very top positions of president, vice president,

cabinet members, department and bureau heads, agency and commission heads,

and the White House staff.

The Town of Twin Creeks Considers a New Law (Simulation) As a member of one of the many constituent groups who will be affected by the town’s decision to eliminate motorized vehicles on our 100-acre lake, students will explore the political, personal, and economic issues involved with this pending de- cision. After completing the simulation, students will be required to summarize the experience by compiling a mini–case study. These case studies will be compared and contrasted with others in the class.

Timothy D. Oliver, Faith Lutheran School, Nevada, “Town Meeting—Direct Representation,” Columbia Education Center Lesson Plans http://www.col-ed.org/cur/sst/sst170.txt.

EXERCISE 4.1

160 CHAPTER 4

Political Model The political decision-making model assumes that intra-organizational coalitions

compete for influence. This competition establishes which decision-making alter-

natives are chosen and which are discarded. In other words, the more powerful

coalitions win out, as do their decision-making preferences. The political model is

thought to be tantamount to office “game playing.” Office games are designed to

improve an individual’s position, while simultaneously hurting and eventually elim-

inating alternative viewpoints. Game players are skillful at pleasing their superi-

ors, becoming sycophants for the sole purpose of gaining power. They support their

superiors’ opinions and choices at all costs—even to the point of withholding in-

formation that might keep a superior from making a poor decision. Risky and un-

safe positions are never taken, and when someone else proffers a good idea, their

response is: “I was thinking the same thing.” The game player’s energy is most con-

cerned with building alliances and consolidating power, which will be use to exert

influence over future decisions.

Public Choice Theory Public choice theory is a school of thought derived from microeconomics, the study

of the economic behavior of individuals and organizations. Adherents of the public

Source: Choo, C.W. 2006. The Knowing Organization: How Organizations Use Information to Construct Meaning, Create Knowledge, and Make Decisions (2d ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

FIGURE 4.6 – POLITICAL MODEL OF ORGANIZATIONAL DECISION MAKING

Environmental Uncertainty

Resource Dependence

Task Interdependence

Goal Conflict

Organizations as Coalitions

Procedural Rationality

1. Control strategic uncertainties

2. Create dependencies

3. Provide resources

1. Build coalitions / expand Networks

2. Control decision premises

3. Enhance expertise

4. Make preferences explicit

Building Power Base

Exercising Power in Decision Making

161Public Decision Making

choice theory argue that self-interest determines how decisions are made. From a

public administration perspective, bureaucrats will make decisions that minimize

risks and maximize rewards for their department, agency, or organization. This

typically involves supporting courses of action that increase the size, area of re-

sponsibility, and budget of department, agency, and organization. Public choice

theorists underscore the importance of efficiency, and they tend to champion gov-

ernment contracting out and the privatization of government services.

Dysfunctions in Decision Making Egos can sometimes cause bureaucratic Waterloos; managers can fall victim to the

image of the isolated decision maker making difficult choices. While decisions that

receive a stamp of approval from yea-saying subordinates may meet the immediate

needs of the boss, they often fail to meet the needs of the organization or its clients.

In virtually all cases, open and honest discussion of a possibility—branching as far

up, down, or sideways as the decision will reach—will result

in a different, better choice than instinct might have origi-

nally dictated. Clearly, important decisions require input

from everyone (not just from top management) affected by

the decision. If some midlevel bureaucrat or rank-and-file

worker knows why plans “A” and “B” will fail but “C” will

succeed, or management styles “X” and “Y” are faulty but

can be corrected by “Z,” it is only prudent to consider that

worker’s advice.

Asking for input may make us feel uncomfortable. But lis-

tening to paid employees is more efficient and cost-effec-

tive than hiring well-paid consultants (whom those same

employees will resist). And failure will deliver a much

larger trouncing to the ego than will humility. As any or-

ganization caught in a recall has learned, decisions shared could have avoided the

prohibitive costs of decisions repaired. The swine flu vaccine is, unfortunately, a

good example of a bad decision. In 1976, an Army recruit contracted a rare form of

swine flu and died shortly thereafter. Public health experts expressed concern that

the swine flu strain closely matched the 1918 influenza strain that killed an esti-

mated 50 to 100 million people worldwide. A swine flu vaccine was developed.

However, Dr. Anthony Morris, a government virologist, warned that death and

paralysis could result from the use of the vaccine. Under pressure for quick action

from the president and Congress, the National Institutes of Health ignored Dr.

Morris’s findings. Swine flu never materialized, but by the time vaccinations were

halted, at least a dozen American had died from the vaccine’s effects and hundreds

more had been paralyzed. Claims against the government eventually amounted to

almost $500 million.

“Bad administration, to be sure, can destroy good

policy; but good administration can

never save bad policy.”

ADLAI STEVENSON American Politician and Presidential Candidate

(1900–1965)

162 CHAPTER 4

Group Decision-Making Dynamics The poorest decisions are made when members of the decision-making team are en-

gaged in a power struggle. This leads to accomplishing nothing or arriving at poorly

contrived and compromised decisions that fail to meet the organization’s goals and

objectives. Overconformity is yet another decision-making dysfunction. If some

members of the decision-making team are particularly assertive, and the other mem-

bers are passive to the point of failing to voice their opinions or ideas, there is a

greater likelihood that the passive members will conform to the more assertive mem-

bers. Passive members typically censor their opinions and ideas, given the fear of

being derided or criticized by the more assertive members of the decision-making

team. This is especially true under circumstances in which a passive member has an

innovative idea or an opinion that is considered to be “outside the box.” Also, pas-

sive members hold back on thinking independently and fail to resist conformity im-

posed by more assertive members in an effort to stay in the good graces of the group.

Groupthink: When Conformity Kills According to Irving Janis (1972), groupthink is a specialized form of conformity. It occurs only in highly cohesive groups that operate in an environment where there

is a feeling of security. The primary goal of this particular decision-making group

is to maintain its power and cohesiveness. Groupthink is characterized by extreme

conformity that gets in the way of any critical analysis. The circumstances under

which groupthink occurs tend to coincide with (1) directive leadership, (2) group

homogeneity in terms of ideals and background, and (3) isolation from outside in-

fluences. The symptoms of groupthink include:

• Illusion of invulnerability: This refers to the group’s overestimation of

its worth. Members of the group share the belief that their group is

“special,” and that they will be successful, regardless of whether they

make more conservative or hazardous decisions.

• Stereotyping: Refers to an “us versus them” dichotomy. Those who

oppose the group are considered enemies. In more extreme cases, “us

versus them” presents itself as “good versus evil.”

• Rationalization: Shared rationalizations are used to dismiss warning

signs of the potential dangers of groupthink.

• Moral high ground: The belief that the group has a monopoly on what

is right or just.

• Self-censorship: If a member of the group has doubts or a dissenting

opinion, that individual keeps such thoughts to him or herself.

• Illusion of unanimity: The illusion that everyone within the group

agrees 100 percent with a given course of action reinforces self-cen-

163Public Decision Making

What Is a Consensus Process? A consensus process is an effort in which government agencies and other affected

parties seek to reach agreement on a course of action to address an issue or set of re-

lated issues. For example, task forces may use consensus to develop recommenda-

tions. Stakeholder groups convened by an agency may use consensus to develop

legislative recommendations on regulations, or intragovernment work groups in-

volving multiple agencies may use consensus to reach agreement.

In a consensus process, representatives of all the necessary interests with a stake in

an issue work together to find a mutually acceptable solution. Each process differs be-

cause in each case the parties design it to fit their circumstances. However, success-

ful consensus processes follow several guiding principles:

Consensus decision making—Participants make decisions by agreement rather than by majority vote.

Inclusiveness—All necessary interests are represented or, at a mini- mum, approve of the discussions.

Accountability—Participants usually represent stakeholder groups or interests. They are accountable both to their constituents and to the

process.

Facilitation—An impartial facilitator accountable to all participants manages the process, ensures that ground rules are followed, and helps

maintain a productive climate for communication and problem solving.

Flexibility—Participants design a process and address the issues in a manner they determine most suitable to the situation.

Shared control—Participants share responsibility for setting the ground rules for a process and for creating outcomes.

Commitment to implementation—The sponsor and all stake- holder groups commit to carrying out their agreement.

Stages of a consensus process A consensus process moves through three stages, each with its own set of activities.

Before—Assess whether or not to initiate a consensus process and how to bring diverse interests to the table, then work with the facilita-

tor to plan and organize the process, and write ground rules. (continued)

164 CHAPTER 4

During—Engage in the problem-solving discussions: exchange infor- mation, frame issues, conduct the discussions, generate and evaluate

options, develop mutually acceptable solutions, and secure the en-

dorsement of all constituents and authorized decision makers.

After—Implement the agreement: formalize the decision, carry it out, and monitor the results.

How consensus processes differ from consultation The most significant differences between consultation and consensus processes are

how decisions are made and what happens to the product of the discussions. In a

consensus process, the parties share decision making about both process and out-

come. By contrast, in a consultative process the sponsoring agency decides whether

to initiate a process and how it will be organized. In a consensus process, the prod-

uct of the discussion gets translated into official decisions, while in a consultative

process, the agency formulates the decisions. In both approaches, the agency retains

final decision-making authority, but in a consensus process, the agency puts the

product of a consensus process out for official review as the proposed decision. In

consultation, the agency receives input from the participants, and then staff members

formulate the proposed decisions.

Sometimes, because of legal requirements, sponsoring agencies refer to a process as

“consultative” or “advisory,” even when the intent is to agree with stakeholders on an

outcome. Federal agencies that sponsor regulatory negotiations must charter the

process as an advisory committee under the provisions of the federal Advisory Com-

munications Act. A legislature or administrative policymaking body that authorizes

a consensus process may designate the group as advisory in order to make it clear

that the formal decision will still be made by government officials.

Again, the most important distinctions among these processes are how decisions are

made and what happens to the outcome. If a sponsoring agency treats the commit-

tee’s final agreement as advice and picks and chooses parts to include in the official

decision, the process is consultative. If it participates along with other parties in for-

mulating the agreement, then accepts it as a package consisting of trade-offs that

cannot be detached (and if it is committed to implementing the package), then the

process is consensual. According to the authors of Building Consensus for a Sus- tainable Future, who first pointed out this distinction, “Consultation is designed to inform decision makers who will ultimately make the decision. Consensus involves

the participants as decision makers. . . . In a consensus process, the participants must

address and persuade one another and find solutions acceptable to all.”

(continued)

165Public Decision Making

Definition of consensus A practical definition for consensus in the public policy setting is: the parties have

reached a meeting of the minds sufficient to make a decision and carry it out; no one

who could block or obstruct the decision or its implementation will exercise that

power; everyone needed to support the decision and put it into effect will do so.

This definition does not mean unanimity of thought or abandonment of values. In-

deed, one of the characteristics of a well-constructed agreement is that it represents

diverse values and interests. Given the mixture of issues and values in public conflict,

the resulting agreement often is a package with varying levels of enthusiasm and sup-

port for different components, but on balance one that each party or stakeholder can

accept. In a consensus process, the parties or stakeholders must define consensus

for themselves and include their definition in the ground rules. Most definitions

imply acceptance, an acknowledgment that things can move forward, that people

support a decision, or at least can live with it. Even if only most participants like the

decision, at least all of them are willing to accept it.

Why use consensus and not majority vote? Because stakeholders and government officials together are the decision makers in

a consensus process, participants must try to educate and persuade one another

about their needs and interests. They also must listen carefully to determine how the

solution can meet the needs of the other parties. Majority voting induces a different

kind of interaction than does consensus decision making. When participants know

they can revert to a majority vote if they cannot agree, they may focus more on build-

ing coalitions for such a possibility rather than trying to meet all the parties’ needs.

Source: State of Maine, Public Policy Consensus and Mediation, “What Is a Consensus Process?” www.maine.gov/consensus/ppcm_consensus_home.htm.

sorship. In other words, even if someone has doubts about a decision,

that individual will refrain from expressing this doubt so as not to

upset the illusion of unanimity.

• Pressure applied to group dissenters: Should the illusion of unanimity

fail to reign in any potential dissenters, pressure is applied to any

group member who may desire to speak out against the group’s deci-

sions.

• Mind guarding: Deals with protecting the group’s leader(s) from ex-

ternal dissenters or criticism.

The groupthink atmosphere discourages anyone from conveying a dissenting opin-

ion. If any member argues against any of the group’s decisions, direct pressure is

placed on this individual by the other members. Group loyalty is paramount, and dis-

sent or criticism undermines loyalty. Even though several group members may have

reservations about a decision, each believes that everyone else is in agreement. Great

failures are often group failures, as shown by the disaster at Pearl Harbor on De-

cember 7, 1941. U.S. intelligence knew Japanese carriers were in the Pacific, but no

one dared speak up to question assumptions that Pearl Harbor was impenetrable.

The results were disastrous, but the lesson unlearned. Two decades later, no one in

the White House dared challenge President John F. Kennedy’s decision to invade

Cuba’s Bay of Pigs—even though the invasion plan hatched out by the Central Intel-

ligence Agency called for using 1,400 Cuban exiles, fewer than 200 of whom had any

prior military experience, to overrun Castro and retake control of the island. One

White House aide, Arthur Schlesinger, expressed a desire to question the president

before the plan was put into action, but he was met by this response from Attorney

General Robert Kennedy, “You may be right or you may be wrong, but the President

has made up his mind. Don’t push it any further. Now is the time for everyone to help

him all they can” (quoted by Janis in 2d ed., 1982, p. 40). That same groupthinking

group brought about disaster in Vietnam, as the war effort kept growing despite ev-

idence that further escalation would not enable the United States to achieve its mil-

itary objectives. This mindset is nowhere clearer than in American industry, where

groupthinking groups in major competitive corporations arrived at the same wrong

conclusions that their Japanese counterparts were not a threat to the market.

In the twenty-first century, we have seen groupthink and its consequences regard-

166 CHAPTER 4

Based on: Janis, I.L. 1972. Victims of Groupthink: A Psychological Study of Foreign-Policy Decisions and Fias- coes. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 2d ed., 1982.

FIGURE 4.7 – THE GROUPTHINK PROCESS

Pre-conditions

1. High cohesiveness and homogeneity 2. Insulation of the group 3. Lack of methodical procedures for search and appraisal 4. Directive leadership

Symptoms

1. Illusion ol invulnerability 2. Belief in inherent morality 3. Collective rationalizations A. Stereotypes of out-groups 5. Direct pressure on

dissenters 6. Self-censorship 7. Illusion of unanimity 8. Self-appointed mind-

guards

Decision-Making Dysfunctions

1. Incomplete survey of alternatives

2. Incomplete survey of objectives

3 Failure to examine risks of preferred choice

4. Inadequate information gathering

5. Failure to reappraise alternatives

6. Failure to work out contingency plans

167Public Decision Making

ing the U.S. occupation of Iraq. When the Iraqi invasion was in the planning stage,

there were arguably two identifiable groups: the in-group consisting of Vice Presi-

dent Dick Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Deputy Defense Secretary

Paul Wolfowitz, and the former chair of the Defense Policy Board Richard Perle.

These four primary members of President George W. Bush’s in-group shared sim-

ilar backgrounds, as both Cheney and Rumsfeld got their starts in politics during

the Nixon administration. Wolfowitz and Perle has close working relationships with

Cheney and Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz served as mentor to Cheney’s former chief of

staff, Lewis “Scooter” Libby, while Libby was a student at Yale and later in his ca-

reer. These four members of the in-group have been characterized as champions of

a foreign policy ethos known as neoconservatism. Neoconservatism embraces no-

tions such as preemptive war and unilateralism. In contrast to President Bush’s in-

group, former Secretary of State Colin Powell and his deputy, Richard Armitage,

arguably represented the out-group within the administration.

Source: The New Yorker Collection.

SAY IT AINT So!

PERISH THE

THOUGHT!

You'vE G O T TO B E

KIDDING!

HEAVEN FORBID!

No! No! A THOUSAND

TIMES NO!

"All those in favor say 'Aye'." "Aye."

"Aye." "Aye." "Aye."

"Aye."

MONTH

168 CHAPTER 4

Some of the classic symptoms of groupthink can be identified easily if we examine

the U.S. occupation of Iraq. President Bush and the in-group were reluctant to ex-

plore alternative courses of action—even in the context of modifying the occupa-

tion strategy following the removal of the Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein and the

Ba’ath Party. For instance, some individuals who were not a part of the president’s

in-group expressed concerns as to the number of American forces used in the oc-

cupation. As it stands, roughly 85,000 American troops have been carrying out the

occupation and rebuilding of Iraq. In 1999, four years prior to the Iraq war, a war

simulation known as “Desert Crossing” was conducted by the Department of De-

fense (DoD). The simulation estimated that 400,000 American troops would be

needed to successfully control Iraq and respond to security threats that insurgents

posed to American forces and Iraqi civilians. General An-

thony Zinni, who retired in 2000, oversaw the war simula-

tion. When it became apparent to Zinni that the Bush

administration had set its sights on invading and occupy-

ing Iraq, he made a call to some of his colleagues in Central

Command—the part of the DoD responsible for planning

and carrying out military operations throughout the Mid-

dle East—and suggested that the Bush administration and

military leadership review the findings of Desert Crossing.

According to Zinni, Central Command had no idea that this

war gaming scenario existed (as quoted in National Secu-

rity Archive, Post-Saddam Iraq: The War Game 2006). Knowing this, it seems pos- sible that the in-group within the Bush administration deliberately avoided the

Desert Crossing report for fear that its findings would undermine the current oc-

cupation strategy. Another possibility is that the contents of the report were known

by some but not conveyed to others for fear of upsetting the cohesiveness and feel-

ing of unanimity within the in-group. Or, perhaps the in-group was well aware of

the Desert Crossing findings, yet its findings were rationalized as being “alarmist”

or flat out wrong. These classic symptoms of groupthink were most likely present

during the planning of the Iraqi occupation.

Avoiding Groupthink The Bay of Pigs, the escalation of the Vietnam War, and the Iraqi occupation

demonstrate that groupthink can exist at the highest levels of government, where

some of the smartest, most capable people work every day. This being said, can any-

thing be done to reduce the likelihood of groupthink? Yes. There are a number of

strategies for avoiding it:

1. The leader of the group should avoid stating his or her preferences. Truth

to power is inherently difficult, and even more so if the members of the

group believe that the leader prefers one course of action to another.

2. The leader should designate a member of the group to serve as the “devil’s

“Take time to deliberate; but

when the time for action arrives, stop thinking and go.”

ANDREW JACKSON 7th President of the

United States

169Public Decision Making

advocate.” This person should be given the explicit responsibility of pre-

senting counterarguments and questioning the prudence of the group’s

ideas.

3. Outside experts can also be used as devil’s advocates.

4. Anonymity fosters truthfulness; therefore, the leader needs to give mem-

bers of the group a means of voicing their opinions anonymously.

5. The leader needs to a create a culture where debate, critical analysis, and

creativity are encouraged. Fostering a climate where a range of ideas can

flourish is key to avoiding groupthink and its potential consequences.

170 CHAPTER 4

Dahl, R.A. 1982. Dilemmas of Pluralist Democracy: Autonomy vs. Control. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Dror, Y. 1964. “Muddling Through—‘Science’ or Inertia?” Public Administration Review 24: 153–57.

Janis, I.L. 1972. Victims of Groupthink: A Psychological Study of Foreign-Policy Decisions and Fiascoes. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 2d ed., 1982.

Kingdon, J.W. 2003. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. 2d ed. New York: Longman.

Lewis, V. 1952. “Toward a Theory of Budgeting.” Public Administration Review 12 (Winter): 42–54.

Lindblom, C.E. 1959. “The Science of Muddling Through.” Public Administration Review 19: 79–88.

Mikesell, J.L. 1978. “Government Decisions in Budgeting and Taxing: The Eco-

nomic Logic.” Public Administration Review (November/December): 511–13.

Mills, C.W. 1956. The Power Elite. New York: Oxford University Press.

National Security Archive. 2006. Post-Saddam Iraq: The War Game. National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 207. Washington, DC: National

Security Archive of the George Washington University.

Schumpeter, J.A. 1942/1976. Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. 5th ed. London: Allen and Unwin.

Simon, H. 1947/1997. Administrative Behavior. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Balance sheet

Bounded rationality

Cost-benefit analysis (CBA)

Decision-making alternatives

Elite theory

Garbage can model

Groupthink

Incrementalism

Participatory model

Political model

Rational model

Satisficing

KEY TERMS

REFERENCES

171Public Decision Making

Allison, G., and P. Zelikow. 1999. Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis. 2d ed. New York: Longman.

March, J. 1989. Decisions and Organizations. Oxford: Blackwell.

The Decision Analysis Society of INFORMS (promotes the development and use

of logical methods for the improvement of decision making in public and pri-

vate enterprise): http://decision-analysis.society.informs.org/

RAND Corporation: http://www.rand.org

The Society for Judgment and Decision Making (an interdisciplinary academic

organization dedicated to the study of normative, descriptive, and prescriptive

theories of decision making): http://www.sjdm.org/

SUPPLEMENTARY READINGS

ELECTRONIC RESOURCES

Politics and Public Administration

CHAPTER 5

This chapter examines the marriage of politics and

administration. Upon reading this chapter, students will

understand the need for administrative reform following the

Jacksonian spoils system, as well as the intersection and

reality of politics and administration. Central to this chapter is

an examination of bureaucratic discretion and decision

making. Further discussion centers on the executive branch’s

inability to control the bureaucracy, the legislative branch’s

lack of desire to control the bureaucracy, and the judicial

branch’s role as a reluctant arbiter of bureaucratic actions.

172 CHAPTER 5

173Politics and Public Administration

“Management is the science of which organizations are but experiments.”

JOHN CONSTABLE English Romantic Painter

(1776-1837)

“A theory of public administration means in our time a theory of politics also.”

