Relationship between Public Administration and Democratic Governance - Essay Example

Relationship between Public Administration and Democratic Governance Defining Public Administration There are a number of factors that typify public organizations and as such make it possible to define the kind of leadership practiced at public organizations. These include the fact that public organizations pursue multiple goals concurrently, employees have job security, and there is higher leadership turnover in the public sector. Moreover, the reward system in the public sector focuses more on seniority, public organizations have to comply with civil service rules, there is a higher level of accountability in public organizations and there are no market incentives within the public sector. In essence, one can establish that public organizations have highly static organizational structures more often than not mandated by a statute. Because of this static nature, leaders of public organizations are prone to be weak and lacking in discretion; this is used to explain the traditional leadership theory where employees or subordinates respond to the influence of little discretion employed by their leaders. Similarly, because of the seniority basis of reward systems public administration will older managers often take more up. These older managers are seen to exercise little discretion since they operate in different environmental contexts from their private sector counterparts, where environmental contexts are differentiated by market forces and interaction with legislations and legislatures (Pacek, 2010). Relationship between public administration and politics It has been found that there is a dichotomy between public administration and politics where this has been evidenced by the fact that the division of authority and labour is branched out into between administrative and elected officials, which raises the planning ability along with democratic ability among public administrators. It is crucial to establish the relation that lies between public administration and politics as it has important implications on the institutional development as well as intellectual identity of public administration. One finding into this dichotomous relationship suggests that politics and public administration are two distinct, separate issues. This outlook defines politics as being about making policies, a process that encompasses a set of activities involving value choices. Public administration, on the other hand, is seen as a tool for interpreting articulated policies into actual outcomes through the application of dedicated skills and knowledge, formally referred to as administrative knowledge. In essence, politics serves up the duties for public administration but should not be used to manipulate these offices. This distinction is important as it promotes ethics in form of neutral competence in an attempt to safeguard public administration from political intrusions. Further, this dichotomous relationship appoints legitimacy to the role of public administration by upholding the idea that public administration operates exclusively as neutral and competent arm of government (Demir & Nyhan, 2008). Legal framework of government institutions There are two factors upon which the legal framework of government institutions lies- separation of powers and responsible government. An example of the English constitution is cited where its strength is brought out owing to the fact it exerts the separation of powers as this safeguards against abuse of power. A number of government institutions in England, each with its distinctive function, are separated from one another in order to avoid concentration of power. It is important to note that this division of power comes in two aspects division of functions and division of institutions where America provides a clear illustration. The President is the single elected person that is part of the Executive as all the other persons part of the Executive are appointed personally by the President. The people bring the President to power and this election differs from that of the members of the legislature that is the Congress comprising of the House of Representatives plus Senate. Further, the President is not accountable to the Congress nor can he put forward legislation to the Congress. It is dissimilar to the U.K where the government has almost full control of the Parliament’s legislative agenda, where the majority of the Acts of Parliament are founded on proposal brought forward by Ministers. The Queen who acts on advice from the Prime Minister, who she appoints, formally appoints the Ministers; the Ministers are also responsible for the conduct of public administration following a principle of responsible government. These two countries represent an ideal state of public administration where the U.S follows the rule of separation of powers while the U.K applies the principle of responsible government; these two principles ensures there is no abuse of power and that government institutions are held accountable (Cane, 2011). Financial framework of government institutions Most government institutions are lacking in an articulate framework for public financial management as they serve varied interests. The difficulty in having an articulate framework lies in the fact that the efficiency goal, which is the purpose of having such a framework, conflicts with the policy goal; where policy goals include carrying out affairs on an agreeable budget, steering away from pointless risks and complying with control systems. Moreover, public financial management is riddled with difficulties stemming from the fact that finance decisions rest on human behaviour and resources are scarce. Institutional along with personal biases and imperfections taint finance decisions where there are many claims to the scarce resources. Traditionally, public financial management has been concerned with managerial control and rules of accounting, along with legal compliance as the determinants of a best practice framework. These are all important determinants as they ensure that public agencies realize goals of compliance with legal requirements, accounting standards, financial control and to some extent resource optimization. However, there should also be a consideration of positive theory that calls for looking into explaining and predicting the various patterns of behaviour that exist in public financial management; where the former, traditional focus alludes to normative theory. The positive theory is useful as it facilitates in understanding the ubiquitous nature of transactions undertaken by government institutions and adding to the value of efficiency. Government institutions undertake transactions that are centred on contracting where revenue is collected to pay wages, fixed rent payments and share contracts in place of a wage payment. Because of the nature of contracting in these transactions, it becomes necessary to look into the attributes of the contractors and nature of these transactions; hence, the positive theory comes into play (Khan & Hildreth, 2004). Comparative Public Administration as a concept Referring to the study of processes of producing dependable administrative knowledge as well as developing reliable administrative principles, comparative public administration is a subject that has evolved distinctly and separate from public