Bureaucracy: A Necessary Evil?
A Comparative Analysis
Derik Van Baale
PADM 6610
Dr. Mingus
Introduction
“Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst, an intolerable one.” (Kurland, Lerner, 1987) These words were spoken by Thomas Paine, one of America’s Founding Fathers, as the 13 American Colonies were preparing to declare their independence from England. Henry Clay stated, “Government is a trust, and the offices of the government are trustees. Both the trust and trustees are created for the benefit of the people” (Clay, 1829). Beating the System by Russell Ackoff and Sheldon Rovin and The Case for Bureaucracy by Charles Goodsell address the role of bureaucracy within society, but they do so from opposing viewpoints. While both books have some similarities, they are vastly different in their approach to managing bureaucracy. Ackoff and Rovin tend to see bureaucracy as something to overthrow in order to achieve success. Conversely Godsell maintains that bureaucracies have gotten a bad rap and merely need to be embraced and manipulated in a meaningful way. Even so, overthrowing bureaucracy and embracing bureaucracy should not be considered to be the only two viewpoints on the matter. Jumping from one end of the spectrum to the other end does not mean these authors hold the monopoly on public administration viewpoints. Missing from the discussion is the role of a limited government bureaucracy. Which begs the questions,
There is a plethora of criticisms about the effectiveness of the Bureaucracy. Even during the 19th century, as Wilson writes, the Post Office “was an organization marred by inefficiency and corruption”. With an appointment standard such as the “spoils system”, where individuals or groups are granted high level positions based on political favors alone, corruption is almost a certainty. The political aspect of the Bureaucracy was prevalent in the military for over 100 years, as Wilson states “the size and deployment of the military establishment in this country was governed entirely by decisions made by political leaders on political grounds”. Political favors and factors plague our government, including the Bureaucracy. A by-product of these political favors and corruptions are stagnancy and mediocrity. An example of this, as
In his book, Bureaucracy: What Government Agencies do and why they do it, James Q. Wilson’s main objective is to better define the behavior of governmental bureaucracy, believing traditional organizational and economic theory does not adequately explain their actions. Wilson believes that government agencies are doomed to be perceived as inefficient entities by the public. He gives examples of commonly held perceptions of bureaucracies and reveals how these are mostly misconceptions. He points to the environment of bureaucracy, where rules and procedures, dictate goals, along with context, constraints, values, and norms.
The federal bureaucracy is the group of government organizations that implement policy. The federal bureaucrats belong, for the most part, to the group of government agencies led by the president’s cabinet (the collection of appointed officials tasked with leading various federal government departments such as the State Department, Department of Homeland Security etc.) (Geer et al.). These department heads, known as cabinet secretaries, are appointed by each new president. The federal bureaucracy is responsible for writing regulations that implement the laws. In this, the federal bureaucracy’s importance cannot be understated. Congress passes laws, the president signs them, but it is the responsibility of the bureaucracy to actually implement them in the most effective, unburdening way.
Political authority over the bureaucracy is not in one set of hands, but shared among several institutions
What I read about reducing the cost of the national bureaucracy was Under the Hood: The Cost of Bureaucracy by Allison Gofman. The major points of her article are that there are many different agencies, departments, and groups of people who deal with the same things throughout the government. With having many different groups of people dealing with the same issues, there isn't one federal bureaucracy. Instead, its a bunch of different groups with their own interests and own opinions on one topic. The article also states that "public bureaucracies are not designed for efficiency" and I can see why. The bureaucracies just want to have power and influence over decisions that their agency gets to make at later dates.