JOHN GAUS Political Science;

Public Administration Expert (1894–1969)

Newark City Hall, Newark, New Jersey

174 CHAPTER 5

Reform and Neutrality Competence versus responsiveness has been a historical struggle in public adminis-

tration. From George Washington to John Quincy Adams, the small bureaucracies of

the federal government valued competence and qualification. In 1828, however, the

bureaucracy’s focus on competence shifted. The election of Andrew Jackson to the

presidency ushered in a new public administration philosophy—the so-called “spoils

system.” Central to the spoils system was the belief in a more “responsive” bureau-

cracy. Jackson believed that virtually any individual was ca-

pable of executing the “simple” tasks of public management,

which were thought to be a matter of “common sense.” Dis-

appointingly, a heavy price was paid for more responsive ad-

ministration under the spoils systems. Inefficiency was

widespread, profiteering was common, and scandals were

recurrent. The ills associated with the spoils system were

pervasive not only at the federal level but also throughout

state and municipal bureaucracies. A large, rapidly growing

and increasingly industrialized nation could not afford sub-

standard public service administration. Waste and corrup-

tion had to be restrained. In the post–Civil War period,

reformers made public appeals for efficient and honest gov-

ernment. Reformers, most notably Princeton University ac-

ademic (and future U.S. president) Woodrow Wilson,

insisted on a politics-administration separation. Wilson

championed a dichotomy, or firm separation, between the

determination and implementation of policy. Policy deter-

mination should occur via the political process, while policy implementation should

be the realm of apolitical administrators only. In other words, policy stands as an ex-

pression of state will through elected officials, and public administrators should ex-

ecute that expression of state will in a professional, competent, and apolitical fashion.

The Pendleton Civil Service Act of 1883 changed everything by creating a biparti-

san Civil Service Commission—the predecessor of the system that is currently re-

sponsible for 90 percent of government employees. Critics maintain that a

significant price has been paid for this type of merit-based system. By being too

shielded from politics, mediocrity and incompetence has again become pervasive,

so much so that the system arguably rivals the Jacksonian spoils era. Other critics

argue that corruption has yet to be eliminated. Corruption persists in less obvious

ways, such as through friendly ties and under-the-table favors, although overt forms

of corruption still make headlines from time to time.

THE INTERSECTION OF POLITICS AND ADMINISTRATION

“All of us who are concerned for

peace and triumph of reason and

justice must be keenly aware how small an influence reason and honest

good will exert upon events in the

political field.”

ALBERT EINSTEIN Physicist;

Nobel Prize Winner (1879–1955)

175Politics and Public Administration

The creation of a civil service system provided the basis for more “businesslike”

government. The central principle became machinelike efficiency; that is, accom-

plishing a given task with as little wasted energy as possible. This civil service re-

form movement influenced governments at all levels to establish ethics codes,

which distinguished acceptable from unacceptable public employee behavior. Some

of these codes of ethics were incorporated into laws. The idea was that government

services must be delivered without passion or prejudice, and that truthfulness and

openness were essential to creating a most favorable administrative environment.

This reform movement assumed that public administrators would abide by the law

and even higher ethical standards. Providing services less efficiently was considered

acceptable as long as public servants conducted themselves lawfully and ethically.

Honest, businesslike government became the mantra during this reform move-

ment. Reformers like Woodrow Wilson and Frank Goodnow advocated that greater

thought be paid to the “science” of public administration. Wilson believed it was im-

perative that government not only determine what policies should be enacted but

also implement those policies with the highest degree of efficiency and respon-

siveness to the citizenry. Public administration needed to emerge as a profession,

The attack on the President’s life – Scene in the ladies’ room of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad depot. Source: Berghaus, A., and C. Upham, Frank Leslie's Illustrated Newspaper, 1881 July 16, pp. 332-333. Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, reproduction number LC-USZ62-7622.

176 CHAPTER 5

and public administrators needed to conduct themselves as such, that is, public ad-

ministrators must be responsible, professional, and efficient. Theories of “good gov-

ernance” became widespread, namely from the Bureau of Municipal Research in

New York, which was established in 1906. Good governance stresses that efficient

service delivery is vital to the public’s interest. Additionally, these theories suggest

that administration and politics should remain separated. Ideally, public adminis-

trators operate in an apolitical environment, removed from the sphere of elected

boards and political officials. Furthermore, expertise should be a trademark of re-

form. The essence of the good governance reform movement is encapsulated in the

proverb: “There is neither a Democratic nor a Republican way to build a road, just

the right way.” As satisfying as this may sound, contemporary public administration

has witnessed the movement away from the naive belief that politics and adminis-

tration can be separated and toward the recognition that the practice of public ad-

ministration cannot realistically occur in a neutral, apolitical environment.

The Reality of Bureaucratic Politics In contrast to the notions of nineteenth-century reformers like Wilson and Good-

now, twentieth-century analysts acknowledged the reality that appointed adminis-

trative officials often take the lead in making policy, while lower-level public officials

often interpret policies. Nineteenth-century policies were largely distributive—

meaning the government provided specific services that the free market would not

(for example, education, a national defense, and other services that did not require

significant interpretation on the part of public administrators). This all changed,

however, with the creation of the welfare state that began with President Franklin

Roosevelt’s policies during the Great Depression and continued with Lyndon John-

son’s Great Society, a reform package rooted in the twin concepts of social justice

and public improvement. To be clear, the welfare state refers to policies that pro-

vide for the general welfare of it citizenry. These policies are, by and large, “redis-

tributive” in nature, meaning that taxes collected from higher-income, wealthier

citizens are redistributed to lower-income, poorer citizens in the form of services

and benefits. Examples of redistributive policies include welfare benefits, food

stamps, and Medicaid (health insurance for the poor, which is not to be confused

with Medicare, health insurance for retirees under Social Security). With the ar-

rival of depression-era “big government” and the growing implementation of re-

distributive policies during Johnson’s Great Society, it became clear that any

dichotomy between politics and administration was not realistic. Wilson’s call for

politics-administration separation is now seen as rather naive. Clearly, politics and

values encroach on administration from numerous external sources. Public ad-

ministrators are policymakers, as public administration is ultimately the sum of

politics plus management (Holzer and Gabrielian 1998).

Many scholars have spoken against the utopian view of public administrators as

177Politics and Public Administration

neutral and apolitical. This attack on the oversimplistic nature of the politics-

administration dichotomy began in earnest in the 1940s, having gained momentum

by the end of World War II. Scholars such as P. Appleby (1949) pointed out that “ar-

guments about application of policy are essentially arguments about policy.”

D. Waldo (1984) maintained that public administration research was grounded in

political theory, while N.E. Long (1949) contended that “the lifeblood of adminis-

tration is power.” This underscored public agencies’ need to cultivate a clientele in

order to ensure political survival. P.A. Selznick (1949) demonstrated how the Ten-

nessee Valley Authority (TVA), a New Deal–era agency providing electricity and

resource management for the southeastern United States,

survived and accomplished its mission by taking into ac-

count the needs of the local citizenry. In his landmark book

Administrative Behavior, Herbert Simon (1947/1997) demonstrated that facts and administrative realities drive

not only how decisions are made but also how values are

formed. Simon (1967) disputed Wilson’s notion that “the

field of administration is a field of business. It is removed

from the hurry and strife of politics.” Simon stressed that

Wilson’s notion is normative, and thus “the field of ad-

ministration ought to be a field of business.”

The assumption that politics and administration could be

separated was ultimately disregarded as utopian. Wilson

and Goodnow’s idea of apolitical public administration

proved unrealistic. A more realistic view—the so-called

“politics” school—is that politics is very much a part of ad-

ministration. The politics school maintains that in a plu-

ralistic political system in which many diverse groups have

a voice, public administrators with considerable knowledge

play key roles. Legislation, for instance, is written by pub-

lic administrators as much as by legislators. The public bureaucracy is as capable

of engendering support for its interests as any other participant in the political

process, and public administrators are as likely as any to be part of a policymaking

partnership. Furthermore, laws are interpreted by public administrators in their

execution, which includes many and often unforeseen scenarios. Policy imple-

mentation is the final step in the policy process, and it serves as the last chance for

outside interests to influence policy.

Given that laws must be interpreted in the context of unanticipated circumstances,

administrative discretion becomes necessary. Administrative organizations are

often subject to external pressures by special interest groups and elected officials.

This stems from the fact that when public administrators draft policies and inter-

pret those policies, they are making value-based judgments. Even the most “tech-

“There is no doubt that the

development of the administrative

agency in response to

modern legislative and administrative need has placed severe strain on

the separation-of- powers principle

in its pristine formulation.”

BYRON WHITE Football Player;

Supreme Court Justice (1917–2002)

178 CHAPTER 5

nical” decisions are somewhat value-laden. With such discretion, public adminis-

trators fall victim to policy preferences from all sorts of stakeholders, most notably

interest groups, legislators, media groups, and rank-and-file citizens. Pressure is

also found within public organizations.

The manner in which a policy is interpreted and implemented is as important as the

writing stage of the policymaking process. As a result, public administrators are

consistently pressured by interest groups and elected officials. Within a public or-

ganization, bureaucrats often emerge as advocates for one special interest over an-

other—advocating for one certain position and interpretation of a newly drafted

policy. Making the “process” more objective is imperative, and one way of doing

this is to make the process more logical. According to the rational-comprehensive

school of decision making, the best decisions are logical; that is, decision makers try

to meticulously account for every possible consequence involved in choosing one

course of action over another. On the other hand, the incrementalist school argues

that pressures resulting from crises and deadlines limit the amount of time avail-

able for such a detailed analysis. The incremental approach defends the process of

making decisions based on choosing a course of action that is both satisfactory and

sufficient. In other words, incrementalists advocate finding a “good enough” alter-

native until a better one presents itself. This is called “muddling through.”

The intermingling of politics and administration is fairly obvious when one looks at

the budget process. Every government, regardless of the level (municipal, county,

state, or federal), operates under the direction of an official spending plan—more

simply, a budget. Budgets are massively dense documents filled with calculations

and figures. Thus, to most laypeople, budgets are overly dry. While true to some

extent, the battle for resources by public organizations is not as dry a process as

Tobacco Settlement Distribution Simulation A $2.5 billion settlement from a tobacco company is awarded to the State. A net- work of taxpayers, elected officials, and public administrators must distribute the award. This simulation challenges students to balance constituency needs, politi- cal forces, and public administrative goals in achieving an equitable distribution plan. What are the guiding principles that should be considered by the group and why? Create a list of the principles with a brief summary justifying each based upon the need to balance both political and equity priorities.

Linda Blessing and Bette F. DeGraw, E-PARCC. Program for the Advancement of Research on Conflict and Collaboration, The Maxwell School, Syracuse University http://sites.maxwell.syr.edu/parc/eparc/simulations/tobacco-settlement- distribution-simulation.asp.

EXERCISE 5.1

179Politics and Public Administration

one might think. Money is the lifeblood of any organization. An agency or depart-

ment’s budget affects the number of people it employs and the resources available

to them. The struggle for money becomes a struggle over values, prompting ques-

tions such as, Should money be spent on more police officers, for emergency med-

ical technicians, or for a remedial mathematics program? Eminent political scientist

V.O. Key (1940, p. 1138) recognized this struggle when he asked, “On what basis

shall it be decided to allocate x dollars to activity A instead of activity B?” Key be-

lieved that personal values and priorities ultimately determine where money is

spent. Developing “criteria” to decide how public resources

should be spent is nearly impossible, given that people’s

values and priorities differ. These diverse values and pri-

orities are reflected in budgetary choices. The budget,

therefore, is an interest-oriented process defined by con-

stant struggle—struggle to determine whose interests and

preferences will be given consideration. Politics ends up

being very much a part of this struggle (Wildavsky 1992).

Most public administrators will admit that bureaucratic de-

cisions are, to some measure, influenced by politics. Em-

ployees are sometimes hired to placate the powerful.

Government contracts are sometimes given to friends of

powerful officials. Former public officials are given prof-

itable private-sector consulting jobs. Typically, a public ad-

ministrator’s involvement in such situations is not tied to

personal gain; rather, involvement is a means of maintain-

ing close ties with important and influential people. The

golden rule of public administrators is not to make enemies,

which is accomplished, at times, by dodging hard decisions.

Sometimes when bureaucrats’ interests are severely threat-

ened, they become excessively political. For instance, when stuck in the middle of a

financial crisis with significant budget cuts looming, bureaucrats will often under-

score the political costs of budget cuts by summoning important “allies” to advocate

on their behalf. These allies include employee unions and interest groups. Special in-

terest group representatives can and will lobby forcefully—often with the active co-

operation of the bureaucracy—to do away with proposed budget cuts that a chief

executive or legislative committee has advocated. The budget reflects the successes

and failures of the various contenders—agencies and departments fighting to avoid

budget cuts (or increase their budgets) through their relationships with powerful

people and the influence they exert among high-ranking political appointees or

elected officials. These dynamics are present at the federal, state, and local levels.

Scholar Theodore Lowi (1979) argues against giving public administrators too much

discretion. Lowi contends that until the emergence of the administrative state, the

“Bureaucracies are inherently

antidemocratic. Bureaucrats derive

their power from their position in

the structure, not from their relations

with the people they are supposed

to serve. The people are not masters of the bureaucracy,

but its clients.”

ALAN KEYES Political Activist

180 CHAPTER 5

United States was dominated by Congress. He is critical of government programs

that grant bureaucrats discretionary powers, given the inherent difficulty of con-

trolling such discretion. Lowi’s criticism has added credibility when considering

the discretionary power of “street-level bureaucrats.” According to Lipsky (1980),

street-level bureaucrats are those that provide public benefits and maintain public

181Politics and Public Administration

order—namely, police officers, social service providers, public school teachers, and

judges. Street-level bureaucrats tend to be at the center of political controversies for

two reasons: (1) controversies regarding the appropriate scope of government are

essentially controversies regarding the functions of that level of bureaucracy, and

(2) street-level bureaucrats have extensive power over the lives of ordinary citizens.

These public employees play a vital role in citizen entitlements. Also, poorer indi-

viduals such as welfare recipients are typically more reliant on the services pro-

vided by street-level bureaucrats, and the services delivered by these bureaucrats

tend to be immediate and very personal.

Through their exercise of wide discretion, street-level bureaucrats essentially make

policy. For instance, police officers make decisions about whom to arrest, and

judges impose sentences every day. There are, of course, rules and regulations that

guide discretion. In some cases, however, the sheer number and constantly chang-

ing nature of these rules and regulations make it extremely difficult to hold street-

level bureaucrats accountable for their decisions. Lower-level workers are unlikely

to see eye-to-eye with management, as there is often an incentive for managers to

curb a worker’s discretion in the interest of achieving organization-wide goals. The

worker will likely view this exercise of power as illegitimate and resist it. For lower-

level street-level bureaucrats, there is a desire to maintain discretionary power. For

example, if a prosecutor did not believe in mandatory minimum drug sentences,

then he or she might charge a criminal with a less serious crime.

The responsibility of street-level bureaucrats is linked to “client processing goals”

and maintaining self-autonomy. Management, however, is more focused on achiev-

ing collective goals. Management also works to lessen the autonomy of the lower-

level bureaucrats. The relationship between managers and street-level bureaucrats

is characterized by mutual dependence. In other words, managers will honor work-

ers’ desires as long as managers are rewarded in terms of collective job perform-

ance—an example of which is a police chief giving his or her officers what they want,

provided crime in their jurisdiction remains low.

Checking Bureaucratic Discretion Despite the criticisms of Lowi and others, giving bureaucrats discretionary powers

is a real necessity. Some argue that the public bureaucracy is more representative

than elected institutions. John Rohr (1986) justifies bureaucratic discretion, given

the assumption that bureaucracies are microcosms of the American people. War-

ren (1993) believes it is pointless to argue the legitimacy of bureaucratic discretion;

rather, he views bureaucratic discretion as legitimate because it is a response to an

increasing demand for services. The delegation of power to bureaucrats who im-

plement and interpret legislation is guided by the principles of administrative law, which ultimately dictates what agencies, departments, or other public organiza-

tions can do.

182 CHAPTER 5

The Executive Branch’s Futile Efforts The executive branch attempts to steer the bureaucracy through the president’s

appointment powers. The president appoints more than 1,300 officials, all of

whom require senatorial approval. Presidential appointees, however, are often

unfamiliar with their respective agencies or departments, and therefore they de-

pend on the expertise and advice of well-connected midlevel career bureaucrats.

Moreover, assuming top-level appointees can influence agency policymaking,

their influence is not automatically an extension of presidential priorities. Cabi-

net and subcabinet officials are usually sympathetic and loyal to the bureaus,

agencies, and clientele groups that comprise a given department; for example,

agriculture secretaries typically represent midwestern states and therefore iden-

tify with farmers (Cann 1998).

In the 1970s and 1980s, respectively, presidents Nixon and Reagan used ideology

to counter captivity and loyalty issues; that is, appointments were based on ideo-

logical beliefs, as opposed to skill, expertise, or experience. During Reagan’s tenure,

few individuals were appointed to the cabinet or subcabinet level unless they cham-

pioned scaling back the bureaucracy and limiting government. Reagan appointees

were less concerned about cooperating with career bureaucrats and gave little at-

tention to the day-to-day business. This allowed the Reagan administration to ef-

fectively manage loyalty and captivity issues that had so plagued previous

administrations (Maranto 1993). In addition to appointments, the reorganization

of the executive branch is a powerful tool of presidential control. Consistent with

power vested in the Reorganization Act of 1939, Nixon reorganized staff agencies

within the Executive Office of the President (EOP) in the interest of gaining lever-

age over the bureaucracy. Specifically, Nixon created the Office of Management and

Budget (OMB), which replaced the Bureau of the Budget (BOB). Political appointees

currently head the OMB, while career civil service bureaucrats headed the BOB.

The OMB plays an active role in setting agency budgets, and the ability to appoint

its members gives the president some control over agency spending limits. In an

ideal world, this keeps the bureaucracy in step with the president’s wishes (Nathan

1975; Seidman 1980; Arnold 1986).

In contrast to Nixon and Reagan, President Carter tried to control the bureaucracy

through civil service reform, namely the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. Central

to this act was the creation of what is known as the Senior Executive Services (SES).

Still in existence today, the SES gives high-level bureaucrats the option of forfeit-

ing civil service job protections in exchange for a higher salary, one that is more

competitive with the private sector. This measure sought to address captivity and

loyalty issues, and roughly 95 percent of those eligible for the SES have accepted it

(Cann 1998).

Despite these efforts, the federal bureaucracy is not easily tamed by the Executive

Office of the President. The bureaucracy is afforded the upper hand for a number

183Politics and Public Administration

of reasons. First, the EOP exhibits not more than a passing interest in what the bu-

reaucracy does and lacks specialized knowledge needed to effectively monitor the

bureaucracy. Second, the EOP lacks the resources to overcome bureaucratic re-

sistance. Bureaucrats resist because of their technocratic nature. Contrary to pop-

ular belief, bureaucrats are policy experts, and therefore executive branch

intervention is, by and large, perceived to be ill timed and politically motivated

(Riley 1987). Third, clientelism and captivity issues still loom in spite of previous

presidential efforts.

Congressional Power Unused Unlike the EOP, Congress is given considerable power over the bureaucracy by the

U.S. Constitution. Congress not only funds the bureaucracy but also determines

how much power an agency can exert. In terms of power, we are referring to

whether an agency will have the authority to make rules or issue orders. While both

possess the effect of law, rules are quasi-legislative in nature (meaning they are ap-

plied uniformly), while orders are quasi-judicial in nature (meaning they are ap-

plied narrowly) (Kerwin 1994). Nevertheless, the intimate relationship between

Source: Buchanan, B. 1981. “The Senior Executive Service: How We Can Tell If It Works.” Public Administra- tion Review 41 (3): 349–58.

FIGURE 5.1 – SENIOR EXECUTIVE SERVICE PROGRAM DESIGN LOGIC

Central Control of SES allocation

Rank-in-person mobility

Pay-linked performance

appraisal systems

Controls against prohibited personnel practices

Improve career noncareer interface

PROGRAM COMPONENTS

Personal Allocation Track

Performance Effectiveness Track

Personal Development and Certification Track

OBJECTIVES

Rational deployment of SES in response to federal priorities

Reward good executives dismiss incompetents

Eliminate prohibited personnel practices

Improve individual competence motivation performance

Improve agency performance

Improve program performance

Clarify and link agency, program and individual perfromance objectives

Increase public confidence and satisfaction

Executive development programs

Attract outside talent

Attract women and minorities

Certified professional qualifications

Executive recruitment and placement systems

184 CHAPTER 5

Congress and the bureaucracy arguably precludes meaningful oversight. The quin-

tessential iron triangle exists among congressional subcommittees, bureaucrats,

and interest groups.

The relationship within them [iron triangles] is symbiotic; that is, each

member of the triangle gets something that it needs from other members.

The agency gets appropriations and new programs from the subcommittee,

and the subcommittee gets support and information from the agency. The

interest groups get policies and benefits from both the subcommittee and

the agency, and the subcommittee gets support, information, and cam-

paign contributions… from the interest groups. (Cann 1998, p. 57)

Cann (1998) maintains that while presidents have demonstrated the will to control

the bureaucracy, they have lacked the means. In contrast, Congress is afforded the

power to control the bureaucracy but lacks the desire, given its cozy relationship

with and dependence on the bureaucracy.

Then, of course, there is the judicial branch of American government. The judicial

branch has been forced to play the role of reluctant arbiter when it comes to settling

controversies regarding bureaucratic discretion and the implementation of policy.

In instances where the politics in administration (or value-based judgments) go too

far, the courts must settle the issue. The Supreme Court’s rulings determine what

bureaucratic actions are appropriate—appropriate in the sense that these actions do

not violate the spirit of the U.S. Constitution.

FIGURE 5.2 – CLASSIC IRON TRIANGLE

Congressional Subcommittee

Campaign Contributions

Favorable Policies

Funding

Congressional Support via Lobby

Information

AgencyInterest Group

Favorable Policies

185Politics and Public Administration

The Court as the Ultimate Arbiter: Federal Administrative Case Law Congressional Delegation Given tremendous responsibilities, it is impossible for Congress to carry out all of

its duties. According to the Constitution, Congress is allowed to delegate some of its

powers to the bureaucracy. In the Supreme Court case of Hampton v. United States (1928), the Hampton Company imported barium dioxide assessed at a duty rate of

$.06 per pound ($.02 higher than what was mandated by legislation). President

Coolidge had raised the duty in accordance with the Tariff Act of 1922, which al-

lowed the president to alter duties in the interest of equalizing costs among foreign

and domestic products. The issue before the Court was whether Congress had the

authority to delegate its constitutionally enumerated powers to the chief executive

(or the bureaucracy, for that matter). The Supreme Court affirmed the constitu-

tionality of congressional delegation, contending that if Congress were required to

alter every duty, it would be impossible to exercise any of its powers. This case es-

sentially made it acceptable for Congress to pass on some of its responsibilities to

the bureaucrats.

