Public administration, the management of public programs, is about getting things done or about making and carrying out public policies. Scholars who study public administration draw on research gleaned from a number of disciplines, including political science, sociology, psychology, economics, and business. Researchers from each of these disciplines bring their own perspectives on the structure of organizations, what motivates people to work and to be more productive, how people communicate in organizations, human resources management, leadership, and decision making. Public administration also includes the budgeting process, taxation, program evaluation, employee / labor relations, ethics, policy making, publicprivate sector relations, and federalism (the relationship of the national, state, and local governments). Comparative public administration focuses on the similarities and differences between the structures of government in different countries.
Public administration has gradually developed as a profession with a body of scholarly knowledge, a professional organization (the American Society for Public Administration), and a code of ethics. Through much of the 20th century, there were few public managers with formal training in public administration. Most administrators worked their way up in an organization, with city managers often beginning their careers in a department like public works. Although some colleges offer undergraduate courses in public administration today (usually through the political science program), most people who desire a career in public service seek specialized training in graduate school. Many colleges and universities offer master’s degrees in public administration, public policy, or public management for recent undergraduates or for those already working in government. People who are interested in an academic career generally seek a doctoral degree in public administration, political science, or a related area.
The beginning of public administration as a discipline or field of study separate from its “mother” discipline of political science is usually dated to 1887. In that year a college professor named Woodrow Wilson wrote an essay entitled “The Study of Administration.” Wilson, who later became the 28th president of the United States, believed that politics did not belong in administration and said that the role of administrators was to carry out policies made by elected politicians. He believed that public administration was very much like private business, and he decried the influence of partisan politics on government administration. Wilson’s views were in tune with those of the reformers in the late 1800s and early 1900s who were disgusted by corruption in government and by a spoils system that rewarded political loyalty. They sparked a nationwide government-reform movement. Hiring based on merit (more objective qualifications like a test score) began at the federal level with passage of the Pendleton Act in 1883 and gradually filtered down to the state and local levels. Beginning in 1907, some communities adopted a form of government in which elected officials hire a professional manager or administrator to implement programs.
The scholars of the early 1900s built on Wilson’s work as public administration began to emerge as a separate field. In the 1920s and 1930s, their primary focus was how to make government more efficient and how to help the executive gain more control over the organization. Luther Gulick developed a set of managerial principles that described the role of the executive. Along with his colleague Lyndall Urwick, he argued that these “principles,” like planning and organizing, could be applied to all organizations.
In the 1940s scholars began to study public administration scientifically. Herbert Simon, a leader in this field, criticized the “principles” approach as contradictory and of little practical value. He believed that the study of how decisions are made in organizations was a central part of an administrative science. However, despite the widespread use of empirical research methods (research based on observation and use of the scientific method), some other late 20th-century scholars have argued that it is difficult to quantify administration. George J. Gordon, for example, points out that many decisions are made in secret and that decision making is often an informal process.
After World War II, with a larger government that was playing a more active role in people’s lives, scholars and administrators began to realize that it was impossible for politicians to make all the day-to-day decisions necessary to carry out government programs. Today most students of the discipline know that administrators must have the discretion to interpret laws and to make policy decisions. Politics has always played a role in public administration, even from the earliest days of the republic, when those who governed came from the upper strata of society. Democratic accountability requires government to be responsive to the varied and conflicting demands of many different constituencies and to seek a balance between their needs and desires.
Scholars have also realized that organizations are not static but rather dynamic. Systems theorists study the interaction of organizations with their environment, both internal and external. For example, a manager’s decision can have an impact throughout the organization; or, in response to outside criticism, an organization may decide to hold public hearings before implementing a new policy. Scholars have developed a number of new subdiciplines based on the concepts of systems theory, such as cybernetics, information theory, game theory, organizational change, and organizational development.
In a sense, the country has come full circle since Woodrow Wilson’s day. Public confidence in government has been low since the 1960s, and the words politics and BUREAUCRACY have negative connotations for much of the public. In an era where there is much overlap and much blurring of the lines between the public and private sectors, some people think the private sector can do a better job of handling many traditional government services, from schools to prisons to trash collection. They favor increased contracting out of privatization of certain government services to the private sector.
Many people believe that it is possible to resolve the problems inherent in government by applying a business model, arguing that there are many similarities between organizations in the public and private sector, such as their bureaucratic structure. Such critics note that managers in both the public and private sectors must address many of the same problems in administering organizations, such as hiring and firing employees. Reform efforts seek to apply to the government principles that have worked in the private sector. One such reform was the National Performance Review of the Clinton-Gore administration in the 1990s, with its emphasis on customer service and increasing efficiency.
Others, however, point out there are substantial differences between the public and private sectors. The mission of government is to provide service to its various constituencies, while the private sector’s goal is to make money. As a result, it is often difficult to determine whether a government program is effective, since its goals may not be so clear-cut. For example, a business’s success is generally measured by whether it makes a profit, but how can people determine if a school is successful? Should the criteria be how many of its students graduate, how many have good writing and math skills, or how many find a job after finishing their education?
Because government in the broadest sense belongs to the people, it must operate in a fishbowl, where most decisions are made openly and are subject to public and media scrutiny. A private company can cut an unprofitable route or limit its hours of service to save money. When a public agency attempts to do the same, members of the public who object may place pressure on the elected officials who have the final say. Another critical difference is that all government operations are subject to law and legal scrutiny to a far greater extent than are private businesses. This includes questions of hiring and firing, the extent to which public employees and employers have immunity, and the use of public monies. Court decisions frequently play a role in determining what public managers can and cannot do, as courts interpret and reinterpret various laws.
The field of public administration will have to address these and many other issues in a changing world. New technology will change the way that services are delivered, at least in some respects, and perhaps make government more accessible to a wider range of citizens. There will be disagreements concerning the extent to which government should regulate the private sector and to what extent it should protect citizens from the various harms inherent in modern life. Continuing issues include how to better set goals, measure the accomplishments and failures of government programs, and pay for the services that the public wants. Perhaps most important is the related issue of how to change the political climate from one that denigrates to one that respects and values public service.