“The government, which was designed for the people, has got into the hands of the bosses and their employers, the special interests. An invisible empire has been set up above the forms of democracy.” This quote by Woodrow Wilson fits perfectly with the topics that will be discussed. The major theme of this paper is bureaucracy. Bureaucracy refers to an administrative system in which agencies staffed largely by non elected officials perform specific tasks in accordance with standard procedures. The work of the bureaucracy involves implementing laws and procedures. Does this sound familiar? That is because most bureaucrats work for the executive branch of the government. The executive branch is the one that enforces the laws. Some of these law enforcing jobs include mail clerk, police officer, fireman, and first responder. These jobs are essential to our lives as Americans and are greatly appreciated. This paper will expound on the history, usage, and the Cabinet
Goodsell’s book “The Case for Bureaucracy: A Public Administration Polemic” is composed on the contrary. Goodsell makes several arguments in favor of the fundamental soundness of American bureaucracy. His thoughts are derived from a core belief: the quality of public service in the United States is vastly underrated (p. xi). His polemic is such that the flaws and the faults of bureaucracy in America are far fewer on a proportionate basis than is generally thought. The argument of this book is that a wide gap exists between bureaucracy’s repopulation and its record. Despite endless ranting to the contrary, American bureaucracy does work – in fact, quite well (p. 4). According to Goodsell criticisms of government bureaucracy are based more on myth than reality. Goodsell argues that government agencies actually play a valuable and indispensable role in making our society a better place to live. For instance Goodsell examines studies that show what he argues is evidence of public satisfaction with bureaucracy. His arguments are based on such statistics as “most” citizens believing that police do not accept bribes (p. 27) or that “only” a quarter of welfare recipients waited a half hour or more for service (p. 35). In addressing direct performance evaluation, Goodsell shows that public bureaucracy has witnessed overall growth in productivity from 1967 through 1990. He acknowledges, however, that this cannot be fairly compared to private industry’s experience over the
Woll views the bureaucracy as the center of governmental power because agencies exercise legislative, judicial, and executive functions, and because of how strongly administration and politics are intertwined. Woll argues that contrary to popular thought, the President and Congress have infrequent control over the administrative process. Agencies make definite decisions that carry out vague policy initiated in Congress or by the President. Agencies also offer expert advice and are receptive to interested pressure groups. Not only do agencies determine the policies that the legislative and executive branches recommend, but the agencies affect the policy-making process through the decisions they make.
Bureaucrat is a dirty word to some people in modern society, so how can a bureaucracy be a good thing? Many Public Administration theorist, argue that bureaucracy is essential to the growth and expansion of the United States. Most of the criticism of the bureaucracy within the government is based on myth versus reality. Federal agencies play a critical and a valuable role within society and are indispensable to the operations of the federal government. Bureaucracy can be simply defined as the system in which decision are made by Public Administrators rather than elected officials (legislator) within the government. However, when the average citizen of just says the single word bureaucracy thoughts and images of evoked over how negative
The word “bureaucracy” has a negative connotation to many people. The fact is that our current system of government would not be able to survive without bureaucracies. The bureaucracy has become the “fourth branch” of the government, it has quasi-legislative and judicial powers and in it’s own field its authority is rarely challenged. The presence of these large, inefficient structures is necessary if the American people want to continue receiving the benefits that they expect.
Americans depend on government bureaucracies to accomplish most of what we expect from government, and we are oftentimes critical of a bureaucracy’s handling of its responsibilities. Bureaucracy is essential for carrying out the tasks of government. As government bureaucracies grew in the twentieth century, new management techniques sought to promote greater efficiency. The reorganization of the government to create the Department of Homeland Security and the Bush administration’s simultaneous push to contract out jobs to private employers raises the question as to whether the government or the private sector can best manage our national security. Ironically, the criticism of the bureaucracy may be a product
Bureaucracy was one of the most popular theories developed and is used in some modern organisations such as the NHS and the Police. Through the years bureaucracy has developed a bad reputation for de-humanizing jobs (Grey, 30) “In the ideal-type, people are no more than parts in a well-oiled machine –devoid of passion, prejudice and personality”, although some people prefer this structure (Handy, 22) “No one, it seems, approves of bureaucracy except, interestingly, lots of people in organisations who like to know where they stand.”
With the creation of new states and the intervention of government in everyday life of citizens necessitated the need for ideal-type of bureaucracy. Everywhere whether in developed or developing nations, bureaucratic structure is a common phenomenon.
Abstract: The theory of bureaucracy was proposed and published by Marx Weber (1947). Although there are some studies on this perspective were discussed before him, those theories did not form as systematic theory. After Weber, the issue of bureaucracy becomes a hot topic in the field of social organization. Almost all well-known scholars such as Martin and Henri have published their views on it. Bureaucracy adapted as the traditional organizational model during industrial society, essentially, bureaucracy could exist rational. This essay firstly will review the principle of bureaucracy in organization based on organizational design perspective. Secondly, it will analyze the strengths and weakness of
“Bureaucracy is becoming more and more independent and powerful and the rules governing the exercise of that power are not clearly defined; hence bureaucracy poses a threat to the democratic political structure and to the politicians who run it. And yet, a, powerful, independent bureaucracy is also necessary for the prevention of political corruption and for the safe guarding of proper democratic procedures.” Therefore having bureaucracy as party of the democracy it’s the best because it helps to maintain corruption, it’s also helps increasing the economy and social activities, helps with the delivering of services to the people. Examples of everyday bureaucracies include governments, armed forces, corporations, hospitals, courts. The people who