Congress delegates many of its responsibilities to the bureaucracy in the interest of

making its workload manageable. Additionally, congressional representatives often

lack the technical acumen to address a particular issue, thereby making delegation

to an agency of expertise necessary. However, limits are placed on congressional

delegation so as to ensure that administrative actions are consistent with constitu-

tional standards. These limits are readily apparent when one examines the case In- dustrial Union Department AFL-CIO v. American Petroleum (1980), which dealt with a regulatory standard issued by the secretary of the U.S. Department of Labor

regarding workplace exposure limits to benzene, a potentially carcinogenic agent.

In accordance with delegated congressional powers vested in the Occupational

Safety and Health Act (OSHA) of 1970, the secretary imposed an exposure limit of

The Iron Triangle Simulation In this role-play exercise, students will take on contemporary public policy issues and experience the challenges of balancing the needs and wants of public admin- istrators, public opinion, lobbyists, legislatures, and presidential pressure when at- tempting to address the issues. With each of the issues identified in this simulation, create a list of the conflicting values anticipated from each force within the triangle and identify the reasons why.

Gruebs Education Technology http://gruebs.com/vscentral/irontrianglesimulation.

EXERCISE 5.2

186 CHAPTER 5

1 part per million (ppm) and required medical testing for work areas having levels

at .05 ppm.

In this case, the issue before the Supreme Court was whether the secretary of Labor,

in accordance with OSHA, exceeded his authority by imposing the most rigid reg-

ulatory standard without first determining the health risks associated with benzene

exposure, and without determining corporate impacts resulting from the regula-

tion. According to the Court, the regulatory standard imposed was deemed invalid,

as the secretary failed to comply with explicit and uniform congressional standards.

That is, to guarantee the constitutionality of the imposed

regulation of benzene, the secretary needed to (1) deter-

mine at what levels benzene exposure presents a signifi-

cant health risk, and (2) account for the economic impacts

of the imposed regulation upon industry viability. He failed

to make these determinations, and so the imposed regula-

tion of benzene could not be considered constitutionally

valid.

Consistent with case law, congressional delegation of

power to the bureaucracy is constitutionally sound as long

as there are sufficient standards to guide bureaucratic ac-

tions. Standards are imperative, because they prevent

agencies from both promulgating arbitrary regulations

and, essentially, making policy, which was highlighted in then-Justice William

Rehnquist’s concurring opinion in Industrial Union Department AFL-CIO v. Amer- ican Petroleum (1980), the so-called “Benzene Case.” Specifically, Rehnquist wrote: “To the extent Congress finds it necessary to delegate authority, it provides the re-

cipient of that authority with an ‘intelligible principle’ to guide the exercise of del-

egated discretion” (quoted in Cann 1998, p. 75). According to Rehnquist, the statute

used by the secretary of Labor in this case was standardless.

Due Process and Bureaucratic Discretion The Fifth (federal applicability) and Fourteenth (state applicability) amendments

to the Constitution prohibit the government from depriving life, liberty, or property

without due process. The notion of due process coincides with a guarantee of fair

procedures. Due process is an elastic concept, and it is shaped, in large part, by the

prevailing political climate and the ideological makeup of the Supreme Court. In-

dividuals claiming an infringement of due process must demonstrate a property or

liberty interest. A property interest coincides with an economic stake. In the con-

text of this discussion, a liberty interest refers to an individual’s future employment.

The high mark of administrative due process is embodied in Goldberg v. Kelly (1970). The issue before the Court in this case was whether an agency may termi-

nate welfare benefits without providing the recipient with a pre-termination evi-

“Politics, it seems to me, for years

or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right

or wrong.”

RICHARD ARMOUR American Poet; Writer

(1906–1989)

187Politics and Public Administration

dentiary hearing. The majority held that a pre-termination evidentiary hearing was

warranted in accordance with the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amend-

ment. The basis for this decision lies in the nature of the property interest at stake.

That is, welfare benefits are means-tested, meaning their termination would leave

recipients without financial support. It is imperative, therefore, that welfare recip-

Uncle Sam’s Christmas Dream Source: Rogers, William Allen, Harper's Weekly, 49:1851 (December 23, 1905). Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, reproduction number LC-USZ62-10352, http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/cai.2a14425.

188 CHAPTER 5

ients are given timely and adequate notice of termination, and the reasons for such

termination must be clearly stipulated so as to provide recipients with the oppor-

tunity to present evidence on their behalf. In this particular case, bureaucratic in-

terests are thought to be secondary, as the erroneous allocation of welfare benefits

would prove nominal to the state. The erroneous termination of welfare benefits,

however, would have a profoundly negative impact upon one’s livelihood.

On the other hand, in Matthews v. Eldridge (1976), the issue before the Supreme Court was whether a Social Security recipient is, in accordance with the due process

clause of the Fifth Amendment, entitled to a hearing prior to the termination of dis-

ability benefits. Unlike the Goldberg case, the Court held that a pre-termination

hearing was not due. The basis of this decision rests upon the following assump-

tions: First, disability benefits are not means-tested, and therefore the termination

of such benefits would not leave one destitute. Second, given that disability bene-

fits are allocated on the basis of medical records, the risk of an erroneous decision

is thought to be lower than in welfare cases. Finally, in weighing the interests of the

state versus the individual, a post-termination hearing more than adequately sat-

isfies due process.

Goss v. Lopez (1975) concerns a due process case in the educational arena. It stemmed from a challenge to an Ohio public school policy that gave principals the

authority to suspend students from school for a maximum period of 10 days. The

challenge in Goss v. Lopez followed the assumption that, consistent with the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, one’s right to education cannot be de-

prived without a hearing. The Supreme Court held that the failure to provide a hear-

ing prior to or within a reasonable time subsequent to a student’s suspension

violates due process protections. The decision acknowledged the need for a limited

hearing (a guarantee of nominal due process) given a student’s entitlement to pub-

lic education as a property interest. A limited hearing may include notifying a stu-

dent (and parents) of the reasons for the suspension, providing an explanation of

the evidence that school officials have against the student, and giving the student

in question the opportunity to explain his or her side and present counterevidence.

Property interests are not limited means-tested and entitlement benefits. Taxes

represent bona fide property interests, and under specific circumstances, taxes can-

not be levied without a measure of due process. For instance, in Londoner v. Den- ver (1908), a nonlegislative body (a local board) established a special tax district for the purpose of financing road improvements. The issue before the Supreme Court

was whether a nonlegislative body may levy a special tax assessment without a hear-

ing. According to the majority opinion, no individual should be compelled to pay a

specialized tax assessment without having an opportunity to be heard. Specifically,

the Court ruled that when a legislative body gives lower units of government the

power to determine “upon whom” to impose a tax, an adjudicatory hearing must be

provided (Cann 1998, p. 221).

189Politics and Public Administration

Adjudicatory hearings are most appropriate if a limited number of people claim a

property interest, and if a decision is based upon evidence that can be rebutted,

which was the case in Londoner. However, an adjudicatory hearing was not con-

sidered necessary in Bi-Metallic Investment Company v. State Board of Equal- ization (1915). In this instance, the State Board of Equalization and the Colorado Tax Commission increased property taxes by 40 percent. Claiming a property in-

terest, the petitioner filed suit contending that property cannot be taken without

due process, thereby meriting an adjudicatory hearing. Ac-

cording to the Supreme Court, since the tax increase was

applicable to all taxable property, it impacted more than a

limited number of individuals. Given this fact, individual-

ized hearings are not necessary in accordance with due

process protections.

Due process protections apply to public sector employees,

as well. Public employees wrongly terminated may file suit

in accordance with the due process clauses of the Fifth and

Fourteenth amendments provided they are able to estab-

lish a liberty or property interest. In this context, a property

interest coincides with the expectation of future employment (for example, a con-

tract or tenure). A liberty interest can be established under the following condi-

tions: (1) A public employee’s superior has openly discussed the reasons for that

employee’s firing, thereby damaging that individual’s reputation and compromis-

ing his or her ability to gain future employment. This is precisely why public uni-

versity professors not receiving tenure are rarely, if ever, told why. (2) The reason

for a public employee’s termination was the exercise of a constitutionally protected

right (notably, First Amendment protections of free speech, assembly, and exer-

cise of religion).

In Hale v. Walsh (1987), Hale was the untenured chair of the Department of His- tory at Idaho State University. He was threatened with termination given his refusal

to change the grade of a student related to a former dean at the university. Aware

of his inability to establish a property interest because of his untenured position

(and therefore having no expectation of continued employment), Hale attempted

to establish a liberty interest by becoming involved in union activities. As a union

leader, he made a speech critical of the university president. When subsequently

dismissed, Hale argued that he was fired for exercising his constitutionally pro-

tected right to free speech, which would theoretically constitute a liberty in accor-

dance with the due process clause. However, he was ultimately unsuccessful in

establishing a liberty interest.

Unlike Hale, the petitioner in Pickering v. Board of Education (1968) was able to establish a liberty interest. Specifically, Pickering was a public school teacher who was terminated for writing a letter to the editor criticizing the board of education

“Politicians are the same all over. They promise to build a bridge even where there is no river.”

NIKITA KHRUSHCHEV Former Soviet Leader

(1894–1971)

190 CHAPTER 5

and the superintendent of schools for their support of a local bond issue. The issue

before the Supreme Court was whether public school teachers may be penalized for

First Amendment acts that do not impair their job or the institution. The Court held

that an individual’s First Amendment rights may be restricted in instances when

they interfere with the operation and administration of schools within the district.

According to the justices, however, Pickering’s letter to the editor failed to inter-

fere in this regard. His termination resulted from the exercise of a constitutionally

protected right, thereby establishing a liberty interest in accordance with due

process protections.

Administrative Expediency v. Search and Seizure Protections Consistent with the letter of the Fourth Amendment, individuals have the right to

be “secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable

searches and seizures, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause…par-

ticularly describing the place to be searched and the person or things to be seized.”

The Pendleton Act Provides Civil Service Reform: 1883. Image Source: Smith, Carter, ed. American Historical Images on File: Key Issues in Constitutional History. New York: Facts on File, 1988.

TURNTHE RASCALSOUT!

WE THE BOYS

HAVE BEEN CHEATED OUT Of OUR SPOILS.

WE ARE THE PEOPLE WE ARE

CIVIL

REFORM IS A

HUMBUG

191Politics and Public Administration

Accordingly, warrantless searches and seizures are deemed “unreasonable” (Cann

1998, p. 142). The intent of the Fourth Amendment has since served as a means of

controlling bureaucratic discretion within the context of information gathering pur-

suant to the implementation of redistributive or regulatory

policies. For example, in Marshall v. Barlow’s, Inc. (1979), the issue before the Supreme Court was whether a warrant

is necessary for administrative searches of industries, as-

suming there is an absence of criminal charges. The ma-

jority held that agencies conducting inspections must

obtain a warrant. The rationale for the majority opinion

rests on the contention that a warrant, in accordance with

the protections vested in the Fourth Amendment, offers

proprietors assurances that agency inspections are reason-

able. According to the majority opinion, “the authority to

make warrantless searches devolves almost unbridled dis-

cretion upon executive and administrative officers, particularly those in the field,

as to when to search and whom to search” (Marshall v. Barlow’s, Inc., as cited in Cann 1998, p. 155). The warrant requirement ultimately protects against the arbi-

trary exercise of bureaucratic discretion.

In Wyman v. James (1971), an Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC, a form of welfare) recipient was informed that her home would be visited by a case-

worker. While the petitioner offered to provide all relevant information, she re-

fused to allow the caseworker to visit. Subsequently, the petitioner’s AFDC benefits

were terminated. The petitioner sought injunctive relief, claiming that the case-

worker’s visit violated the Fourth Amendment, and therefore there was no justifi-

cation for the termination of her benefits. The Supreme Court needed to decide

whether a state agency violates the Fourth Amendment by preconditioning AFDC

benefits to home visits. According to the majority, the caseworker’s visit was not

thought to be a “search” within the context of the Fourth Amendment. Further-

more, even if the visit could be considered a search, it was not unreasonable as it

served a valid administrative purpose regarding the dispensation of AFDC benefits

(verifying the care of children).

In addition to conducting physical inspections, agencies sometimes use subpoenas

to obtain information. The case of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) v. Amer- ican Tobacco Company (1924) addresses administrative subpoena powers. In this instance, the issue was whether Congress intended to afford the FTC the power to

subpoena any information it deemed useful. The Supreme Court held that while

the FTC has the authority to subpoena documentary evidence related to a matter

under investigation, so-called fishing expeditions remain unjustified. In Oklahoma Press Publishing v. Walling (1946), the petitioners claimed that a subpoena issued in accordance with the Fair Labor Practices Act (FLPA) violated the Fourth Amend-

“Bureaucracy is not an obstacle

to democracy but an inevitable

complement to it.”

JOSEPH A. SCHUMPETER

Austrian Economist; Political Scientist

(1883–1950)

192 CHAPTER 5

ment. The issue was whether Congress authorized an agency to subpoena nonevi-

dentiary subject matter pursuant to an investigation. According to the majority

opinion, the subpoena was thought to be reasonable and germane to the Labor De-

partment’s mission, and therefore there was no constitutional breach. That is, em-

ployee records were subpoenaed, and consistent with the FLPA, the secretary of

Labor has the authority to investigate wage and hour violations.

The Supreme Court attempts to balance the bureaucracy’s need to obtain informa-

tion against the rights of the citizenry. Specifically, within the context of an ad-

ministrative inspection, a warrant is required where there is a “reasonable

expectation of privacy,” which coincides with the case of Barlow’s, Inc. (Cann 1998, p. 162). In Wyman, however, an individual receiving AFDC benefits is subjected to warrantless home inspections pursuant to an administrative purpose (verifying the

care of children). With respect to administrative subpoena powers, subpoenas can

be used to obtain information relevant to an agency’s mission and scope of author-

ity, which was the Court’s rationale in Walling. However, administrative subpoena powers cannot be used to justify fishing expeditions, which was the basis for Court’s

ruling in FTC v. American Tobacco.

Torts as a Bureaucratic Check In accordance with the notion of sovereign immunity, the government cannot be

sued unless it allows itself to be sued. While seemingly monarchical and antitheti-

cal to fundamental democratic tenets, sovereign immunity is justified given the as-

sumption that if the government suffers through litigation, then the citizenry will

ultimately suffer. However, the Federal Tort Claims Act has altered the dynamic

regarding sovereign immunity, as it allows the federal government to be sued under

similar circumstances as private citizens. The act, however, contains a number of

notable exceptions.

Despite the statutory provisions of the Federal Tort Claims Act, government func-

tions that are discretionary in nature are exempt from tort litigation. The rationale

for this exemption is based on the notion that without sovereign immunity coin-

ciding with discretionary actions, the government may discharge its duties in an

overly cautious and timid manner. The mere prospect of litigation could have a

chilling effect. For example, without discretionary immunity, law enforcement of-

ficers may not aggressively pursue suspected criminals for fear of civil liability re-

sulting from, say, a car accident.

While discretionary governmental functions are immune from liability, there are ex-

ceptions. In Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents (1971), Bivens claimed that agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics entered his home, placed him in hand

shackles, and searched his apartment without a warrant or probable cause. Bivens

sought damages, and the Supreme Court held that an individual is entitled to sue

federal law enforcement agents (as opposed to the agency) for damages given Fourth

193Politics and Public Administration

Amendment violations. According to some constitutional scholars, Bivens created what has become known as “qualified immunity.” That is, while certain officials—

judges, prosecutors, the president—are afforded total immunity, the majority of gov-

ernment officials and street-level bureaucrats may be sued

for egregious constitutional infringements (Cann 1998;

Barry and Whitcomb 1987). The precedent set forth in

Bivens was taken further in Butz v. Economou (1978), whereby the Court held that citizens have grounds to file

suit against federal officials in instances when “the officials

knew or should have known that the official’s action would

violate a citizen’s constitutional rights” (Cann 1998, p. 394).

The Butz ruling essentially made it easier for citizens to sue federal bureaucrats, thereby serving as a check against potential abuses of bureaucratic discretion.

Given the aforementioned discussion, one may assume that the U.S. Supreme Court

takes an activist role in checking the power of the bureaucracy. While this assump-

tion is debatable, potential litigants must overcome a number of barriers before a

case or controversy is given consideration. Standing proves to be a noteworthy bar-

rier. According to Barry and Whitcomb (1987), standing “involves the question of

whether a party has sufficient interest in a controversy to bring an action in court”

(p. 90). Establishing standing requires the following conditions: (1) injury or the

imminent likelihood of injury, (2) the violation of a constitutional principle, and (3)

the presence of redressability. For example, in Allen v. Wright et al. (1984), the Wrights sued the Internal Revenue Service for providing tax-exempt status to

racially segregated private academies, which is a violation of the Internal Revenue

Code. Since the Wrights made no attempt to enroll their children at one of these

academies, there was no injury, and therefore the Wrights had no standing.

The doctrine of primary jurisdiction serves as another potential barrier to litiga-

tion. Primary jurisdiction involves the question of whether a case or controversy

would be better settled in a court or by a bureaucracy. The courts will typically defer

to agencies in instances where agency expertise overrides the courts or in the in-

terest of regulatory uniformity (Barry and Whitcomb 1987; Cann 1998). Nader v. Allegheny Airlines (1976) is a notable primary jurisdiction case. Specifically, con- sumer activist Ralph Nader filed suit against the Allegheny Airlines claiming its

overbooking practices constituted fraudulent misrepresentation in accordance with

the Federal Aviation Act of 1958. The issue before the Supreme Court was whether

the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) has primary jurisdiction to determine if over-

booking practices constitute fraudulent misrepresentation. The Court declared that

the CAB does not have primary jurisdiction, as the courts are more than capable of

rendering a decision related to statutory interpretations. Hypothetically speaking,

had Allegheny dealt with issues of regulatory uniformity or expertise, the Court would have deferred to the CAB.

“To the victor belongs the

spoils.”

WILLIAM L. MARCY New York Senator

194 CHAPTER 5

Additionally, a petitioner’s claim is unlikely to be given consideration until all ad-

ministrative appeals have been exhausted. That is, one must exhaust “all legal reme-

dies within an agency” before the Supreme Court will hear a case or controversy

regarding agency action (Cann 1998, p. 117). Exhaustion affords agencies the first op-

portunity to address a dispute, thereby decreasing the likelihood of litigation. Other

barriers that litigants must overcome include ripeness and jurisdiction, which is not

to be confused with primary jurisdiction. Ripeness simply refers to whether a case

or controversy is ready to be heard, and it is highly subjective. Regarding jurisdic-

tion, an individual adversely affected by an agency’s action must demonstrate that

the courts have the “power to resolve” the controversy. In accordance with Article III

of the U.S. Constitution, federal courts have the jurisdiction to hear controversies

pertaining to constitutional and federal statutory interpretations, in addition to dis-

putes regarding federal agency action, given Congress’s constitutional authority to

delegate power to agencies. Barriers to litigation are often used to justify judicial in-

action. In many instances, the courts use these barriers to avoid addressing cases or

controversies that are overly political in nature. Such barriers reduce the frequency

of frivolous lawsuits, thereby preventing the courts from becoming overburdened.

This ideally gives the courts the latitude to hear more exigent disputes.

The inherent value conflict between administrative bureaucracy and democratic

governance exists on several levels. Bureaucracies are synonymous with a mana-

gerial approach, which is predicated on a hierarchical structure, formalization, and

uniform procedures that are carried out impersonally. Representative bodies are

political in nature, which suggests a certain measure of transparency and account-

ability. Expertise is the hallmark of a bureaucracy, which affords bureaucrats a mo-

nopoly of power. Bureaucracies are closed systems that execute policies in a

technical, rationalist manner. This is arguably antithetical to the nature of demo-

cratic institutions, which ideally emphasize openness and citizen participation. The

president’s inability to control the bureaucracy effectively, coupled with Congress’s

symbiotic relationship with the bureaucracy, necessitates judicial vigilance. And

while the nation’s High Court serves as a reactive and often reluctant arbiter, its

holdings guide the bureaucracy so as to ensure that bureaucratic actions do not run

counter to the letter and spirit of the Constitution.

195Politics and Public Administration

Appleby, P. 1949. Policy and Administration. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.

Arnold, P.E. 1986. Making the Administrative Presidency: Comprehensive Reor- ganization Planning, 1905–1980. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Barry, D.D., and H.R. Whitcomb. 1987. The Legal Foundations of Public Admin- istration. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Company.

Cann, Steven J. 1998. Administrative Law. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage Publica- tions.

Holzer, M., and V. Gabrielian. 1998. “Five Great Ideas in American Public Ad-

ministration.” In Handbook of Public Administration, ed. J. Rabin, W.B. Hil- dreth, and G.J. Miller. New York: Marcel Dekker.

Kerwin, C.M. 1994. Rulemaking: How Government Agencies Write Law and Make Policy. Washington, DC: CQ Press.

Key, V.O. 1940. “The Lack of a Budgetary Theory.” American Political Science Review 34 (December).

Lipsky, M. 1980. Street-Level Bureaucracy. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Long, N.E. 1949. “Power and Administration.” Public Administration Review 9: 257–64.

Lowi, T.J. 1979. The End of Liberalism: The Second Republic of United States. 2d ed. New York: W.W. Norton.

Maranto, R. 1993. Politics and Bureaucracy in the Modern Presidency: Careerists and Appointees in the Reagan Administration. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Nathan, R. 1975. The Plot That Failed: Nixon and the Administrative Presidency. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Administrative discretion

Administrative law

Distributive policies

Due process

Iron triangle

Redistributive policies

Search and seizure protection

Street-level bureaucrats

Tort

Welfare state

KEY TERMS

REFERENCES

196 CHAPTER 5

Riley, D.D. 1987. Controlling the Federal Bureaucracy. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

Rohr, J. 1986. To Run a Constitution: The Legitimacy of the Administrative State. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.

Seidman, H. 1980. Politics, Position, and Power: The Dynamics of Federal Or- ganization. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.

Selznick, P.A. 1949. TVA and the Grass Roots. New York: Harper and Row.

Simon, H.A. 1947/1997. Administrative Behavior. New York: Simon and Schus- ter.