administration. The idea behind it is to develop a global and genuinely comparative perspective, away from the current mode of public administration. In the U.S, comparative public administration is imperative as it helps to adopt a wider-angle view of the world where one moves from the parochial view that is restraining, as there is a shift to global leadership. This is particularly for the reason that the nation has become intertwined with the world’s governance. In any case, schools along with institutions outside the United States have incorporated comparative administration into their research. Such teaching and training requires wide acknowledgement as the study involves cross-cultural comparisons that greatly contributes to the increased capacity of students to make better judgments in a fast, shrinking global context. Comparative administration facilitates elevation of analysis and improvement of the knowledge of students as well as their appraisal of the world’s affairs. Paramount to the study of comparative public administration is the pursuit of regularities and patterns of administrative action along with behaviour. Information and analysis obtained from this concept creates a balancing effect where internalized prejudices and biases are reduced. This is because information generated allows for reflecting and exploration of worldwide administrative attributes in addition to revealing of the diversity of human experiences concerning public administration (Jreisat, 2005). Ethical Framework of Public Administration as a concept As a subject, ethics is inevitably linked to public service as it brings in the aspect of being responsible for one’s actions and their consequences. An ethical framework, largely making use of findings from past scholars, has been established to act as a guide for persons in public administration; this framework enshrines six elements- complexity, self-awareness, being justifiable, being factual, being responsible and the public. Complexity refers to the confusing and difficult circumstances surrounding public service. Self-awareness alludes to having a personal desire to be knowingly and methodically ethical when arriving at a decision. One has to understand that decisions can be justified but not excused, and this describes the element of being justifiable. Being factual calls for understanding the world as it is not as how one would wish. Having a genuine concern for others and accepting consequences for actions taken explains the element of being responsible. Lastly, the element of the public implies a willingness to explain to others how a decision was reached. It is imperative for public administrators to view themselves as operating in a synergistic manner in an environment where politics and the society are intertwined. This calls for moral performance as one must have self-discipline and commitment to the continuance of democracy, where one must accommodate group judgment for the public (Cox, 2009). Public Administration and Democratic Governance Because public administration is centred on bureaucracy, it has been reduced to a subservient role and as such, participation in the continuance of democracy has been limited. For democratic governance to exist and thrive there has to be leader who are motivated and have strong discretion so as to use their judgment to advocate for public interest; and at the same time wary and engaged citizens who are aware of public administration issues and care profoundly for democratic governance. This outlook then opposes the dichotomous relationship between public administration and politics, as the latter makes the former its subordinate. Elected and appointed officials in public administration have technical expertise and can operate on neutral ground and as such should actively participate in protecting the public against tyranny from politicians and cultivate an engaged and wary electorate. This essentially means that public administrators should be involved in managing problems associated with democratic governance where this can be achieved by empowering them with knowledge on political issues so that they can exercise judgment similar to that of a political leader. It is important to note that a diplomat is different from a politician primarily based on the level of moral performance and ethical standards between the two; the former operates with sense of duty and obligation to the public and the latter is guided by selfish interests based on personal gain (Morgan et al, 2010). Conclusion Public administration is plagued with inadequacy based on inefficiency and poor motivation of employees and this is what effectively differentiates it from private sector administration. Besides this, the static nature of the structure of government institutions prevents public administration from being perceptive and adaptable to changes and transformation especially derived from intellectual insights. Attention needs to be drawn to this where scholars and researchers at educational institutions dealing with public administration should look deeper into the subject; especially concerning the inability to embrace change and transformation. Without a doubt, politics plays a manipulative role in public administration and as such, there should be an equal partitioning of the two where it should also be noted that politics is not value-free. Similarly, the restraining effect of bureaucracy should be addressed as this contributes to the inefficiency of public administration (Rabin et al, 2007). This brings in the importance of adopting a wider view of public administration by looking at practices worldwide through the study of comparative analysis, where the study is not just limited to study of foreign governments. Analyses need to be drawn by comparing the U.S public administration to others and encompassing study of human behaviour as stipulated by the positive theory. The subject of democratic governance should be emphasized concerning improving capabilities of public administrators in order to enable them exercise strong discretion. All this will ensure that public administration is indeed revived, as the core areas of concern will be tackled. References  Pacek, L. (2010). Fundamental Differences between Leaders in Public and Private Organizations. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/3481145/Fundamental_Differences_in_Leadership_in_Public_and_Private_Organizations Demir, T., & Nyhan, R. C. (2008). The politics-administration dichotomy: An empirical search for correspondence between theory and practice. Public Administration Review, 68(1), 81-96. Cane, P. (2011). Administrative Law. 5th Ed. Oxford University Press: Oxford. Khan, A., & Hildreth, W. (2004). Financial Management Theory in the Public Sector. Connecticut: Praegor Publishers Jreisat, J. E. (2005). Comparative public administration is back in, prudently. Public Administration Review, 65(2), 231-242. Cox, R. (2009). Ethics and Integrity in Public Administration: Concepts and Cases. New York: M.E. Sharpe, Inc. Morgan, D. F., Kirwan, K. A., Rohr, J. A., Rosenbloom, D. H., & Schaefer, D. L. (2010). Recovering, restoring, and renewing the foundations of american public administration: The contributions of herbert J. storing. Public Administration Review,70(4), 621-633. Rabin, J., Hildreth, W., Miller, G. (2007). Handbook of Public Administration. 3rd Ed. Taylor& Francis Group: Florida Read More