Caleb Roberts
POLS 660A
September 5, 2017
Bureaucracy: What Government Agencies do and why they do it by James Q. Wilson 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. Wilson uses a unique approach of breaking down bureaucracy into six parts: Organization, Operations, Managers, Executives, Context, and Change.
The organization is basically what it states, an organization is important for an agency, and it matters.
Operations look at behavior, for example, street-level bureaucrats, and how their culture is determined by the situations they encounter daily.
Managers of public agencies have complex issues to deal with, that is made more challenging due to a variety of constraints.
Executives of government agencies are in competition with other departments, and use specific strategies in the process of competing, for “turf”.
The context of public agencies business includes presidents, courts, and congress.
Change is needed, and Wilson summarizes the problems of government agencies and offers alternative market solutions and propositions. Wilson does an excellent job to dispel the public's perception of bureaucracy as a largely impersonal, poorly managed entity that employs unqualified staff who are buried in red tape. He explains, that to better understand why bureaucracies do what they do, you must recognize that public government agencies do not have the same goals as private independent businesses. The two operate with different sets of rules, goals, incentives, and constraints. In short, private companies are goal oriented, where bureaucracies are driven by constraints. Wilson demonstrates this by using Government
Although some might believe that bureaucrats are always trying to expand their agencies, researches have proved that is not always the case. Instead, they try to validate their position by doing a good job for the people.
In their books, Riccucci and Maynard-Moody & Musheno expose the reader to the front-line world of bureaucratic agencies. Through narration, they provide the reader direct experiences that support theories of discretion, performance management and the public administration dichotomy. By linking testimonies of real-world, street-level experiences with theory, they offer a nuanced and humane perspective. The books give managers of public administration the knowledge to develop strategies that may help link public policy with bureaucratic practice.
The text describes a bureaucracy as a large, complex organization composed of appointed officials. The departments and agencies of the US government make up the federal bureaucracy. The federal bureaucracy has 15 federal cabinet departments with about 2 million full-time employees. (Wilson et al, 290)
Throughout the rigmarole of political history of the United States of America, the growth of the “fourth branch of government”, the Bureaucracy, has been a prominent, controversial topic. Peter Woll, in his article “Constitutional Democracy and Bureaucratic Power”, and James Q. Wilson, in his article “The Rise of the Bureaucratic State”, discuss this developing administrative branch. The Constitution has no written mention of an “administrative branch”, and today’s Bureaucracy is often tedious, corrupt, and even undemocratic. But such a branch’s development and expansion is necessary in order to keep par with an evolving and changing society.
Bureaucracy involves non-elected agents that are often seen as the “worker bees” of government such as those in civil service. They execute the law through an organized structure that maintains specific functions, rules, and procedures. They must not be taken for granted. One example of the use of regulations would be the FDA’s role to ensure American health through appropriate regulation of new medication. Through the effective hierarchal organization, duties are completed faster and more efficiently. Some also argue that bureaucracy decreases room for favoritism and all have equal opportunity. For example, all students applying for loans will have their application reviewed, thus creating an equal opportunity for all. Similarly, bureaucracy allows for the hiring of expert officials who show merit and gives the opportunity to be promoted. While they are not involved the process of policy
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.
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.
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.”
In this analysis we will review a case titled “The Dilemma at the Public Service Department.” We will be discussing different issues, amongst them are: opinions on the honesty, malfeasance, misfeasance, nonfeasance, accountability, competence, and why these particular responsibilities are identified. We will also discuss certain trade-offs made by the commissioner’s loyalty to the department as well as the governor, and public interest. We will also be discussing three barriers when it comes to deciding how the governor will be approached, along with the basic elements that are recommended in strategic management planning.
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
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.
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
In the following paragraphs, I will explain the dominant theory in public administration practice and elaborate on the major theoretical assumptions of the Old Public Administration. As stated in the question, the world has transformed through globalization, information technology, and devolution of authority since the latter part of the last century. The dominant theory in public administration has been replaced from the traditional rule-based, authority-driven processes of the Old Public Administration with market-based, competition-driven tactics in the New Public Management, beginning in the 1980s (Kettl, 2000, p. 3). This was an effort to privatize government and streamline public administration to maximize efficiency and productivity. Heavily relying on market mechanisms to guide public programs, public administrators in the New Public Management are encouraged to “steer, not row,” meaning they should not bear the burden of delivering services, but instead define programs that others will carry out, through contracting or other means (Denhardt & Denhardt, 2011, p. 13). Core values of the New Public Management include using private sector and business approaches to the public sector, squeezing as many services as possible from smaller revenues, market style incentives, providing customers more choices, and focusing on outputs and outcomes instead of mainly processes.
Politics/administration dichotomy- when viewing this opposition, it should be seen as politicians writing and making rules while bureaucrats implement and put in place the policies and programs for the public to utilize. Administration and politics are seen as two separate components where they should not interface with one another. Even with them being a separate field of study, they have no choice but to integrate. As Woodrow Wilson looked at how politics and administration were forming, he felt the importance of government employees conduct themselves in a professional business manner while ensuring their accountability of providing proper services to the people and not partake in political philosophies. Politics are aligned with elected officials who write and pass the policies to be implemented by government agencies which are then applied by civil servants. By achieving this responsibility, public sector employees are required to embrace the values and principles to ensure efficiency, legitimacy, and
“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