———. 1967. “The Changing Theory and Changing Practice of Public Administra-

tion.” In Contemporary Political Science: Towards Empirical Theory, ed. I. de Sola Pool. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Waldo, D. 1984. The Administrative State. 2d ed. New York: Holmes and Meier.

Warren, K. 1993. “We Have Debated Ad Nauseam the Legitimacy of the Adminis-

trative State—But Why?” Public Administration Review 53, no. 3: 249–253.

Wildavsky, A. 1992. “Political Implications of Budget Reform: A Retrospective.”

Public Administration Review 52 (November): 594–99.

Riccucci, N. 1995. Unsung Heroes: Federal Execucrats Making a Difference. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

Rosenbloom, D.H. 1987. “Public Administrators and the Judiciary: The ‘New

Partnership.’” Public Administration Review 47, no. 1: 75–83.

OMB Watch (a nonprofit research and advocacy organization): http://www.omb-

watch.org/

American Civil Liberties Union (an interest group agency): http://www.aclu.org

Guide to Administrative Law—HG.org, Worldwide Legal Directories:

http://www.hg.org/adm.html

SUPPLEMENTARY READINGS

ELECTRONIC RESOURCES

197Politics and Public Administration

Allen v. Wright et al. (1984). 468 U.S. 737.

Bi-Metallic Investment Company v. State Board of Equalization (1915). 239 U.S. 441.

Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents (1971). 403 U.S. 388.

Butz v. Economou (1978). 438 U.S. 478.

Federal Trade Commission (FTC) v. American Tobacco Company (1924). 264 U.S. 298.

Goldberg v. Kelly (1970). 397 U.S. 254.

Goss v. Lopez (1975). 419 U.S. 565.

Hale v. Walsh (1987). 747 P.2D 1288.

Hampton v. United States (1928). 276 U.S. 394.

Industrial Union Department AFL-CIO v. American Petroleum (1980). 488 U.S. 607.

Londoner v. Denver (1908). 210 U.S. 373.

Marshall v. Barlow’s, Inc. (1979). 436 U.S. 307.

Matthews v. Eldridge (1976). 424 U.S. 319.

Nader v. Allegheny Airlines (1976). 426 U.S. 290.

Oklahoma Press Publishing v. Walling (1946). 327 U.S. 186.

Pickering v. Board of Education (1968). 391 U.S. 563.

Wyman v. James (1971). 400 U.S. 309.

CASE CITATIONS

Intergovernmental Relations

CHAPTER 6

The term intergovernmental relations refers to the

collaborative dynamic, or working relationships, that exist

among all levels of government—national, state, and local.

The U.S. Constitution created what is called a Federalist

system of government. A Federalist system consists of a

centralized national government that has jurisdiction over the

nation as a whole, while at the same time sharing power and

responsibility and working in concert with smaller subnational

governmental units at the state, county, and municipal levels.

This chapter delves into the complex workings of the American

Federalist system and examines a growing aspect of

intergovernmental relations at the local level—that being

interlocal shared services. The chapter concludes with a

discussion of intragovernmental and intergovernmental

competition as a means of improving performance.

198 CHAPTER 6

199Intergovernmental Relations

“Management is the science of which organizations are but experiments.”

JOHN CONSTABLE English Romantic Painter

(1776-1837)

“Management is the science of which organizations are but experiments.”

JOHN CONSTABLE English Romantic Painter

(1776-1837)

“We’re hearing how Pennsylvania municipalities are furloughing employees, cutting services

or taking other drastic measures to pay their bills…If they shared services, the financial pain would not be so great.”

KEN KLOTHEN Pennsylvania Department of Community

and Economic Development

Source: www.cartoonstock.com

200 CHAPTER 6

The Idea of Federalism The U.S. Federalist system created several layers of government. A number of models

are used to explain how the Federalist system works; among them are the layer cake,

the marble cake, and the picket fence models. The layer cake model envisions sepa- rate and distinct areas of authority between the national, state, and local governments.

For example, this model assumes that the national government (that is, U.S. Congress

and the president) is primarily responsible for defending the nation, engaging in in-

ternational diplomacy, and regulating interstate commerce. State governments are

primarily responsible for overseeing education and infrastructure such as building

bridges and roads. Local governments, which include county and municipal govern-

ments, are responsible for public safety, emergency services, and waste removal.

The marble cake model assumes that there are few hard-and-fast lines of distinc- tion as to what constitutes national, state, or local responsibilities. Like a marble

cake, governmental responsibilities are, at times, swirled or mixed. For example,

while defense would still fall under the domain of the national government, educa-

tion could potentially involve all three layers of government.

The picket fence model of the Federalist system is characterized by close fiscal re- lationships among the national, state, and local governments. These fiscal rela-

tionships emerged given the national government’s strong tax base, one that is less

affected by the hills and valleys of a fluctuating economy, coupled with the pre-

sumption that state and local officials are in a better position to spend money in a

manner that is responsive to their citizens. The picket fence model relies on grants-

in-aid programs: the national government provides grants (that is, transfers of tax

money collected by the Internal Revenue Service) to the states, a portion of which

is further filtered down to the county and municipal governments. In some cases,

the national government provides grants directly to local governments. These

grants not only help the state and local governments to finance necessary activities

and programs but also create working relationships among national, state, and local

public servants who share common policy concerns. In the picket fence model, the

pickets (or vertical slats) represent policy or functional areas that tie together bu-

reaucratic specialists throughout the various levels of government (represented by

the three horizontal slats).

There are two types of federal grants: categorical and block grants. Federal cate- gorical grants are funds that must be used for very specific purposes. For exam- ple, if the national government gives a categorical grant to a state for highway

construction, then that state is required to use that money in a way deemed ap-

propriate by the agency that granted it—in this case, the U.S. Department of

Transportation. With categorical grants, clearly defined rules and regulations dic-

THE LAYERS OF GOVERNMENT

201Intergovernmental Relations

FIGURE 6.1 – MODELS OF FEDERALISM

Layer Cake Model: This model envisions separate and distinct areas of authority between the levels of government; no level intrudes upon the others.

Marble Cake Model: This model assumes that there are few distinct areas that are strictly national, state, or local per se. Education, for example, is one policy area where all levels of government have concerns.

Picket Fence Model: This model is characterized by close fiscal relationships among the various levels of government, as well as the recognition that public servants from all lev- els of government have similar policy concerns regardless of the level of government.

NATIONAL GOVERNMENT

STATE GOVERNMENTS

LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

NATIONAL GOVERNMENT

STATE GOVERNMENT

LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

National

State

Local

C A T I

W E L F A R E

H I

G H W A Y S

U R B A N

R E N E

A L

H I

H W A Y S

P U B L I

E A L T H

U L I

S A F E

P U L I

L I B R A R A R

202 CHAPTER 6

tate how the money may be spent; there are strings attached and hoops to jump

through, and for these reasons, state and local governments tend to prefer block grants. Block grants gained popularity in the Nixon era (1969–1974). They afford the states much more freedom in determining how grant money will be spent.

Most notably, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation

Act (PRWORA) of 1996 implemented a block grant approach to reforming wel-

fare. PRWORA replaced Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) with

Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF). Through TANF, the national

government provides a lump sum of money to the states, and from there, each

state determines its own eligibility requirements and regulations. Through the

TANF block grant system, welfare became much more decentralized than under

the old system, meaning that power has shifted away from the national govern-

ment and to the states. Some observers have criticized this particular approach to

welfare, arguing that the block grant system creates a “race to the bottom” as

states seek to lower their TANF benefits to avoid becoming “welfare magnets.” In

other words, by having better benefits, states are fearful that they will attract more

welfare recipients.

Interlocal Shared Government Pubic demands for doing more with less, promoting public organizations that are

efficient and effective, and bolstering citizen trust through improved governmental

responsiveness have engendered interest in interlocal shared service agreements. State governments are exploring interlocal shared service agreements in order to re-

FIGURE 6.2 – POTENTIAL SHARED SERVICE OUTCOMES

Decreased Property Tax

Burden

Cost Savings

Service Standardization

SHARED SERVICE OUTCOMES

Improved Service Efficiency and Effectiveness Reduction of

Duplicative Services

Improved Responsiveness

203Intergovernmental Relations

duce service delivery costs and ease the tax burden on their citizens while simulta-

neously streamlining local services, doing away with duplicative services, and en-

hancing governmental responsiveness.

Types of Shared Services Sharing Personnel Sharing personnel is a straightforward concept. Smaller governmental units such

as municipalities and small cities recognize that while specific governmental func-

tions must be performed, sometimes there is simply not “enough work” to require

a full-time employee. While this dilemma may be resolved by having one worker

handle multiple functions, such a solution is not sensible

when the functions require specific technical or professional

skills. Part-time workers commonly fill these positions,

which include posts like certified assessor, certified munic-

ipal finance officer, or zoning officer. Cost is one advantage

of the part-time employee option, but other problems come

to pass, namely management control, pubic availability, and

accountability. Sharing personnel with other jurisdictions

may provide a better solution, but it requires planning and

cooperation among the jurisdictions involved. Shared staff

is preferable to the use of part-time staff due largely to in-

creased accountability over an individual managed by more

than one municipality.

Sharing Equipment Sharing equipment represents a partner model in which

ownership is shared by each community owning an indi-

vidual part of the entire piece of equipment. For example,

a piece of equipment known as the “Ditch Master” is owned

jointly by the townships of Franklin, Bridgewater, and

Montgomery in New Jersey. Each township has one-third

ownership of the device, which is used to remove debris from roadside drain

ditches. Franklin Township provides for upkeep and stores the Ditch Master, given

that it has large garage and a number of trained mechanics. Bridgewater Township

holds the escrow account of rental fees when neighboring municipalities contract

to use the Ditch Master. Fees collected are used to offset maintenance costs (Hes-

ter 2000).

Sharing Internal Services Sharing internal services is ideal when the service function requires little interac-

tion with the public. A prime example is the shared animal shelter in Maplewood

and South Orange, two municipalities in New Jersey. To the individual municipal-

ity, this is similar to a relationship with a private vendor. The difference, however,

“Government compares

favorably to the private sector in

characteristics and performance,

particularly when it is called upon to

achieve what other sectors of the society could

not achieve. Government

works.”

CHARLES GOODSELL Virginia Polytechnic

Institute and State University

204 CHAPTER 6

is that all communities have a vested interest in making the relationship succeed.

The shared service agreement benefits all participants who are acting collectively.

Sharing External Services External services refer to agreements in which one governmental unit consents to

provide essential services to another that no longer provides such services. An al-

ternative arrangement entails two or more governmental units consolidating serv-

ices into a single regional service delivery system. These shared service arrangements

may involve regional fire and police, public works departments, and waste disposal.

External shared service models are pursued in the interest of saving money and im-

proving service quality. It is believed that cost savings are the result of economies of

scale (Staley et al. 2005), which is a principle that assumes larger organizational

units are able to provide comparable service quality but at a lower cost. That is, a

larger, shared sanitation department will keep the streets just as clean as a smaller,

independent sanitation department—but at a lower public cost.

Shared Service Examples Shared service efforts are being explored in the hopes of cutting service delivery

costs, reducing tax burdens, and improving governmental responsiveness through

better services. For example, in California, the cities of Moreno Valley and Riverside

reached an agreement in 1996 to jointly construct a shared fire station instead of

constructing separate, independent stations separated by only one mile. Sharing a

fire station saves an estimated $750, 000 in capital and operating costs annually.

Serving the western part of the Moreno Valley and the Canyon Crest and Canyon

Springs areas of Riverside, the shared station has been responsible for significantly

reducing response times; for example, the response time to the Canyon Springs

area of Riverside has decreased from fifteen minutes to five (U.S. Conference of

Mayors 1997).

The North Hudson Regional Fire and Rescue Department, a shared service initia-

tive created in 1999, serves 200,000 residents throughout five New Jersey munic-

ipalities—Guttenberg, North Bergen, Union City, Weehawken, and West New York.

This regional department has saved each municipality about $5 million in service

costs annually. It has also created a more responsive and efficient fire department.

Not long after its creation, firefighters rushed to a house fire in a neighborhood of

West New York. Fire stations in the municipalities of Weehawken and North Bergen

were actually closer to this house fire than stations in West New York. In this case,

removing municipal boundaries allowed firefighters to respond faster and there-

fore better ensure the safety of West New York residents (Smothers 1999).

The Pine-Marshall-Bradford Woods joint police force represents another ground-

breaking shared service model. The small Pennsylvania communities of Pine, Mar-

shall, and Bradford Woods merged their police forces in 1969. Consolidation has

enabled these communities to support an 18-member police force. This includes a

205Intergovernmental Relations

detective—a resource not afforded to most small communities (Barcousky 2005).

Several communities in the United States have since emulated the Pine-Marshall-

Bradford Woods model to capture improvements in safety and service quality, most

specifically: an improved police presence and officer coverage; improved training;

and more opportunities for officers to specialize.

Sanitation and public works departments have become opportunities for shared

– WE’VE GOT PLURALISM! ONE TRAFFIC LIGHT IS RUN BY THE CITY, ANOTHER BY THE REGION, AND A THIRD ONE BY THE DISTRICT Artist: V. Uborevich-Borovsky (caption: A. Gostiushin) Cover of Krokodil [Crocodile] satirical magazine, 1991, No. 23.

206 CHAPTER 6

services, as well. Most notably, the Wisconsin counties of Outagamie, Winnebago,

and Brown merged their waste disposal and recycling departments in 2003. This

multicounty agreement projects cost savings of $35 million over 25 years for waste

disposal, and $8 million over 12 years for recycling (Tom 2003). The bridge main-

tenance program in Chautauqua County, New York, is a col-

laborative effort between the County Department of Public

Facilities and the municipalities within the county. The

bridge maintenance program was established to ensure

bridge and roadway safety. When established, 62 percent

of the county’s 488 bridges were in need of significant re-

pair and 69 bridges were impassable or weight restricted by

the State Department of Transportation. By pooling mu-

nicipal and county resources, bridge conditions within the

county improved significantly. For example, when the

bridge program was introduced in 1988, 55 percent of the

county’s bridges were considered “deficient,” compared to

34 percent eight years later (Hattery 1996).

Communities are seeking better parks and recreational op-

portunities through shared service agreements. Due to lim-

ited resources, the village of Pewaukee, Wisconsin could

provide recreational services only during the summer

months. The neighboring city of Pewaukee provided recre-

ational services year-round, yet its director of recreation

was employed only part-time. The village and city ulti-

mately combined their recreation departments, forming

the Pewaukee Joint Parks and Recreation Department. Vil-

lage residents were provided year-round recreational serv-

ices, while the city gained a full-time director of recreation.

This agreement has been credited with enhancing parks

and recreational services for both municipalities, in addi-

tion to reducing operating costs (Johnson 2006).

In the interest of enhanced library services, the municipality of Chula Vista, Cali-

fornia, cooperated with the Sweetwater Union High School District. The jointly sup-

ported East Lake Branch Library was established in 1993. For the students and

residents of Chula Vista, the shared municipal and school district resources afford

library users a more comprehensive and up-to-date book collection than could oth-

erwise be provided without this agreement (Repard 1993).

State Financial Support to Encourage Shared Services The prospects of cost savings and improved services have prompted many states to

establish funding streams that encourage intergovernmental shared service initia-

tives. For instance, the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs created a

“Doing more with less is an

impressive sound bite… Politicians

looking for a quick fix and corporations

looking to make quick profits are

promoting privatization as

the magic answer to government

deficit problems… Privatization is

undermining the public services

that bind us together and underpin the

foundations or our democracy.”

JUDY DARCY President, Canadian

Union Public Employees

207Intergovernmental Relations

program known as Sharing Available Resources Efficiently (SHARE). The SHARE

program provides municipal and county governments with feasibility or imple-

mentation grants. Typically in the range of $20,000, feasibility grants help gov-

ernments with the planning and developing stages of shared service initiatives.

Implementation grants of up to $200,000 help governments cover costs associ-

ated with putting a shared service arrangement into action (SHARE 2006).

New York established a program called the Shared Municipal Service Incentive pro-

gram (SMSI), which is a $25 million program designed to help municipalities con-

solidate local government services. For municipalities that want to consolidate into

one government unit, grants of up to $1 million are offered to offset the upfront

costs of consolidation. Grants of up to $300,000 are available for countywide-

shared service programs (NYSAC 2006).

The Department of Community and Economic Development for the State of Penn-

sylvania created the Shared Municipal Services Program (SMSP). Grants are pro- vided ranging from $10,000 to $25,000 for intermunicipal agreements that

promote cooperation (SMSP 2005), including but not limited to:

• Sharing technology

• Municipal insurance cooperatives

• Sharing public works departments

• Sharing recreation services

• Sharing code enforcement operations

• Sharing equipment

Emergency Management and Homeland Security Plan (Simulation) Collaboration is a key learning objective in this role-play simulation. Students be- come members of an intergovernmental agency task force commissioned to create an emergency response plan for their city. After reviewing the task, groups of six students will draft a plan for emergency response, including a public relations ef- fort strategy that involves local citizens. After completing this simulation, teams will present their plans to the class.

David E. Booher and Adam Sutkus, E-PARCC, Program for the Advancement of Research on Conflict and Collaboration, The Maxwell School, Syracuse University http://sites.maxwell.syr.edu/parc/eparc/simulations/booher-sutkus.asp

EXERCISE 6.1

208 CHAPTER 6

There are three main obstacles that impede the implementation of shared service

initiatives: (1) shared service proposals are typically opposed by union, civil service,

and tenured government employees; (2) local residents may oppose shared service

proposals given insufficient information regarding the potential benefits; and (3)

local community officials may fear losing total control over specific service areas.

The loss of “home rule” is a significant psychological obstacle, making the shared

service model particularly difficult for states having large numbers of independent

governmental units. New Jersey is a prime example, with 566 municipalities, 611

school districts, 212 fire service districts, and 21 counties packed within a relatively

small geographic area. In overcoming these obstacles, states must take the lead in

encouraging interlocal and regional service, perhaps through grant programs that

support feasibility studies and help to offset implementation costs. Accurately and

routinely measuring and disseminating cost savings and service delivery improve-

ments of shared service initiatives is important as well.

Improving Performance via Intragovernmental and Intergovernmental Competition Government should not be cast aside. Government must learn to compete with the

private sector. Public organizations might compete for government contracts

against one another and against private-sector organizations as well. The debate

regarding privatization—employing the private sector or nonprofit sectors to do the work of government—is based on the following premise: what the citizenry, pri-

vate businesses, and policymakers truly desire is productivity. Those who embrace

privatization have underscored the importance of high performance, defined in the

context of efficiency and effectiveness. Champions of government underscore less

tangible and more value-oriented impacts. However, advocates of both privatization

and government must address each other’s concerns. In other words, government

services that are privatized must be responsive to the public, and services delivered

by government must be done so efficiently and effectively. Competition has been

promoted to the citizenry and to policymakers as the best way of achieving effi-

ciency and effectiveness. Privatization is the type of competition that is talked about

most. A main argument advanced by the so-called “guru” of privatization, E.S.

Savas, is that “competition, achieved by prudent privatization, is the key to im-

proving the productivity of public agencies and, more broadly, of public programs

and public services. . . . Competition must be introduced and institutionalized, and

privatization is the technique of choice for accomplishing this” (Savas 1992).

Undoubtedly, competition can improve organizational efficiency and effectiveness.

However, linking competition to privatization assumes an overly narrow view of

competition. It is important to consider “government as competitor.” This idea of-

fers an expanded set of approaches to solving the problem of government per-

209Intergovernmental Relations

formance. The notion of “government as competitor” allows for intragovernmen-

tal competition in the delivery of public services as a substitute for private-sector

delivery. There are at least three approaches to competitive government:

1. Dye’s Competitive Federalism. T.R. Dye’s approach (1990) deals with com- petition among units of government. Individuals are capable of “voting

with their feet.” This simply means that, when economically feasible, indi-

viduals have the freedom to live where specific services are provided or

where a certain degree of service quality is pro-

vided. People can choose a specific town, state, or

even country in which to live. The dynamics of

competitive federalism can be seen quite often in

debates about public school quality. Families with

school-age children will often move to municipal-

ities that have high-performing schools. On the

other hand, empty nesters or singles may want to

live where school taxes are relatively low. Although

Dye’s model of intragovernmental competition is

valid, whether between states or localities, it has

done little to create the image of government as

competitor. Thus, it fails to establish government’s

claim to manage scarce resources better than other

providers.

2. Public v. Private Competition. Under this long- standing but less familiar concept, services are

“contracted in” to government rather than “con-

tracted out” to private or nonprofit organizations.

In Phoenix, Arizona (Holzer 1991), the Depart-

ment of Public Works “won back” services it had contracted out by lower-

ing service costs. The department’s Competition with Privatization

program utilized nontraditional approaches to competing with private-sec-

tor organizations. Other jurisdictions—New Orleans, Kansas City (MO),

Newark (NJ), Oklahoma City, and Minneapolis—have competed with the

private sector for sanitation services (Savas 1992). Although Savas con-

tends that government “should be given an opportunity to compete with

the private firms in an even-handed bidding process” (1992), he is rather

cynical about the impact of contracting in within the United States. How-

ever, he does describe effective competitive bidding by government agen-

cies throughout the United Kingdom .

3. Public vs. Public Competition. Governmental units compete to provide services appropriate only to the public sector. The model described next is

developed according to the public-private and public-public concepts.

“One of the major changes taking

place today in gov- ernment manage-

ment (federal, state, and local) is the shift from the

government as the historic ‘provider’ of public services to the government as the ‘manager of providers’ of serv- ices to the public.”

JACQUES S. GANSLER Educator; Corporate

Director; Political Appointee

210 CHAPTER 6

An Expanded Model of Governmental Competition Public administration scholars accept privatization given the assumption that gov-

ernments are altogether ill equipped to provide certain services in any capacity,

much less high-quality services. Even more accept the premise that government

monopolies are intrinsically inefficient. According to Savas (1992):

A government agency that enjoys a monopoly or is otherwise shielded from

competition can be expected to behave no differently than a private mo-

nopoly: Without the spur of competition, managers and workers alike gen-

erally lack the motivation to innovate, to seek better ways, to make

changes, to work smarter or harder, or to increase productivity.

There are inherent weaknesses in the argument that privatization is the only solu-

tion to government inefficiency and ineffectiveness, in addition to being the only

source of competition for government. First, using private providers does not en-

sure meaningful competition. Second, in a growing number of cases, private con-

tractors have failed to provide public-sector services at a level promised. Third,

there is a growing database of innovative and successful state and local performance

improvement projects. The Exemplary State and Local (EXSL) Awards program

database, for example, demonstrates that many public organizations are “busi-

nesslike”—in other words, they are competitive. These award winners undermine

the stereotypical view that government is inherently inept.

Drawing on government’s capacity for innovation, the open competition model of

government service delivery is discussed.

1. Open Competition. Many services are suitable for contracting out to pri- vate or nonprofit organizations. In cases where private organizations are re-

luctant to bid on a government project, or in cases where collusion is

suspected, public-sector bidders represent an important competitive force.

In the spirit of maximizing competition, all public organizations—regard-

less of their place within the government, their jurisdiction, or their mis-

sion—should be encouraged to bid on government contracts. A school

district, for example, could very well provide maintenance services to a po-

lice department. A state highway department could bid on a management

services project for a municipal parks department. Many public organiza-

tions have the know-how and surplus capacities that cannot be reduced be-

cause of technical, financial, or legal reasons. At the same time, if the

private sector or nonprofit organizations can do these jobs better, then so

be it. Consider that in some European countries, government-owned and

private airlines compete for government contracts. In another case, the ve-

hicle maintenance division of the New York City Department of Sanitation

won contracts to service city emergency service and police vehicles over

private organizations (Holzer 1988).

211Intergovernmental Relations

2. Open Competition Within Government Only. Sanitation, training, and maintenance are typical target areas for privatization. Some public-sec-

tor functions, however, are relatively intangible and complex, and thus

these services are best delivered by public organizations. For public ac-

countability purposes, services such as public safety and law enforcement,

public education, social services, public health, air traffic control, and en-

vironmental regulation should be under the di-

rection of government-owned contractors without

bids from private or nonprofit contractors. To pro-

tect democratic and service-delivery capacities, in-

tragovernmental competition may prove ideal.

Those bidders might include departments within

the contracting organization, other organizations

within the same jurisdiction, or organizations at

other levels (federal, state, county, or local) of gov-

ernment. In many cases, legislation would be

needed to allow public organizations to bid on

projects outside the realm of their stated missions.

Shared services represent an informal application

of this model.

3. Expanded Capacity for Competition. To strengthen the competitive forces suggested above, one might

hypothesize that government’s competitiveness will

increase given the introduction of new government-

based competitors. The collection of public-sector

bidders should be expanded to include more generic

agencies or units, the mission of which is improved

productivity. “Generic” agencies would be similar to

government-based conglomerates or internal con-

sulting firms that would serve a host of functions,

ranging from internal capacities (such as mainte-

nance, information services, duplicating, and train-

ing) to external capacities (such as housing,

education, transportation, or perhaps even defense).

These generic government agencies would include

public authorities or corporations and ad-hocracy with the ability to incor-

porate facets of several models, thereby allowing for the flexibility necessary

to sustain competition.

Public Authorities or Corporations Construction, transportation, highway, or port authorities and corporations are

often created as quasi-independent organizations that have their own revenue

“A proponent of aggressive

contracting out declares that ‘the purpose of local

government is not to provide jobs; it is to deliver

services to people.’ A critic

insists upon government’s

‘socially important role of providing

good jobs to people who might

otherwise not get them.’ Is local service

privatization a good thing, or not?

The question is as political as a

question can be.”

JOHN D. DONAHUE The Privatization Decision, 1989

212 CHAPTER 6

sources; therefore, they have greater flexibility in raising the resources needed to ac-

complish specific tasks. Public authorities and corporations have fewer constraints

than regular government organizations, which makes achieving private sector–like

efficiency easier. In some cases, authorities and corporations have been asked to

expand their missions to contract for other government services.

Ad-hocracy Regardless of the competitive vehicle—whether it is a new agency, agency sub-unit,

authority, or corporation—the nature and resources of this vehicle must be flexible.

Using “matrix organizations” and “project management practices” (Halachmi 1989)

facilitates the creation of ad hoc—or temporary—work groups to complete tasks

typically reserved to public organizations. These work groups have the skills to per-

form specific tasks for a certain period of time. A work group’s size, skills, and other

aspects of its performance can be altered to achieve a specific goal. This affords flex-

ibility—the level of which will be comparable to that of similar private-sector

groups—and this flexibility will likely foster comparable levels of performance. Ad-

hocracy substitutes an agency-specific civil service career model with a more flexi-

ble career option, the latter stemming from an employee’s successful completion

of other ad hoc assignments in task-specific working groups. More often than not,

the assignment of successive ad hoc duties to an employee is based on the past per-

formances of the individual and the working group.

There are a number of advantages to public-sector responses to bid notifications

by public organizations. A competitive governmental environment should:

1. Encourage greater managerial innovation, thereby making the jobs of man-

agers and workers more appealing.

2. Improve the use of available information resources. Far too many public

Electronic Hallway—Keep Your Eye on the Ball: The Road to the Real Salt Lake Stadium Deal (Case Study) This case study examines intergovernmental conflict. Tension erupts between city and state officials when Salt Lake City decides to use state funds to build a new sta- dium. The impact of this intergovernmental conflict on the sports team seeking to relocate to Salt Lake City is also examined. Students will read the case study and critique it with the goal of creating an alternative strategy that would result in more of a win-win situation for all four parties involved: city, state, team, and citizens.

http://hallway.evans.washington.edu/cases/details/keep-your-eye-ball-road-real- salt-lake-stadium-deal

EXERCISE 6.2

213Intergovernmental Relations

managers are lethargic readers, meaning they are not likely to mine infor-

mation from dense reports, professional conferences, electronic databases,

and tedious academic journals. Information needs to be a valued resource

that is critical to competitive survival, and thus it needs to be sought out

with greater frequency.

3. Improve the public sector’s competitive image. The popular image, which

is reinforced by politicians and media outlets on a

daily basis, is one of waste and ineptitude (Holzer

and Rabin 1987).

The previous discussion engenders a range of questions:

Q: What if a public organization is too successful, be- coming a monopoly?

A: Success should never be a deterrent to innovation.

For example, if an agency that is intended to in-

crease competition becomes too dominant, then

policymakers should limit its size by splitting the

agency into smaller units. Much like Darwin’s the-

ory of survival of the fittest, an agency’s “offspring”

could replace unsuccessful government bidding

units.

Q: What will public organizations do with additional resources—or profits—generated by contracts?

A: Profits can be reinvested in the public contractor.

In the private sector, large portions of profits are

dispersed among individual managers as bonuses;

in the public sector, profits can be reinvested with

ease. For one, improving the quality of work life

and enhancing worker recognition is paramount

to public managers. Additionally, legislators and

citizenry are unlikely to approve of the large

bonuses being doled out to public employees.

Q: Are public organizations capable of making decisions as quickly or flexi- bly as their private-sector counterparts?

A: Quite possibly, especially if generic agencies or agency units are expected

to operate nonbureaucratically. However, this may call for rewriting exist-

ing regulations or legislation.

Q: Are public agencies prepared to compete with the private sector?

“It is federal, because it is the government of

States united in a political union, in contradistinction

to a government of individuals, that is, by what is usually

called, a social compact. To

express it more concisely, it is fed- eral and not na-

tional because it is the government of

a community of States, and not

the government of a single State

or Nation.”

JOHN C. CALHOUN Seventh Vice President of

the United States (1782–1850)

214 CHAPTER 6

A: Not necessarily. A significant proportion of public agencies have experienced

a loss of talent and capital equipment. Historically, some public agencies

have never been funded adequately. One distinct advantage of privatization

is that private organizations have greater access to investment resources,

which is not characteristically the case for their public-sector counterparts.

Q: Will internal government competition have consequences that may be dysfunctional?

A: Of course. But these dysfunctions can be minimized if they are anticipated

and monitored. Such dysfunctions may include:

• Pirating information: Will managers attempt to dig for private infor-

mation to gain unfair advantages?

• Corruption: Will government managers attempt to influence each

other through bribery and other unethical or illegal means?

• Undue political influence: Will elected officials direct contracts to or-

ganizations where they have more influence?

Q: Will public agencies be able to endure “slack” in order to invest in public bidding—in other words, will public agencies be afforded a long-term view that, in time, success will emerge?

A: Possibly yes, given the argument that there is underutilized capacity in gov-

ernment. Internal bidding units may be criticized as redundant resources

that compete unfairly with the private sector. A related problem is expec-

tations: The expectations for bidding units may be unreasonably high, ex-

erting pressure for quick successes.

Q: Are public agencies less willing to transfer functions to other public agen- cies and more willing to contract out to private organizations?

A: Perhaps. Contracting to the private sector does not mean that an agency is

giving up its territory per se; permitting another public agency to provide

a service, however, may be perceived as such.

Improved competitive capacities may help convince cynics that government does—

or at least can—perform at a high level. Under a model of “government as com-

petitor,” the change in public opinion is not likely to be remarkable, but the

direction is likely to be more positive as governments’ reassert their missions and

highlight their competency.

215Intergovernmental Relations

Abramovitz, M. 1986. “The Privatization of the Welfare State: A Review.” Social Work 31 (July-August): 257–64.

Bailey, R.W. 1987. “Uses and Misuses of Privatization.” In Prospects for Privati- zation, ed. S.H. Hanke. New York: Academy of Political Science.

Bamekov, T.K., and J.A. Raffel. 1992. “Public Management of Privatization.” In

Public Productivity Handbook, ed. Marc Holzer. New York: Marcel Dekker.

Barcousky, L. 2005. “One Chief, Two Departments: Police Chief for Pine-

Marshall-Bradford Woods Force Also Will Lead Richland Department Under

One-Year Agreement.” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, January 2, N6.

Dye, T.R. 1990. American Federalism: Competition Among Governments. Lex- ington, MA: Lexington Books.

Ferris, J., and E. Graddy. 1986. “Contracting Out: For What? With Whom?” Pub- lic Administration Review 46, no. 4: 332–44.

Halachmi, A. 1989. “Ad-Hocracy and the Future of the Civil Service.” Interna- tional Journal of Public Administration 12, no. 4: 617–50.

Hanke, S.H., ed. 1987. Prospects for Privatization. New York: Academy of Politi- cal Science.

Hatry, H.P. 1983. A Review of Private Approaches for Delivery of Public Serv- ices. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.

Hattery, M. 1996. “Chautauqua County Bridge Program.” Cooperative Highway Services Case Study Report Number 2. Local Government Program, Depart- ment of Agricultural, Resource, and Managerial Economics, College of Agricul-

ture and Life Sciences, Cornell University, December.

Ad-hocracy

Block grants

Categorical grants

Economies of scale

Federalist system

Layer cake model

Marble cake model

Picket fence model

Privatization

Public authority or corporation

Shared service agreements

KEY TERMS

REFERENCES

216 CHAPTER 6

Hester, T. 2000. “More Towns Reap What They Sow Through Pooling of Vital

Services.” Newark, NJ: Star-Ledger, August 8, 21.

Holzer, Marc. 1988. “Productivity In, Garbage Out: Sanitation Gain in New

York.” Public Productivity Review 11, no. 3 (Spring): 37–50.

———. 1991. “Exemplary State and Local (EXSL) Awards Program.” Newark, NJ:

National Center for Public Productivity, Rutgers University, January.

Holzer, M., and J. Rabin. 1987. “Public Service: Problems, Professionalism, and

Policy Recommendations.” Public Productivity Review 43 (Fall): 3–14.

Holzer, M., L. Sadeghi, and R. Schwester. 2007. “Exploring State Shared Services

and Regional Consolidation Efforts.” In The Book of the States, ed. Keon S. Chi, 451–56. Lexington, KY: Council of State Governments.

Jennings, E.T. 1986/1991. “Public Choice and the Privatization of Government:

Implications for Public Administration.” In Public Management: The Essen- tial Readings, ed. J. Steven Ott et al., 113–29. Chicago: Lyceum Books, 1991.

Johnson, M. 2006. “Village Open to Merger, Officials Say Committee May Form

on Consolidation Issues for Two Pewaukees.” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, July 20, B3.

Katz, J.I. 1991. “Privatizing Without Tears.” Governing, (June): 38–42.

Kettl, D.F. 1991. “Privatization: Implications for the Public Work Force.” In Public Personnel Management, ed. C. Ban and N.M. Riccucci. New York: Longman.

McManus, S.A. 1991. “Why Businesses Are Reluctant to Sell to Governments.”

Public Administration Review 51, no. 4 (July-August): 328–44.

Morgan, D.R., and R.E. England. 1988. “The Two Faces of Privatization.” Public Administration Review 48, no. 6 (November-December): 979–87.

New York State Association of Counties (NYSAC). 2006. “The Shared Municipal

Service Incentive Program: A Policy Primer.” NYSAC Policy Brief.

http://www.fredonia.edu/crrdg/docs/NYSACguide.pdf.

Osborne, D. 1990. “Ten Ways to Turn D.C. Around.” Washington Post Magazine, December 9, 19–43.

Repard, P. 1993. “City-School Library Is One for the Books.” San Diego Union- Tribune, August 3, B2.

Savas, E.S. 1992. “Privatization and Productivity.” In Public Productivity Hand- book, ed. M. Holzer. New York: Marcel Dekker.

Schneider, M. 1989. “Intermunicipal Competition, Budget-Maximizing Bureau-

crats, and the Level of Suburban Competition.” American Journal of Political Science 33, no. 3 (August): 612–28.

217Intergovernmental Relations

Shared Municipal Services Program (SMSP). 2005. SMSP Program Guidelines. Harrisburg: Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Develop-

ment.

Sharing Available Resources Efficiently (SHARE). 2006. SHARE Best Practices Handbook. Trenton: New Jersey Department of Community Affairs. http://www.nj.gov/dca/lgs/share/share_handbook.pdf.

Smothers, R. 1999. “Regional Fire Service Succeeds in Its First Test.” New York Times, January 12, B5.

Staley, S.R., Faulk, D., Leland, S.M., & Schansberg, D.E. 2005. “The Effect of

City-County Consolidation: A Review of the Recent Academic Literature.” Pre-

pared by the Indiana Policy Review Foundation, http://www.in.gov/legisla-

tive/interim/committee/2005/committees/prelim/MCCC02.pdf; accessed on

19 September 2009.

Tom, P.A. 2003. “It Takes Three.” Waste Age 34, no. 10.

U.S. Conference of Mayors. 1997. “Shared Fire Station Saves Money, Improves

Service for Moreno Valley, Riverside Residents.” November 24. http://usmay-

ors.org/usmayornewspaper/documents/12_22_97/documents/Best_Prac-

tices__97___Moreno_Valley__CA_and_Riverside__CA__11_24_97__0120

98.html.

Agranoff, Robert. 2007. “Managing within Networks: Adding Value to Public

Organizations.” Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

Gazley, Beth.2008. “Beyond the Contract: The Scope and Nature of Informal Gov-

ernment–Nonprofit Partnership.” Public Administration Review 68(1): 141-154.

Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations (ACIR was an independ-

ent, bipartisan intergovernmental agency established in 1959 and disbanded in

1996; the ACIR Digital Library is composed of publications that study the in-

teractions between different levels of government),

http://digital.library.unt.edu/browse/department/govdocs/acir/

The Share Program—New Jersey Division of Local Government Services,

http://www.nj.gov/dca/lgs/share/

SUPPLEMENTARY READINGS

ELECTRONIC RESOURCES

Public Performance

CHAPTER 7

This chapter examines strategies for improving the

performance of public organizations. Upon reading this

chapter, students will understand the concepts of total

quality management (TQM) and performance measurement,

specifically the different types of performance indicators,

how to create a performance measurement system, and the

role of citizens in this process. This chapter transitions into

a discussion of the many social factors that influence

organizational performance and concludes with a

discussion of the privatization of government services.

218 CHAPTER 7

219Public Performance

“Management is the science of which organizations are but experiments.”

JOHN CONSTABLE English Romantic Painter

(1776-1837)

Postal Workers Mural

“Management is the science of which organizations are but experiments.”

JOHN CONSTABLE English Romantic Painter

(1776-1837)

Postal Workers Mural

“An acre of performance is worth a whole world of promise.”

WILLIAM DEAN HOWELLS American Author

(1837–1920)

– YOUR APPLICATIONS ARE BEING LOOKED INTO… Artist: V. Travin; Poet: A. Shkliarinsky; “The Fighting Pencil” group, 1976. The promise is given only as a blind. They will have to come back not once, not twice... But many, many times.

220 CHAPTER 7

The Importance of Knowledge Sharing and Training There is undoubtedly a relationship between knowledge and performance. All “pro-

fessionals” are expected to be current: Doctors must read the latest medical jour-

nals and attend professional seminars and conferences. Lawyers must understand

changes in the legal field. Professionals must be innovative. There is significant in-

novation in government, yet there is also a significant amount of ignorance of in-

novation. Too few of the truly successful projects have been

replicated widely throughout the public sector. The fault

lies somewhat with small-minded professionals who resist

going beyond the borders of their own disciplines. Maybe

they are lazy or arrogant or simply lack the foundational

knowledge necessary for improving their performance. The

fault also lies with a budget process that is overly political

and shortsighted in terms of knowledge investments. Lux-

uries like conferences, academic journals, and professional

association memberships are thought to be needless or gra-

tuitous and offer no clear payoffs. Knowledge investments

have a difficult time surviving the budget process, losing

out to more immediate needs. Professional knowledge,

under the best of circumstances, is treated as a discre-

tionary expenditure as opposed to a necessary investment.

However, if public managers are not afforded access to

timely and adequate information, we can expect that same

mistakes will be repeated in the future.

Public organizations need to learn from their successes and

failures—but perhaps more important, they need to learn

from the successes and failures of other public organiza-

tions. Strategies for government performance improvement

are being reported in hundreds of publications and conferences. Public organiza-

tions need to unearth the mountains of available information by sharing experiences,

participating in conferences, and joining Internet-based networks such as the Pub-

lic Performance Measurement and Reporting Network (http://www.ppmrn.net), a

key information-sharing tool in the field. Launched in 2006 by the National Center

for Public Performance at Rutgers University’s School of Public Affairs and Admin-

istration, the Public Performance Measurement and Reporting Network was created

to support networks that include government officials, public and non-profit man-

agers, professors and researchers, citizens, and other stakeholders that are looking

to improve public-sector performance through the use and sharing of valid and re-

IMPROVING GOVERNMENT PERFORMANCE

“Measurement is the first step that leads to control and

eventually to improvement.

If you can’t measure

something, you can’t understand

it. If you can’t understand it,

you can’t control it. If you can’t control

it, you can’t improve it.”

H. JAMES HARRINGTON

Quality and Performance Improvement Consultant

221Public Performance

liable information. In supporting this network, the National Center for Public Per-

formance has launched several initiatives: an all-inclusive and up-to-date database

of publications and case studies; academic conferences; professional workshops;

books and articles dealing with measurement; an Online Public Performance Meas-

urement Certificate; and a monthly electronic newsletter.

In addition to knowledge and information sharing, a trained workforce is indis-

pensable. In many public organizations, however, on-the-job training is thought to

be “good enough.” Many public organizations suffer from the mistaken belief that

government work is simple—that it can be learned rather quickly by virtually any-

one. In a postindustrial society, however, on-the-job training is insufficient prepa-

ration for a public sector with increasingly complex responsibilities. Still, public

managers with only modest professional management training are often given the

responsibility of running public organizations.

Total Quality Management: Customer Focus and Responsive Public Organizations The adoption of total quality management (TQM) as a management philosophy has

been debated among public administration scholars and practitioners. TQM, orig-

inally intended to change American private-sector work environments, has been

implemented by numerous public agencies. TQM is defined as “an enterprise

lifestyle that emphasizes customer satisfaction, excellent service and rapid adjust-

ment to address ever-changing customer needs” (McCloskey and Collett 1993,

quoted in Flynn, Sakakibara, and Schroeder 1995, p. 1325). TQM is a strategy for

improving processes and services on a continual basis. Customer focus, upper-man-

agement commitment, continuous improvement, participative management, labor-

management cooperation, and organized analysis are essential functions in a TQM

environment (Shea and Howell 1998).

The difference between the public and private sectors has raised discussions about

what prevents TQM from being used within public organizations (Swiss 1992). Ex-

perience with TQM in the public sector has produced mixed results. Some public

organizations have reported success in using TQM, while others believe it has not

contributed to improvements in performance. Perhaps this is somewhat attribut-

able to a major misunderstanding associated with TQM (White and Wolfe 1995).

TQM’s central emphasis is customer focus—improving public agencies’ respon- siveness to the people they serve (Swiss 1992).

Assumptions of Total Quality Management W. Edwards Deming (1986) is the father of TQM, and he notes that it requires

transformation of the American business management style. It is also applicable to

governmental transformation. According to Milakovich (1992, pp. 584–86), the

222 CHAPTER 7

key elements of TQM include the following:

1. Leaders must develop and disseminate the aims and purposes of the

organization. Management must commit to these aims and purposes.

2. All must learn the new philosophy—including upper management.

3. In the interest of processes improvement and cost reductions, all must

understand the purpose of inspection.

4. Eliminate the practice of using cost as the basis for awarding business.

5. Continuously improve systems of production and service.

6. Implement modern training methods.

7. Teach leadership.

8. Eliminate fear, build trust, and create an environment conducive to inno-

vation.

9. Staff and work groups must be optimized toward the aims of the organi-

zation.

10. Eliminate pleas to the workforce.

11. Eliminate numerical quotas for work—rather, learn and implement meth-

ods for improvement.

12. Eliminate obstacles that deprive people of pride in their work.

13. Encourage worker education and self-amelioration.

14. Act to bring about the transformation.

Based on Deming’s 14 points, several assumptions can be drawn.

Customer Focus Without question, TQM assumes that the customer is paramount. This is because

the customer is the ultimate judge of quality. Performance improvement cannot re-

ally exist without customer satisfaction. The customer base is composed of both in-

ternal (employees) and external customers (citizens). Internal customers receive “any work output in the service or production process,” while external customers purchase the product (McGowan and Wittmer 1997). Customer satisfaction, there-

fore, must be the supreme priority of any organization. Both employee and citizen

satisfaction are important elements in measuring performance.

Continuous Improvement Another important assumption of TQM is continuous improvement. Any perform- ance improvement program is dependent on feedback from employees and citizens

223Public Performance

on a continuous basis. Continuous improvement includes: “(1) enhanced value to the

customer through new and improved products and services, (2) reduced errors, de-

fects, and waste, (3) improved responsiveness and cycle-time performance, and (4)

improved productivity and effectiveness in the use of all resources” (McGowan and

Wittmer 1998, p. 313). As Swiss (1992) points out, “Quality is not a static attribute;

it is a constantly changing target because it represents a delighted customer” (p. 358).

Top Management Commitment and Leadership Upper-management commitment is essential to TQM’s success. TQM is unlikely to

work unless implemented through strong leadership. Like other performance im-

provement strategies, TQM requires a long-term commitment from upper manage-

ment (Lee 2000a). Berman and West (1995) argue that too many organizations are

inclined to implement strategies such as TQM at “a token level rather than fully com-

mitting themselves to success.” In this regard, Rago (1996) points out that “agency vi-

sion and goals need to be clearly communicated throughout

all levels of the agency and leadership needs to be actively

involved in this effort” (p. 234).

Upper management needs to assume a significant role in

changing an organization’s culture so that TQM initiatives

can be fully embraced by employees at all levels. It is neces-

sary to change “bureaucratic” organizational culture—which

can be excessively hierarchical, centralized, and firmly struc-

tured—to a more innovative and supportive type of culture.

Innovative culture has a collaborative and people-oriented focus. Supportive culture

embraces creativity and getting results (Wallach 1983). White and Wolf (1995) note

that “the culture of public sector organizations must be shifted away from blame and

control to one of support for positive action” (p. 224). This culture change cannot

occur in the short run. It requires time and perseverance.

Empowerment and Teamwork Empowerment and teamwork assume that performance improvement cannot occur because of one person’s effort. Furthermore, no single managerial action can

foster employee loyalty and full support (Pollock 2001). There are several ways of

defining empowerment, but for our purposes empowerment involves a leadership

approach whereby decision-making authority is given to lower-level employees. In

doing so, employees are more likely to take ownership of their jobs and embrace

more responsibility (Holt, Love and Jawahar-Nesan 2000). Since empowered

teams are seen as central to correcting organizational problems, TQM suggests that

employees work as a team to overcome existing management problems rather than

ask for external help. The reason for this is straightforward: employees are the peo-

ple who really know what is going on in their organization; therefore, no one can

do a better job of correcting existing work problems than they can.

“In God we trust, all others

bring data.”

W. EDWARDS DEMING American Statistician;

Quality Consultant (1900–1993)

224 CHAPTER 7

There are three levels of teamwork (McGowan and Wittmer 1997). With vertical teamwork, upper management gives lower-level employees authority to make deci- sions that would meet customers’ demands. In the interim, horizontal teamwork enables different functional groups within an organization to deal with external de-

Source: Federal Quality Institute. 1991. Introduction to Total Quality Management in the Federal Government. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

FIGURE 7.1 – FEDERAL QUALITY INSTITUTE APPROACH TO TQM

FUNDERS

Traditional Management Focus

Quality Management Focus

ADMINISTRATION

CUSTOMERS EMPLOYEES

QUALITY MANAGEMENT

FUNDERS

CUSTOMERS EMPLOYEES

225Public Performance

mands. Interorganizational teamwork includes establishing work teams of suppli- ers, customers, and other external groups. In the public sector, this level of team-

work might be used to involve interest groups, agency representatives, citizen

representatives, subcontractors, and elected officials in the decision-making process.

Issues in Organizational Responsiveness Responsiveness is an important value of public organizations. Rourke (1984) defines responsiveness as “the extent to which [an organization] promotes correspondence

between the decisions of bureaucrats and the preferences of the community or the of-

ficeholders who are authorized to speak for the public” (p. 4). Such responsiveness

can be attained in an “organizational arrangement under which a great deal of au-

thority is delegated to lower levels of administration” (p. 8). Responsiveness coin-

cides with bringing government closer to its people. In this context, Kaufman (1987)

argues that representativeness, politically neutral competency, and executive lead- ership are important values in government. In particular, regarding representative-

ness, “there is a need to improve public representation within organizations because

‘many unorganized interests’ are excluded from formulation of decisions” (p. 394).

Barriers to Responsiveness and Solutions: Linking TQM’s Philosophy Situation 1 Problem 1: Interest Group Politics and Captive Bureaucracy. Sometimes, pub- lic organizations adhere to the desires of political parties and interest groups even

if these desires clash with what the public wants. This leads to unbalanced polit-

ical influences. Regarding interest group politics, the concept of a captive agency

should be noted. Rourke (1984) describes a captive agency as one that becomes

overly dependent on “the political support of an outside group.” This dependence

is so great that it ultimately ascribes the outside group with “veto power over

many of the agency’s major decisions. In [an] extreme case, the agency becomes

in effect a captive organization, unable to move in any direction except those per-

mitted it by the group upon which it is politically dependent” (p. 58). As a result,

the organization loses its capacity to respond to the demands of the public.

According to Lee (2001), unbalanced participation led by organized interest groups

makes it difficult for public organizations to reflect citizen desires. A common

dilemma with citizen participation is that citizens tend to keep their opinions to

themselves. Organized interest groups, however, participate in and try to influence

political agendas by making their opinions known. In this situation, policy out-

comes are likely to favor interest groups and not individual citizens. Lee argues that

this effect stems not from citizens’ indifference about policy issues but from the

fact that most citizens do not have the time, money, civic skills, and degree of or-

ganization necessary to participate in political life.

226 CHAPTER 7

TQM Solution 1: Establishing Interorganizational Teamwork and Training for External Customers. In most cases, becoming a captive agency is a consequence of not having institutionalized mechanisms for involving a wide range of citizen

groups in the political process. As mentioned earlier, the concept of interorganiza-

tional teamwork can assist in evening out this unbalanced political participation.

That is, it may be possible to involve various citizen groups, voluntary associations,

and citizen representatives in making major decisions within a local community.

Furthermore, given that individual citizens are less inclined to participate in the

political process because of time and money constraints, Internet-based participa-

tion may serve as an equalizing alternative. Washington State’s Internet-based par-

ticipation initiative explains how interorganizational teams composed of numerous

state agencies, boards, and commissions have established a digital government to

improve citizen participation. An interorganizational team called Access Washing-

ton in the Department of Information Services has developed web-based partici-

pation tools. As its progress report from 2000 states:

The Access Washington state Internal Portal was launched in 1998 to re- place a static, billboard-style state website called Homepage Washington that averaged only 170,000 monthly visitors. Within one year, page views

on Access Washington increased 488 percent to an average of one million per month, and the numbers keep climbing. Today’s Access Washington turns government to face the people, organizing hundreds of government

information programs and dozens of transactional services in citizen-cen-

tric navigation paths. Access Washington at access.wa.gov is the gateway to the digital government community: on-line storefronts and service cen-

ters filled with the government information and tools that citizens want,

when they want them. (Washington State Governor’s Office)

Chapter 12 of this book, Technology and Public Administration, provides numerous

other examples of how the Internet and other information and communications

technologies are changing citizens’ interactions and communication with bureau-

cratic and political institutions.

Situation 2 Problem 2: Expertise and Information Distortion. Bureaucratic expertise is a func- tion of a public organization’s characteristics and the capabilities of its members.

The operation of public organizations requires employment of a complex range of

people with specialized skills. Rourke (1984) asserts that bureaucratic expertise in-

fluences public policy development via three primary channels: “(1) the ability of

bureaucrats to gather information and to give advice that often shapes the deci-

sions of political officials; (2) the capacity of bureaucratic organizations to carry on

the tasks that must be performed once policy goals are decided upon—the power of

implementation; and (3) as a critical dimension of this power to implement policies,

227Public Performance

the discretion with which bureaucracies are commonly vested as they carry on the

work of government” (p. 20).

These three factors can cause negative results, most notably information distortion

in an organization. O’Reilly (1978) defines information distortion as “the incorrect

reproduction of objectively correct information,” resulting “from either conscious

or deliberate alteration or unconscious manipulation” (p. 329). That is, supposedly

objective information is knowingly or unknowingly bi-

ased—usually in the interest of self-preservation. Negative

but vital information is sometimes not delivered to upper-

level decision makers, who are reliant upon top-down com-

munication. In 1967, Downs contended that officials tend

to distort the information they pass upward in the organi-

zational hierarchy—overemphasizing (or at times even ex-

aggerating) information that looks good personally and

deemphasizing information that could be personally detri-

mental. This type of information distortion can make it

complicated for public organizations to adapt.

TQM Solution 2: Utilizing Vertical Teamwork and Empow- erment. Information distortion is likely to occur within verti- cal hierarchical structures, where authorized communication

is limited to the channels between upper managers, middle

managers, and rank-and-file employees. Central to avoiding

this distortion is the building of multiple communication

paths so that important information is available to upper

management at all times. As Gortner and colleagues (1987)

put it, “Information tends to be transmitted upward in the organization only if (1) its

transmission will not have unpleasant consequences for the transmitter, or (2) the su-

perior will hear of it anyway from other channels, and it is better to tell him first, or (3)

it is information that the superior needs in his dealings with his own superiors, and he

will be displeased if he is caught without it” (p. 203).

The use of “vertical teams” makes it possible for all employees to share important

information and to facilitate information flows within the organization. Vertical

teams enable upper-level management to receive information from lower-level

management and afford lower-level employees the power to make decisions. Em-

powered employees are more inclined to accept responsibility and risk for their ac-

tions, and they are less likely to hold onto unfavorable yet important information.

Additionally, they are more inclined to solve the problems with their superiors and

colleagues in a cooperative manner.

Situation 3 Problem 3: Specialized Structure and Parochialism. As specialization increases,

“When you can measure what you

are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something

about it: but… when you cannot

express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meager and unsatisfactory

kind.”

LORD KELVIN Nineteenth-Century

Mathematical Physicist

228 CHAPTER 7

so too will administrative efficiency. According to Nobel laureate Herbert Simon

(1997, p. 292), “a major problem in an effective organization is to specialize and

subdivide activities in such a manner that the psychological forces of identification

will contribute to, rather than hinder, correct decision making.” Organizational

structures are centered on functional differentiation. This means that there are cognitive and emotional differences between specialists and separate organizational

departments. To effectively tie an organization’s different functions to its broader

goals, it is essential to integrate and coordinate these separate and specialized func-

tions. Therefore, integration is related to cooperation problems among departments

in an organization. Significant functional specialization can foster parochialism

among public organizations—that is, organizations become too narrowly focused.

This makes it very difficult for public organizations to respond to the various de-

mands of citizens and ensure the appropriate delivery of services.

TQM Solution 3: Utilizing Horizontal Teamwork and Preventing Variation in the Product and Process. While functional specialties are sometimes necessary for achieving efficiency and high organizational performance—especially if that or-

ganization is operating within a turbulent environment—excessive specialization

may serve as an impediment to the delivery of public services in a timely or appro-

priate manner. As mentioned earlier, central to TQM is the removal of barriers be-

tween organizational departments. The use of “horizontal teams” minimizes conflict

and reduces tension between departments. In a horizontal team, members repre-

senting various organizational departments learn how to cooperate beyond their

departmental boundaries. Formation of these “cross-functional teams” helps to re-

duce costs and time in producing and delivering citizen services.

Sometimes, becoming a high-performing organization is a function of minimizing

variations in the way things are done. Swiss (1992) points out that “slippages in

quality arise from too much variation in the product or service” (p. 357). Using

multi-unit teams also enables public agencies to rectify process variation prob-

lems. The Department of Labor and Industries in Washington State serves as a

good example: In July 2000, the department created a multi-unit team called the

“Factory Assembled Structures (FAS) Process Improvement Team” to solve

process problems:

Labor and Industries approved plans for modular building construction.

Manufacturers complained about the process, citing a low 30 percent ac-

ceptance rate for first time plans, poor communications and a lack of con-

sistency and professionalism. In collaboration with manufacturers, the

team improved communications, developed training and computerized

processes. They raised approval rates and enhanced customer service with-

out lowering standards or sacrificing public safety. The plan approval rate

went from 30 to 72 percent for the following 19-month period, an increase

of 140 percent. Training is provided on-site and online, and issues are cor-

229Public Performance

rected over the phone, saving time and money for the manufacturers.

(Washington State Governor’s Office, 2000)

Situation 4 Problem 4: Attribution Error and Management Failure. Under some conditions, the cultivation of stereotypical beliefs may stem from cognitive and information-

processing biases. In typical usage, “attribution refers to

judgments about one’s perceptions rather than causal per-

ception” (Hamilton 1980, p. 767). Attribution theory is

concerned with how ordinary people attempt to under-

stand the causes and consequences of events they witness.

Potential causal factors are thought to be internal to the

actor (for example, ability, effort, and intention) or exter-

nal to the actor (for example, task-related factors and luck).

According to Heider (1958), people searching for the

causes of events rely either on environmental attributes

(external attribution) or on attributes of the person in-

volved in the event (internal attribution). In reality, most

leaders are inclined to believe that organizational success

stems from their own actions and that organizational fail-

ure stems from the actions of others externally. The same

situation in reverse is usually seen by groups in opposition

(Miller and Ross 1975).

The same principle may characterize the relationship be-

tween managers and subordinates as it relates to perform-

ance evaluations. In this situation, people avoid finding out

the causes of policy or management failures, and they most likely fail to admit that “it

was our fault,” even if it was. This makes it hard for public organizations to find out

what went wrong, which likely reduces responsiveness to the demands of citizens.

TQM Solution 4: Admitting Variations in Employees’ Performance and Elimi- nating Numerical Quota. One underlying assumption of TQM is that “it is the man- agement, not the worker, that is a problem in many cases.” As White and Wolf

(1995) explain,

Typically, when a manager sees a performance distribution in which one

or some workers are low and others are high, the response is to evaluate

the low workers as bad, the high workers as good, and then set out to make

the bad workers like the good ones… In contrast, the TQM managers sim-

ply consider that the workers at the good end of the distribution have been

lucky and the ones at the bad end have been unlucky. (pp. 210–11)

TQM presupposes that any public organization is comprised of good and poor per-

formers. Being a good performer today does not necessarily mean that a worker

“The only man I know who

behaves sensibly is my tailor; he takes my

measurements anew each time he sees me. The rest go on with

their old measurements and expect me

to fit them.”

GEORGE BERNARD SHAW Playwright; Critic;

Nobel Prize Winner (1856–1950)

230 CHAPTER 7

will be a good performer tomorrow. Similarly, it is not known whether a poor per-

former today will become a good performer tomorrow. As a result, TQM managers

do not hold employees directly responsible for low performance. Instead, they try

to determine the reasons for the decline in performance. One of Deming’s 14 points,

“eliminate numerical quotas for work,” has been recommended in this context. In

instances where numerical quotas serve as major performance indicators, the rela-

tionship between labor and management is likely to be adversarial. While managers

attribute the cause of poor performance to employees—arguing, for example, that

employees use official work time for union activities—employees contend that poor

performance is not their fault (Holzer and Lee 1999). The following statement by

Bobby Harnage, past president of the American Federation of Government Em-

ployees, shows how management and workers see the causes of poor performance

quite differently:

There is no such thing as one poor performer. That individual has a su-

pervisor. If he or she is staying on the rolls, then we have two poor per-

formers. Performance management rules, which were established by the

Civil Service Reform Act, do not need to be changed. Instead, managers

need to have the courage to deal with poor performance. (Government Ex- ecutive Magazine, January 12, 1999)

Harry Singletary, former secretary of the Florida Department of Corrections, em-

phasizes that people are key to successful TQM application: “We, the members of

the Florida Department of Corrections, believe in the worth of the individuals,” he

stated, adding, “Our most valuable asset is a well-trained dedicated staff working as

a team to meet a challenge” (Florida Department of Corrections, 1997). Every aspect

of TQM is directed toward customer focus. Accepting employee performance vari-

ations and removing numerical goals and quotas will enable public organizations to

respond more effectively to the customers’ demands.

Situation 5 Problem 5: Organizational Entrapment and Trained Incapacity. Organizations often suffer from past resource allocation mistakes. Entrapment refers to “the ten-

dency to persist in a failing course of action in order to justify the allocation of prior

resources to that course of action” (Brocker and Rubin 1985, p. 242). Entrapment

is much more likely to occur in a public organization than in a private organization.

In addition, it should be noted that trained incapacity (Merton 1987) also hinders responsiveness to customers’ demands. Merton asserts that “actions based upon

training and skills which have been successfully applied in the past may result in in-

appropriate responses under changed conditions” (1987, p. 109).

TQM Solution 5: Driving Out Fear, and Training on a Continuing Basis. A critical element of TQM is eliminating fear. This means that employees—regardless of their

level within an organization—should feel comfortable suggesting new ideas and in-

231Public Performance

novative behaviors to their superiors and colleagues. Managerial innovation often

necessitates risk taking. It then becomes crucial that employees feel it is acceptable—

and at times even expected—that they will make mistakes. Creating an innovative

culture of “it is okay if you make a mistake” is imperative for productivity im- provement. Employees must be encouraged to abandon a failing course of action without fear. This is possible only if

employees are encouraged to suggest ideas at any time.

Therefore, “driving out the fear” ensures that the possibil-

ity of entrapment is minimized.

Well known for its successful implementation of TQM, the

Florida Department of Corrections places considerable

emphasis on driving out fear among its employees. As Sec-

retary Singletary noted, “Thomas Edison once said:

Genius is one percent inspiration and 99 percent perspi-

ration. I am challenging each of you to perspire often and

regularly. Go forth and sweat” (Florida Department of

Corrections, 1997). Moreover, Pennsylvania State has em-

phasized employee innovation, assuming that frontline employees are central in-

stallers of change. With the support of Pennsylvania’s former governor Mark

Schweiker (2001–2003), innovation teams have played an important role in state

policymaking. The teams have found groundbreaking ways of recognizing change

ideas proposed by employees, as well as recognizing individual or group creativ-

ity. As a result, numerous innovative ideas have originating from within the

agency, among them environmental site assessments in the Pennsylvania Depart-

ment of Transportation.

The Pollution Prevention Division within PennDOT reexamined the

process used to perform site investigations on underground fuel tanks.

This involved obtaining soil samples by drilling into the ground around

the tank and testing the samples for contaminants from possible leakage

or spillage from the tanks. The testing and analysis of these sites were at

the time being contracted to a private firm. The staff analysis showed that

the testing and analysis could be accomplished more cost-effectively if they

undertook the task themselves. Contracted testing was determined to cost

$28,000 per site. PennDOT staff could perform the same investigation for

$5,600 per site—saving $22,400 per site investigation. Consequently, the

Pollution Prevention Division staff reaped a savings award of $26,000.

(Pennsylvania State Governor’s Office 2001)

At the same time, supporting various training programs on a continuing basis is

critical to avoiding trained incapacity. Many observers agree that training is inte-

gral to managerial and organizational changes (Paddock 1997; Hannah 1995). De-

spite the importance of management training, though, training budgets are most

“What gets measured gets done, what gets

measured and fed back gets done well, what gets rewarded gets

repeated.”

JOHN E. JONES American Attorney

232 CHAPTER 7

likely to suffer in this period of cutback management (Paddock 1997). Training is

critical to cultivating and enhancing employee knowledge, skills, and abilities (typ- ically referred to as KSAs) and reduces the likelihood that employees will become

obsolete over time (Klingner and Nalbandian 1998). Continuous training requires

upper-management support, constant program evaluation, financial support, and

full backing from participants. It is expected to decrease the possibility of trained

incapacity in an ever-changing environment.

According to some public administration scholars and practitioners, short-sighted

goals, regular turnover among upper-level managers, and individualistic organiza-

tional cultures may prevent TQM from being successfully implemented (Swiss 1992;

White and Wolf 1995). However, many public organizations find TQM is feasible

and compatible with their goals. In a study examining managerial public employ-

ees’ attitudes in New Jersey State, Lee (2000b) found that of 19 various productiv-

ity and performance enhancement strategies, managerial employees reported

“Total Quality Management” as the most favored strategy. TQM is a way of trans-

forming organizational cultures and structures to improve performance. Central to

this is creating organizations that are customer-focused, cost-efficient, and com-

petitive. Correctly understanding and implementing TQM strategies will foster re-

sponsive, customer-centered public agencies, even in turbulent environments.

Measuring Performance to Improve Performance Measuring government performance is a requisite tool for accountability and, con-

sequently, for improvement. Generally speaking, performance measurement en- tails trying to answer questions such as:

• Is the organization fulfilling its mission and accomplishing stated

goals and objectives?

• Is the organization producing unintended impacts?

• Is the organization responsive to the people?

• Does the organization keep within its scope of authority?

• Is the organization productive?

• Does it perform well?

Performance measurement is implied when we ask questions that deal with the

quality of government services: “Is the neighborhood dangerous?” “Are the streets

dirty?” “Are the schools succeeding?” Citizens often answer these questions with

tales told by friends and acquaintances, rumors, and personal experiences.

Public organizations need to know how well they are performing, and in doing so

233Public Performance

they must rely on hard data: “Crime is down 10 percent.” “The streets are 25 per-

cent cleaner.” “Standardized test scores have increased by an average of five points

in the last year.” Public organizations often possess the

hard data to develop objective performance measures. As

award-winning and innovative cases suggest, measuring

public service quality is indeed feasible. Data are available,

and the results need not be too complicated to use (EXSL

1989–1995). Performance measurement provides an op-

portunity to present “hard” feedback in place of “percep-

tions” that are often fueled by incorrect information,

gossip, and conjecture. According to the U.S. General Ac-

counting Office (GAO 1992):

Managers can use the data that performance meas-

ures provide to help them manage in three basic ways: to account for past

activities, to manage current operations, or to assess progress toward

planned objectives. When used to look at past activities, performance

measures can show the accountability of processes and procedures used

to complete a task, as well as program results. When used to manage cur-

rent operations, performance measures can show how efficiently re-

sources, such as dollars and staff, are being used. Finally, when tied to

planned objectives, performance measures can be used to assess how ef-

fectively an agency is achieving the goals stated in its long-range strate-

gic plan. Having well-designed measures that are timely, relevant, and

accurate is important, but it is also important that the measures be used

by decision makers.

Performance measures serve several purposes. To successfully operate their or-

ganizations, public managers need specific information. This applies to all man-

agement levels within all organizations. Performance measurement must be

considered a requisite and critical part of the management process. Performance

management is thought to contribute to the following:

• Improved decision making: Performance measures afford managers

needed information to execute their control functions.

• Performance assessment: The measures connect individual and orga-

nizational performance to the management of employees, serving as a

means of motivation.

• Accountability: The process engenders managerial responsibility.

• Service delivery: The process fosters service performance improve-

ments.

• Public participation: Performance reporting can influence the citi-

“When dealing with

numerical data, approximately right

is better than precisely wrong.”

CARL G. THOR Performance

Improvement Expert

234 CHAPTER 7

zenry to care more about public workers’ efforts to improve service

delivery.

• Improvement of civic discourse: This makes public discussions about

public service delivery more factual.

While valuable to the full range of organizational personnel, performance meas-

urement is especially valuable to staff analysts and auditors. Measures can be use-

ful for both internal decision makers (i.e., public managers and policymaking

appointees) and external groups in improving their assessments of government.

This is because such assessments are based on real performance data as opposed to

anecdotal and unreliable information. Harry Hatry, an expert on performance man-

agement at the Washington, D.C.–based Urban Institute, was instrumental in cul-

tivating and spreading public-sector performance measurement (Hatry et al. 1977,

1979, 1990; Urban Institute 1974, 1980). Public agencies, professional associations,

research centers like the Urban Institute, and academics have developed many per-

formance measurement standards. In particular, the Government Accounting Stan-

dards Board (GASB) has published several volumes that recommend standards for

Service Efforts and Accomplishments (SEA). “Doing more with less” has emerged

as an enduring maxim directed toward all levels of government, and as such, per-

formance measurement has become a vital tool for organizational improvement in

the contexts of efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability.

Types of Performance Indicators Several different performance indicators are featured in a performance measure-

Government function

Input indicators

Output indicators

Outcome indicators

Efficiency indicators

Department

of Sanitation

• The number

of labor-hours

worked by

employees of

the Sanitation

Department

• The depart-

ment’s budget

• The number of

vehicles used by

the department

• Tons of

garbage

collected

• Miles of roads

cleaned

• Number of

customers

served

• Percentage of

clean streets

(as measured by

periodic visual

inspection,

citizen surveys,

and so on)

• Employee-

hours per ton

of garbage

collected

• Dollars spent

for one mile of

snow removal

TABLE 7.1 – TYPES OF PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT INDICATORS

235Public Performance

ment system. The most common are: (1) inputs, (2) outputs, (3) outcomes, and (4)

efficiency indicators.

Input Indicators. Inputs reflect the quantity of resources appropriated to a gov- ernment organization, service, or program. Input indicators are typically contained

within the budget, representing financial or personnel resources.

Output Indicators. Outputs are workload indicators. They reflect the amount of work done or the number of services provided by a government program.

Outcome Indicators. These indicators capture the results (or quality) of the serv- ices provided. Outcome indicators are essential to establishing whether an organ-

ization or program has met predetermined goals and objectives. They help answer

questions about service quality and the impacts of service delivery. A measurable

change in students’ test scores resulting from a government-funded tutoring pro-

gram is an example of an outcome indicator.

Efficiency Indicators. These indicators examine the extent to which a public or- ganization or program is performing in relation to service delivery costs. Efficiency

indicators refer to the ratio of the service provided (for example, tons of trash col-

lected) to the cost required to deliver that service (wages for workers, gasoline for

trucks, and the like).

Robert Behn (2003) argues that performance measurement systems serve seven

fundamental purposes that go beyond simply evaluating how well a public organ-

ization is performing. These include:

• Control: Performance measures serve as a means of maintaining

managerial control, ensuring that workers are doing what is required

of them.

• Budget: Performance-based budgeting (or results-based budgeting)

links performance measures with how much money a public agency

or department receives. In other words, agencies and departments

that perform well may receive more money, while those that do not

may find their budgets cut. Critics argue that using performance

measurement as a basis for determining budgets is crude and coun-

terintuitive; that is, are we to believe that actually taking money away

from a public organization will help its situation? Perhaps this is not

a good idea.

• Motivate: By setting performance goals, public managers give their

staff something to work toward. Performance goals serve to focus

workers.

• Promote: Unlike the private sector, public organizations are dreadful

when it comes to self-promotion. The media effectively points out every

236 CHAPTER 7

flaw and misstep that government encounters, making it ever more im-

portant for public organizations to convey their accomplishments. Per-

formance measures can be very helpful in this regard. The New Jersey

Motor Vehicle Commission (NJMVC) serves as a vivid example. Per-

haps no public organization has been ridiculed as much as the NJMVC

(2006), where nightmarish stories of DMV ineptitude and inefficiency

are legendary. The NJMVC went through a massive reorganization, re-

formed itself, and is now doing a better job. How do we know this? Serv-

ice assessment results indicate that wait times have decreased

dramatically and customer satisfaction has increased (NJMVC 2006).

• Celebrate: Taking a moment to smell the roses is important. It is im-

portant from a morale standpoint that public managers use perform-

ance measures to celebrate organizational accomplishments with their

staff. This not only reaffirms the importance of measuring perform-

ance, but also serves as motivation for future projects, endeavors, etc.

• Learn and Improve: Collecting performance data is not an end in it-

self. Rather, it is a tool by which public managers can learn about

what is working and what is not, and make appropriate changes to

improve an organization. The City of Baltimore’s CitiStat program is

an example of using performance measurement data to learn about

and improve an organization’s operations. Developed by the former

mayor of Baltimore, Martin O’Malley (1999–2007; elected governor

of Maryland, 2006), CitiStat is a performance measurement–based

management system that uses computer pin mapping. CitiStat

evolved from New York City’s CompStat program, which was used by

the NYPD to pinpoint crime hotspots. CitiStat built upon CompStat’s

model by including all areas of government. Cooperation and commu-

nication make CitiStat work. City agency and bureau heads develop

strategies and set goals, collect performance data that coincide with

these strategies and goals, and then present the data every two weeks

at CitiStat meetings, where the mayor, deputy mayors, and other key

officials are present. For instance, Baltimore’s Solid Waste Bureau

would present performance data ranging from the number of com-

plaints about dirty alleys or missed trash pick-ups to the number of

sick days taken and the amount of overtime paid in a given two-week

period. With this information, both the mayor and the head of the

Solid Waste Bureau can devise a plan to ensure that missed trash

pick-ups happen less frequently or that those dirty alleys are cleaned

up. CitiStat has proven to be a very powerful management and ac-

countability tool, allowing the mayor to hear how the various func-

tions of the city’s government are performing.

237Public Performance

Source: Shane, Bryan. 2003. “Performance Measurement System: A Leadership-Driven Methodology.” Optimum online. The Journal of Public Sector Management. Vol. 33, Issue 3, Sep 2003. http://www.bpc- gallery.com/leadership_driven.html.

FIGURE 7.2 – SAMPLE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT ARCHITECTURE FOR A HUMAN RESOURCE (HR) ORGANIZATION

To be recognized as an innovative and efficient business partner in the

provision of high quality human resource services across the organization

Finances

To ensure cost

effective HR

services

Resource

Review HR

Framework

Best-in-Class

Service

Regional

Leadership

Quality Control

IT Strategy

Client

Communication

and Education

Client

Partnership

Recruit/

Retain Staff

Staff

Development &

Communication

Reward/

Recognition

Program

Best Practices

Revenues

Expenditures

Capital

Financial Ratios

Management

Index

Project

Management

Index

Client

Satisfaction

Index

Employee

Satisfaction

Index

Human

Resource

Management

Index

Continuous

Improvement

Index

On time

delivery of

high-quality

HR services

across the

organization

To achieve a

high level of

customer

satisfaction with

HR services

To develop

and maintain

an organization

of highly

professional and

dedicated staff

To establish

a culture

dedicated to

innovation

and learning

Quality of Service

Client Satisfaction

Employee Satisfaction

Continuous Improvement

Mission

Objectives

Strategies

Performance Measures

238 CHAPTER 7

Designing a Performance Measurement System Developing a performance measurement system need not be complex. It is likely, however, to be trying for those unaccustomed to measuring and estab-

lishing performance targets. A system of measuring performance requires that one understand what an organization or program is trying to achieve, who its

clients are, and what level of service is being delivered at the time. The seven

specific steps are:

1. Identifying a program to measure

2. Designing a purpose statement

3. Classifying program inputs, outputs, outcomes, and efficiency indicators

4. Setting performance targets

5. Monitoring performance

6. Reporting performance results

7. Concluding with analysis and action

Step 1. Identifying a Program to Measure. Governmental activities need to be iden- tified clearly and separated into distinct programs. Programs are collections of ac-

tivities that provide a specific public service. For example,

street resurfacing, pot hole filling, and curb repairing are

three activities that could collectively comprise a program

called “street maintenance.” Selecting what programs to

measure is somewhat subjective. Regardless of the pro-

grams selected, though, performance measurement sys-

tems typically are most effective when they collect a limited

amount of essential information about a program’s per-

formance.

Step 2. Designing a Purpose Statement. Preparing a state- ment of purpose is a vital step in the development of a per-

formance system. Measuring a program’s performance is not feasible without an

initial understanding of what the program should accomplish. A cogent mission

statement is highly desirable. If the program does not have mission statement, then

a detailed program description may suffice. For example, the Government Ac-

counting Standards Board (GASB) provides the following purpose statement for

government transportation services: “The basic purpose is to provide safe, de-

pendable, convenient, and comfortable transportation services at minimum cost to

the citizens, including special client groups such as the handicapped and elderly”

(Hatry et al. 1990).

Step 3. Classifying Program Inputs, Outputs, Outcomes, and Efficiency Indica-

“You get what you measure. Measure

the wrong thing and you get the

wrong behaviors.”

JOHN H. LINGLE Target Measurement

Pioneer

239Public Performance

tors. Inputs represent resources; they are expressed within a given program’s op- erating budget, in addition to the number of employee hours allotted over a spec-

ified period of time. Outputs are workload measures such as the amount of work

completed or the quantity of services a program provides. Outcome indicators re-

flect the results of a program’s efforts. Efficiency indicators measure the relation-

ship of cost (whether in dollars or employee hours) to either outputs or outcomes.

Step 4. Setting Performance Targets. Managers need to know when program goals and objectives have been met. A program’s effectiveness and quality is best deter-

mined by establishing measurable objectives in the context of time periods, quan-

tities, and percentages. For example, for a street cleanliness program, this may

mean having a citizen cleanliness rating of at least 70 percent each year, and a

trained observer cleanliness rating of at least 80 percent each year. Note, however,

that performance targets are not restricted to outcome indicators. Organizations

Source: M.B. Vergara. 2006. School of Public Affairs and Administration, Rutgers University–Newark.

FIGURE 7.3 – STRATEGIES FOR PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT SUCCESS

Performance Measurement

Accountability

Citizen Surveys

Participation & Engagement

Efficiency & Effectiveness

Reliable & Accurate

Audits create safeguard

OR...

Transparency, Learning,

Appraising, Sanctioning

Auditing the accuracy of

Performance Data used to

create PM

Negative information, language

reporting has negative impact

Success for PM

5 Strategits: Tolerating competing product def.

Banning a monopoly on producing fig's Limit functions/for urns of PM

Limit products subjected to PM Use process & product perspective

If PM not accountable then...

240 CHAPTER 7

can set similar targets for input, output, or efficiency indicators (for example, when

budgets are experiencing shortfalls, setting input targets may prove worthwhile).

Step 5. Monitoring Performance. Each performance target needs to be monitored. Public managers can then make corrective changes if the performance data indicate

a potential problem. Systematic and regular monitoring is essential. For instance,

if a performance target is that 95 percent of park visitors are “satisfied” with a park’s

cleanliness and general maintenance from year-to-year, it does not mean that per-

formance data should be collected and examined only once a year. Smaller-scale

data collection efforts should be completed on a quarterly or even monthly basis.

Doing so affords managers a more complete understanding of what is going on in

terms of performance. Using the parks example, it would be easy to miss seasonal

(or cyclical) patterns in customer satisfaction if data were collected at only one point

in time during the year. An equally important point is the performance data col-

lection should be practical and not overburden an organization’s resource and per-

sonnel capacities.

Step 6. Reporting Performance Results. Performance reporting entails summariz- ing all the indicators and comparing the collected data to the performance targets

Source: D. Bromberg. 2006. School of Public Affairs and Administration, Rutgers University–Newark.

FIGURE 7.4 – DOWNSIDE OF PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT

Long Term Goals Top-down Performance

Measurement

Long Term Goal

Standardized Perfornance Measurement

2014

2012

2010

2008

2006

G G

Social Security Administration

Health and Human

Services

Department of Homeland

Security

Different measurements

M M

Fit Measurement Here

Long Term Goal

Election

Measures increase short term production

Standardization may increase efficiency for decision makers but it stifles the ability administrators

Administrative reforms reflect political values not technocratic solubons

241Public Performance

discussed previously. Besides performance target comparisons, performance re-

porting can include comparisons with: (1) past years, (2) similar jurisdictions, or (3)

professionally developed standards or norms. Performance reporting formats vary

somewhat, but, at a minimum, they should be presented in a convenient arrange-

ment that includes: (1) program name, organization, and statement of purpose; (2)

inputs, outputs, outcomes, and efficiency indicators; (3) performance targets; and

(4) presentation of performance data in a way that facilitates clear comparisons.

Source: A. Ho and P. Coates. 2004. “Citizen-Initiated Performance Assessment: The Initial Iowa Experience,” Public Productivity & Management Review 27, no. 3: 34. Used by permission of M.E. Sharpe, Inc.

FIGURE 7.5 – THE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK OF CITIZEN-INITIATED PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

Citizen Performance Team

Focus groups with community leaders & citizens

Internet chat room for citizens with internet access who are willing to participate

Interactive website for citizens who are comfortable with using computers

Citizen phone hotline for all citizens who are willing to call

Citizen suvey to reach all citizens, including the passive, unvocal groups

242 CHAPTER 7

Straphangers Campaign The Straphangers Campaign represents a bold attempt to influence the accountabil-

ity, accessibility and performance of local government on behalf of its citizens.

Through the New York Public Interest Research Group (NYPIRG), the Straphang-

ers Campaign received a grant from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation to “launch a

new in-depth effort to measure the quality of the transit service.” The goal was to

accurately report on the condition of the New York City’s transit system and to

draw media, public and governmental attention to the need to continue to invest

in transit.

By the mid 1990s, ridership had plummeted to its lowest level since 1917. Many busi-

nesses cited poor transportation as the main reason for relocating from New York

City. An editorial in the New York Times on October 5, 1995 seemed to summarize the sentiment at the time: “Then the near-ruin of local mass transit was taken as a

metaphor for the decline and fall of the City itself. But New York did not fall, and

thanks to a $20 billion rebuilding plan, the subways got better. Now, it seems the

battle must be fought all over again.”

In their application to the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, the NYPRIG wrote, “It is

to hold the Transit Authority accountable by a sophisticated range of measures

– and to communicate that information to the public in lively and meaningful

ways.”

The Straphangers Campaign has developed a measure of how riders rate their sub-

way lines. The Straphangers Campaign has also collected data from transit officials

and all data is presented in a clear and accessible format. A panel of thirty-eight tran-

sit experts also completed questionnaires by prioritizing certain aspects of the sub-

way and bus service. This information was compiled for use in two sets of reports: one

based on a review of official transit statistics and the other, based on NYPIRG’s own

field studies.

The first report under this Sloan project was released in 1997, profiling New York

City’s twenty major subway lines on six key official measures of service, including

the amount of scheduled service, the chance of getting a seat during the most con-

gested periods, the cleanliness of the cars and the adequacy of the announcements.

Another twenty-one page report highlighted the state of the bus system. These two

sets of reports represented the most comprehensive review by any non-governmen-

tal organization of the performance of a major public transportation system. They

achieved two goals. First, they provided a solid baseline for comparing subway serv-

243Public Performance

ice in the future. And, second, they gave riders, communities and officials informa-

tion they would need to press the transit authority for better service.

The Straphangers Campaign’s work generated substantial media coverage. In par-

ticular, the comparative value assigned to each of the twenty subway lines evaluated

enabled riders to make decisions about those lines that they frequented, i.e, what

percentage of the full value of a token had been achieved. According to the 1998 re-

port, riders just wanted to know how their lines performed. Do their trains break

down more or less often than the average for New York City subways? Is there a bet-

ter or worse chance of getting a seat? How clean are the subway cars? Do the trains

come more or less often? Do the trains arrive irregularly or with few gaps in service?

How good or bad are the announcements?

Recently, the Straphangers Campaign concluded the following about the subway

system:

• Subway cars grew dirtier and announcements poorer. The findings on

announcements and dirt mirror independent surveys by the

Straphangers Campaign

• There was a slightly greater chance of getting a seat during rush hour.

However, the report probably underestimated the impact of recent in-

creases in ridership.

• Car breakdowns occurred less often. However, on a majority of lines,

car breakdowns increased, although any improvement to the system

was due to large improvements on several lines.

• There were great disparities in how subway lines performed as meas-

ured in response to questions posed by riders.

Overall, the Straphangers Campaign has found that riders simply want short waits,

regular and reliable service, a chance for a seat, a clean subway car and clear an-

nouncements.

Although the Straphangers Campaign encountered a number of obstacles, including

limited access to transit officials, they stepped up efforts to bring “real time” infor-

mation to the public. An interactive website has also been established.

Source: Written by G.L.A. Harris and Marc Holzer. For more information, visit the Straphangers website at www.straphangers.org. Reprinted with permission from the PA TIMES, monthly newspaper of the American Society for Public Administration (ASPA), www.aspanet.org.

244 CHAPTER 7

Step 7. Concluding with Analysis and Action. A well designed system of measuring performance will enable decision makers to identify organizational or program

strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. An enhanced understanding of

strengths and weaknesses assists managers in diagnosing problems and taking rel-

evant actions to remedy those problems.

Citizen-Driven Performance Measurement The public sector offers an ideal venue for implementing a formal performance

measurement system. Based on the information collected, public managers identify

weak areas within an organization and make corrective changes. A supplementary

approach to performance measurement entails bringing average citizens into the

process. Weeks (2000) maintains that including citizens in the performance meas-

urement process can potentially reduce participatory lethargy, skepticism toward

government, and the rift between the citizenry and public decision makers—and

these important benefits accrue as on outgrowth of reaching the primary goal,

which is enhancing performance measures.

While there are benefits to including citizens in public-sector performance meas-

urement, there are a number of noteworthy challenges, as well. A citizen’s role in

Source: S. Kwak. 2006. School of Public Affairs and Administration, Rutgers University–Newark.

FIGURE 7.6 – CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT: THE CASE OF DES MOINES, IOWA

Supply and Demand Strategy

Supply

Networks Platforms Interfaces

Utilization Infrastructure

Demand

Needs Values

Priorities Digital Surveys

Managerial Values -Congruence between Organizational Goals

and Measurement Schemes -Improvement in Quality of Decision-Making -Problem Identification and Problem Soiving

-Efficiency and Cost Savings

Democratic Values -Effective Communication among Participants

-Civic Engagement and Education -Accountability

Deliberation Process

Designing the Project

Forming a CIPA Team

Identifying Performance Measures

Collecting Performance Data

Analyzing

Reporting Performance Information

245Public Performance

government is typically distant and passive, rarely going beyond writing letters or

signing petitions (King 2002). Many citizens prefer passivity, and many officials

welcome it. Public managers would need additional training to engage citizens in

processes of decision-making, and doing so would require commitments of time

and resources (Roberts 1997; Weeks 2000). Regardless of such challenges, the in-

clusion of citizens in performance measurement has become central to public ad-

ministrators (Nalbandian 1999; Vigoda 2002).

The Balanced Scorecard The balanced scorecard concept as a management tool was first developed in 1992

by David Norton and Robert Kaplan. Adopted in the private sector first, it allowed

for significant improvements in organizational performance. The balanced score-

card (BSC) goes beyond traditional measures—measures that are chiefly financial

in nature—by offering a “balanced” methodology for assessing the effectiveness

with which the organization fulfills its vision and strategy. It aligns performance

measures in four categories: financial management, customer focus, internal busi-

ness processes, and learning and growth. BSC translates strategies into clearly de-

Source: S. Kwak. 2006. School of Public Affairs and Administration, Rutgers University–Newark.

FIGURE 7.7 – PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT DASHBOARD WITH THE BALANCED SCORECARD OF THE WASHINGTON STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT BOARD

TIB GMAP Performance Management Dashboard

TIB at a Glance

Balanced Scorecard

GMAP Reporting

Selected Projects

Project Information

Time Lapse Data

Output Measures

Outcome Measures

Efficiency Measures

Financial Measures

TIB At A Glance Program Metrics

Statewide Project Inventory Open Application

Design Old

Constraction Closeout

Active Projects 383 Rem. Commitment $354,158,863 Completed (FYTD) 119 Under Constraction 138

Agency Status TIB Balanced Scorecard

Investors & Customers

Business Practices

Project Control

Financial

Financial Health

Fund Balances Open 35.5m

3.0m 35.5m 2.0m 15.5m 1.0m

« TIA UATA SCPP Total

Fund Balances

Project Espendetures Accounts PayableFully Funded & Completed Projects

• Sustanable Fnancial Management

• Strong Project Control

• Exemplary Business Practices

• Informed Investors & Customers

Fund Balances are as of 04/12/2008

246 CHAPTER 7

Citizen-Initiated Performance Assessment: The Case of Iowa In 2001, the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation funded a three-year project in Iowa called

Citizen-Initiated Performance Assessment, which engages citizens, city council mem-

bers, and departmental staff in the development and use of performance measures to

evaluate public services. Thirty-two Iowa cities with populations above 10,000 were

contacted initially. Eventually, the city councils, departmental staff, and citizen rep-

resentatives of nine cities (Burlington, Carroll, Clive, Des Moines, Indianola, John-

ston, Marion, Marshalltown, and Urbandale) made the commitment to the project.

The Iowa CIPA project differs from traditional performance measurement in three

major respects. First, it emphasizes collaboration among citizens, elected officials,

and managers in developing performance measures to ensure political credibility

and receptivity of the measures. Second, it emphasizes the citizen perspective in per-

formance measurement, rather than the managerial perspective that often empha-

sizes input and cost-efficiency. Third, it emphasizes public dissemination of

performance measurement results to hold government accountable.

In the first year of the CIPA project, each participating city formed a “citizen per-

formance team.” Citizens from diverse backgrounds make up the majority of the

team. For example, the city of Des Moines asked representatives from neighborhood

associations to participate. Some cities pursued public recruitment of citizens

through newspaper announcements, city newsletters, and the city cable TV. Many

also recruited members from other citizen committees and community organiza-

tions. In addition to citizens, each performance team had one or two staff represen-

tatives and a city council member.

In the initial meetings, the performance team had a brief review of city government

operations. Some cities also asked citizens to develop strategies to recruit additional

members based on a city’s demography. Then the team selected one or two public

services for performance measurement, usually based on fiscal significance, direct

impact on citizens, and current citizen concerns. The Iowa CIPA project currently

covers police, fire and EMS, library, recreational center, street repair, snow removal,

public transportation, solid waste management, nuisance control, and park and

recreation services.

While each of the nine cities can decide its project progress, all of them generally ad-

here to the following model: In the first stage of the project, the citizen performance

team identifies the “critical elements” of a selected public service. For example, for

nuisance control, some of the critical elements are response time, effectiveness in re-

247Public Performance

solving service requests, and effectiveness in public reporting of departmental ac-

tions. For the police, the critical elements include response time, professionalism in

interaction with citizens, competency and effectiveness in investigation, sufficiency

of patrol, and legal compliance of officers.

Based on the critical elements, the performance team develops measures and evalu-

ates them. Among evaluation criteria, understandability and usefulness to the pub-

lic are the most important measures developed for public reporting.

In the second stage of CIPA, city departments develop necessary instruments, such

as citizen or user surveys, to collect performance data. At the same time, citizens help

collect some performance data, report the project progress to the city council, and de-

velop strategies to better engage the general public in the project.

Finally, the performance measurement results are reported to the performance team,

the city council, and the general public. Public input is solicited to improve per-

formance. City departments then integrate the results in strategic planning, per-

formance-based budgeting, and activity-based management of service operations.

The Iowa CIPA project is currently in its second stage. While it may be premature

to conclude any long-term impact of the project, several lessons have been learned.

First, CIPA helps officials focus on outcome measures and citizen concerns. This

enhances public accountability and the result orientation of public services. Second,

CIPA shows the importance of public communication. For example, a department

should not ignore notification of citizens about the progress or results of depart-

mental actions after a service request is filed. Third, managers should prepare for

comparative performance measurement, as many citizens are interested in knowing

how well their city performs relative to others in the neighboring area. Fourth, many

performance measures should be reported at the neighborhood level to enhance

their relevancy to citizens. Finally, public reporting of performance measurement is

important. Cities should consider the usage of technologies, such as the Internet, to

do this cost-effectively. Many cities have been collecting performance data for

decades. CIPA simply changes the perspective of managers and elected officials by

engaging citizens so that the public can influence the bases on which government

services are evaluated.

Source: National Center for Public Performance. 2004. “Iowa. Citizen Initiated Performance Assess- ment (CIPA).” Teaching Case. Citizen-Driven Government Performance. Written by Paul Coates and Al- fred Tat-Kei Ho. ASPA members Paul Coates and Alfred Ho co-lead the Iowa project. Reprinted with permission from the PA TIMES, monthly newspaper of the American Society for Public Administration (ASPA), www.aspanet.org.

248 CHAPTER 7

fined objectives, measures, performance targets, and initiatives that address

achievement in those four categories.

• Financial: “To succeed financially, how should we appear to our

shareholders?”

• Customer: “To achieve our vision, how should we appear to our

customers?”

• Internal processes: “To satisfy our shareholders and customers, at

what business processes must we excel?”

• Learning: “To achieve our vision, how will we sustain our ability to

change and improve?” (Mathys and Thompson 2005)

The Social Aspects of Performance Bureau-pathology Public organizations are facing increasing pressures to perform at a high level, but

several sources of tension may undermine efforts to improve performance. In par-

ticular, most organizations suffer from bureaucratic stagnation, which can have

unanticipated pathological consequences. Whether justified or not, bureaucracy

carries with it a reputation for mediocrity, which is captured in sayings like “don’t

rock the boat” or “go along to get along.” Other negative consequences of bureau-

cracy include a loss of personal autonomy, directing one’s energies toward resolv-

ing personal problems rather than organizational problems, engaging in office

politics, and abusing fellow employees. Bureaucracies—sometimes too often—trans-

form their workers into impersonal machines, the consequence of which is less pro-

ductive responses to citizen demands and needs.

Management-Workforce Cooperation The contention that too much bureaucracy suppresses public performance has

given rise to alternative theories. Osborne and Gaebler (1992) champion an en-

City of Deficitprone—Improving Public Performance (Simulation) After completing the simulation, students will identify the unrealized opportunities for productivity improvements and the obstacles to them. What are the conflicts and how would you address them?

Canfield, Roger and Marc Holzer. 1977. Management-Labor Productivity Simulation: City of Deficitprone. Public Productivity Review 2 (4) (Fall): 38–47.

EXERCISE 7.1

249Public Performance

trepreneurial approach to public administration as opposed to the traditional bu-

reaucratic approach. Central to overcoming bureaucratic pathologies is manage-

ment-workforce collaboration. Many public administrators agree that cooperation

between rank-and-file workers and upper-level decision makers—that is, labor

and middle management—is essential to improving organizational performance.

However, the notion of cooperation goes well beyond contributions to the office

suggestion box; rather, it involves the formation and use of performance commit-

tees and quality circles. These provide a means of discussing and disseminating in-

novative and productive ideas throughout an organization. The hierarchical and

centralized bureaucratic model is replaced by an egalitarian partnership com-

prised of upper- and lower-level employees, which increases the possibility of in-

novation and risk taking, given that everyone within the organization possesses a

psychological stake in its improvement (Grace and Holzer 1992).

– I’VE BEEN WHATCHING THEM ALL DAY: NOT A SINGLE PERSON IS WORKING… Artist: Z. Yefimovsky; “The Fighting Pencil” group, 1980.

250 CHAPTER 7

Workforce Motivation and Incentives Often overlooked are the social and psychological aspects that affect organizational

performance. Classical performance improvement models were borrowed from the

private sector, an example being Frederick Taylor’s scientific management model.

Rooted in the assumption that workers are motivated primarily by money, Taylorism

provides a limited perspective of productivity and performance. Classical manage-

ment principles maintain that individuals are motivated by fear—the fear of losing

their jobs. As a result of this fear, workers will follow orders. The intricacies of worker

motivation are underscored in the Hawthorne experiments, Maslow’s hierarchy of

needs, and in particular McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y assumptions about work-

ers (all of which have been discussed in earlier chapters).

At times, the authority vested in supervisory, management, and upper-manage-

ment positions may lead some “higher ups” to make erroneous assumptions about

lower-level workers. Such individuals embrace Theory X

assumptions that:

• Supervisors and managers are given the lead roles.

• Workers are the supporting cast for supervisors and

managers.

• The cast must be micromanaged.

• Employees require comprehensive training because

they inherently resist change.

• Fear is the chief motivator.

Most people in positions of authority are inclined to take the Theory X view of work-

ers, while those in subordinate positions are more likely to view themselves as “Y”

workers. The Y scenario assumes:

• All workers are important.

• Workers are professionals who are willing to learn and prefer being

self-directed.

• There are many sources of motivation that go beyond fear and money,

such as praise and feeling good about one’s work.

The differences between Theories X and Y is the difference between a success and

a flop, between an underachiever and an overachiever, between loss and profit,

between employee conflict and cooperation, between success and organizational

failure. Rigid “X” assumptions can be broken. Transitioning from X to Y is possi-

ble when status, dominance, distance, decision-making power, praise, and infor-

mation are available to employees at all levels in an organization.

“Without a standard there is

no logical basis for making a decision or taking action.”

JOSEPH M. JURAN “Father” of Quality

Management (1904–2008)

251Public Performance

The Role of Privatization in Government Performance Under increasing scrutiny regarding their efficiency and effectiveness, public or-

ganizations risk losing some of their essential functions to the private sector. Pri-

vatization and contracting out are two frequently used and often expensive

alternatives to underachieving public organizations. Even though these terms are

often used interchangeably, privatization and contracting out are slightly different.

Privatization refers to the complete transfer of a government function to the pri- vate sector. It sometimes entails the sale of government enterprises and assets or

the demonopolization of government functions—which will allow private-sector al-

ternatives to emerge (Savas 1992). With privatization, government is removed, and

what remains is a relationship between a private entity and its customers. This re-

lationship is a financial one. With contracting out, a private organization works on behalf of the government. The relationship essentially involves three parties—the

private organization provides the service, the customers receive the service, and

the entire process is overseen by the government. Contracting out differs from pri-

vatization given that government still has some measure of control over the private

organization delivering the services.

Champions of privatization and contracting out argue that the private sector does

things better. Private organizations are more innovative and more fiscally respon-

sible than government. They have greater motivation and fewer impediments to

delivering services. A recurring argument for privatization and contracting out is

that market competition makes all the difference: because private organizations

are competing with each other, they will work to provide the best service at the low-

est cost (Donahue 1989).

252 CHAPTER 7

Behn, R.D. 2003. “Why Measure Performance? Different Purposes Require Dif-

ferent Measures.” Public Administration Review 63, no. 5: 586–606.

Berman and West. 1995. “Municipal Commitment to Total Quality Management:

A Survey of Recent Progress.” Public Administration Review 55, no. 1: 57–66.

Brocker, J and Rubin J.Z. 1985. Entrapment in Escalating Conflicts: A Social Psychological Analysis. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Deming, W.E. 1986. Out of the Crisis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Center for Advanced Engineering Study.

Donahue, J.D. 1989. The Privatization Decision: Public Ends, Private Means. New York: Basic Books.

Attribution

Captive agency

Continuous improvement

Contracting out

Customer focus

Decentralization

Efficiency indicators

Empowerment

Entrapment

External customer

Functional differentiation

Horizontal teamwork

Information distortion

Input indicators

Integration

Internal customer

Interorganizational teamwork

KSAs (knowledge, skills and abilities)

Output indicators

Outcome indicators

Parochialism

Performance measurement

Performance measurement system

Performance targets

Privatization

Productivity improvement

Programs

Public performance

Representativeness

Responsiveness

Teamwork

Total Quality Management (TQM)

Trained incapacity

Vertical teamwork

KEY TERMS

REFERENCES

253Public Performance

Downs. 1967. Inside Bureaucracy. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.

Exemplary State and Local Awards Program (EXSL). 1989–1995. National Cen-

ter for Public Productivity, Rutgers University, Newark, NJ.

Florida Department of Corrections. 1997. “Secretary’s Message, 1996–97 Annual

Report.” http://www.dc.state.fl.us/pub/annual/9697/sec.html.

Flynn, B.B., S. Sakakibara, and R.G. Schroeder. 1995. “Relationship Between JIT

and TQM: Practices and Performance.” Academy of Management Journal. 38, no. 5: 1325–60.

General Accounting Office (GAO). 1992. “Program Performance Measures: Fed-

eral Agency Collection and Use of Performance Data.” Report to the Chairman

and Ranking Minority Member, Committee on Governmental Affairs, U.S.

Senate. Washington, DC: GAO.

Gortner, H., J. Mahler, and B.J. Nicholson (eds.). 1987. Organization Theory: A Public Perspective. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Government Executive Magazine, January 12, 1995.

Grace, S.L., and M. Holzer. 1992. “Labor-Management Cooperation: An Opportu-

nity for Change.” In Public Productivity Handbook, ed. M. Holzer, 487–98. New York: Marcel Dekker.

Hamilton, Lee V. 1980. “Intuitive Psychologist or Intuitive Lawyer? Alternative

Models of the Attribution Process.” Journal of Personality and Social Psy- chology. 39, no. 5: 767–72.

Hatry, H.P. 1977. How Effective Are Your Community Services? Washington, DC: Urban Institute.

———. 1979. Efficiency Measurement for Local Government Services. Washing- ton, DC: Urban Institute.

Hatry, H.P., Fountain, J.R. Jr., Sullivan, J.M., and Kremer, L. 1990. “Service Ef-

forts and Accomplishments Reporting: Its Time Has Come.” Government Ac-

counting Standards Board (GASB): Library of Congress Catalog Card Number:

90–80879.

Heider, F. 1958. The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: Wiley.

Holt, G.D., P.E.D., Love, and L. Jawahar-Nesan. 2000. “Employee Empower-

ment in Construction: An Implementation Model for Process Improvement.”

Team Performance Management. 6 (3/4): 47–51.

Holzer, M. and S. H. Lee. 1999. “Labor Management Tension and Partnership:

Where Are We? What Should We Do?” International Review of Public Admin- istration. 4, no. 2: 33–44.

254 CHAPTER 7

Kaufman, H. 1987. Administrative Decentralization and Political Power. In Clas- sics of Public Administration, 1969, ed. J.M. Shafritz and A. C. Hyde, pp. 389– 404. 2d.ed. Chicago: Dorsey.

King, C.S. 2002. “Is Performance-oriented Government Democratic?” In Meeting the Challenges of Performance-oriented Government. ed. K. Newcomer, E.T. Jennings, Jr., C. Broom, and A. Lomax. Washington, DC: ASPA.

Klingner, Donald E. . and John Nalbandian. 1998. Public Personnel Manage- ment: Contexts and Strategies. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall/Simon & Schuster.

Lee, S.H. 2000a. “Understanding Productivity Improvement in a Turbulent Envi-

ronment: A Symposium Introduction.” Public Productivity and Management Review 23: 423–27.

Lee, S.H. 2000b. “A Multidimensional View of Public Sector Employee Commit-

ment and Willingness to Support Productivity Improvement Strategies: A

Comparative Study of Public Employees at Managerial Level between the

United States and South Korea.” Unpublished dissertation, Rutgers University,

Newark, NJ.

Lee, S.H. 2001. “Barriers to Active Citizen Participation in the Public Sector: Les-

sons Learned from South Korea.” In Current Topics in Management, ed. M.A. Rahim, R.T. Golembievski, K.D. Mackenzie, vol.6, 309–30. New York: JAI.

Mathys, N.J., and K.R. Thompson. 2005. Using the Balanced Scorecard: Lessons Learned from the U.S. Postal Service and the Defense Finance and Account- ing Service. Washington, DC: IBM Center for the Business in Government.

McGowan, R.P., and Wittmer, D.P. 1997. “Five Great Issues in Decision Making.”

In Handbook of Public Adminsitration, ed. J. Hildreth, W.B. Miller, 2d ed, 293–320. New York: Marcel Dekker.

———. 1998. “Gaining a Competitive Edge: Economic Development Strategies for

State and Local Governments,” Public Administration Quarterly 22, no. 3: 301– 14.

Merton, R. K. 1987. “Bureaucratic Structure and Personality (1940).” In Classics of Public Administration, ed. J.M. Shafritz, A.C. Hyde, 2d ed., 107–16. Chicago: Dorsey.

Milakovich, M. 1992. “Total Quality Management for Public Service Productivity

Improvement.” In Public Productivity Handbook, ed. M. Holzer, 577–602. New York: Marcel Dekker.

Miller, D.T. and Ross, M. 1975. “Self-Serving Biases in the Attribution of Causal-

ity.” Psychological Bulletin 82: 213–25.

255Public Performance

Nalbandian, J. 1999. “Facilitating Community, Enabling Democracy: New Roles for

Local Government Managers.” Public Administration Review 59, no. 3: 187–97.

New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission (NJMVC). 2006. “Toward a Serviced

Model of Efficiency: New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission Service Assess-

ment.” www.state.nj.us/mvc/pdf/About/assess_2006_0330.pdf.

Norton, D. and R. Kaplan. 1992. “The Balanced Scorecard—Measures that Drive

Performance.” Harvard Business Review January/February: 71–79.

O’Reilly, C. A. 1978. “The Intentional Distortion of Information in Organizational

Communication: A Laboratory and Field Investigation.” Human Relations 31, no. 2: 173–93.

Osborne, D., and T. Gaebler. 1992. Reinventing Government: How the Entrepre- neurial Spirit Is Transforming the Public Sector. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Paddock, S. C. 1997. “Administrative Benchmarks in Management Training.”

Public Productivity and Management Review 21, no. 2: 192–202.

Pennsylvania State Governor’s Office. 2001. http://www.governor.state.pa.us/

portal/server.pt/community/governor%27s_web_site/2985.

Pollock, T. 2001. “For Improved Teamwork, Keep Them Informed.” Automotive Design and Production 10: 10.

Public Performance Measurement and Reporting Network. http://www.ppmrn.net.

Rago, W. V. 1994. “Adapting Total Quality Management (TQM) to Government:

Another Point of View.” Public Administration Review 54: 61–64.

———. 1996. “Struggles in Transformation: A Study in TQM, Leadership Organi-

zational Culture in a Government Agency.” Public Administration Review 56: 227–34.

Roberts, N. 1997. “Public Deliberation: An Alternative Approach to Crafting Pol-

icy and Setting Direction.” Public Administration Review 57, no. 2: 124–32.

Rourke, F. E. 1984. Bureaucracy, Politics, and Public Policy. 3d ed. Boston: Lit- tle, Brown.

Savas, E.S. 1992. “Privatization and Productivity.” In Public Productivity Hand- book, ed. M. Holzer, 79–98. New York: Marcel Dekker.

Shea, C.M. and Howell, J.M. 1998. “Organizational Antecedents to the Successful

Implementation of Total Quality Management.” Journal of Qualitative Man- agement 3: 3–24.

Simon, H. A. 1997. Administrative Behavior. A Study of Decision Making Processes in Administrative Organizations. 4th ed. New York: Free Press.

256 CHAPTER 7

Swiss, J. E. 1992. “Adapting Total Quality Management (TQM) to Government.”

Public Administration Review 52: 356–62.

Urban Institute and International City Management Association. 1974. Measuring the Effectiveness of Basic Municipal Services. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.

Urban Institute. 1980. Performance Measurement: A Guide for Local Elected Of- ficials. The Urban Institute in cooperation with The National League of Cities and National Association of Counties. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute

Press.

Vigoda, E. 2002. “Administrative Agents of Democracy? A Structural Equation

Modeling of the Relationship Between Public-Sector Performance and Citizen-

ship Involvement.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 12, no. 2: 241.

Wallach. 1983. “Individuals and Organizations: The Cultural Match.” Training and Development Journal 37: 29–36.

Washington State Governor’s Office. 2000. http://access.wa.gov/.

Weeks, E.C. 2000. “The Practice of Deliberative Democracy: Results from Four

Large-Scale Trials.” Public Administration Review 60, no. 4: 360–72.

White, O. E. and J. E. Wolf. 1995a. “Deming’s Total Quality Management Move-

ment and the Baskin Robbins Problem. Part One: Is It Time to Go Back to

Vanilla?” Administration & Society. 27, no. 2: 203–25.

———1995b. “Part Two: Is This Ice Cream American?” Administration & Society 27, no. 3: 307–21.

Gore, A. 1993. From Red Tape to Results: Creating a Government That Works Better and Costs Less: The Report of the National Performance Review. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

APQC (formerly known as the American Productivity and Quality Center; a non-

profit agency that provides benchmarking and best-practice research to organ-

izations worldwide): http://www.apqc.org

ExpectMore.gov (a site developed by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget

devoted to ranking the performance of federal agencies): www.expectmore.gov

SUPPLEMENTARY READINGS

ELECTRONIC RESOURCES

257Public Performance

Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB), Service Efforts and Accom-

plishments Reporting for Governments: http://www.seagov.org/index.shtml

Government Finance Officer’s Association (GFOA) of the United States and

Canada, Performance Measurement Website:

http://www.gfoa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=479&It

emid=250

National Institute of Standards and Technology, Baldrige National Quality Pro-

gram: http://www.quality.nist.gov

Office of Management and Budget: Performance Measurement Challenges and

Strategies http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/challenges_strategies

Office of Management and Budget: Best Practices for Collecting and Using Cur-

rent and Past Performance Information

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/best_practice_re_past_perf

The W. Edwards Deming Institute: www.deming.org

Program Evaluation

CHAPTER 8

In Chapter 8, students are presented with the fundamentals

of program evaluation. Upon reading this chapter, students

will understand what program evaluation is and how one goes

about completing an evaluation. This chapter discusses the

various techniques for collecting information (or data) and the

importance of stakeholders in this process. It also examines

the types of program evaluations and concludes with a

discussion of ethical conduct for program evaluators.

258 CHAPTER 8

Chapter 1 Public Administration: An Indispensable Part of Society

Government Requires Resources

What Do We Get for All of These Resources?
How Government Is Organized to Deliver Services
How Government Serves Others
What, Then, Is Public Administration?

Key Terms
References
Supplementary Readings
Electronic Resources
Case Studies

Chapter 2 Organizational Theory and Management

Theories of Managerial Efficiency

The Classical Management Movement
The Neo-Classical School
The Human Side of Organizational Management

Contemporary Organizational Theories

Structural Theory
Systems Theory
W. Edwards Deming and Japanese Management
Organizational Economic Theory
Organizational Culture
National Performance Review

Key Terms
References
Supplementary Readings
Electronic Resources

Chapter 3 Managing Human Resources

Human Resources Management

Productive Human Resource Management
Cultivating and Maintaining a High-Quality Diverse Workforce
Creating a Quality Work Environment

Key Terms
References
Supplementary Readings
Electronic Resources

Chapter 4 Public Decision Making

How Decisions Are Made

The Nature of Decision Making
Theoretical Models of Decision Making
Dysfunctions in Decision Making

Key Terms
References
Supplementary Readings
Electronic Resources

Chapter 5 Politics and Public Administration

The Intersection of Politics and Administration

Reform and Neutrality
The Reality of Bureaucratic Politics
Checking Bureaucratic Discretion

Key Terms
References
Supplementary Readings
Electronic Resources
Case Citations

Chapter 6 Intergovernmental Relations

The Layers of Government

The Idea of Federalism
Interlocal Shared Government
Improving Performance via Intragovernmental and Intergovernmental Competition

Key Terms
References
Supplementary Readings
Electronic Resources

Chapter 7 Public Performance

Improving Government Performance

The Importance of Knowledge Sharing and Training
Total Quality Management: Customer Focus and Responsive Public Organizations
Issues in Organizational Responsiveness
Measuring Performance to Improve Performance
The Role of Privatization in Government Performance

Key Terms
References
Supplementary Readings
Electronic Resources

Chapter 8 Program Evaluation