Public_Administration__Discretion_of_Power

Abstract This paper will look at the advantages and disadvantages of whether Public Administrators should only be allowed to follow a restricted set of rules according to Max Weber’s rules of public administration or allowed to have some amount of discretion in the discharging of their duties. There are two articles from our course handbook that will be used to examine both sides of the argument showing the advantages and disadvantages of the restricted set of rules theory and the advantages and disadvantages of allowing the administrator some discretion in the discharging of their duties. The two articles from our handbook “How Kristin Died” and “William Robertson: Exemplar of Politics and Public Management Rightly Understood” give prime examples of both methods of Public Administrative actions and also illustrate the short comings of each. Max Weber believed that the more dehumanized the people were the better the system would run (Stillman II, 2010, p.60). This paper examines both sides of the argument for and against Max Weber’s Public Administration theory and concludes that allowing some discretion is the overall best way for public administrators to address the various complexities of public administration, but not without oversight as a way to maintain public trust. Public Administration is always changing, not in the meaning of the word, but in who holds the position at any given time. Each new official has his or her way of doing things and thought processes, priories, what needs to be done, how to address issues and their own styles of leadership. The role of Public Administrator is such that whoever assumes the position needs to be a person who is capable of multi-tasking, an aggressive outside the box thinker who can address current issues and agendas while running a public department. Keeping all parties, agencies and citizens informed in an ever changing environment that can get very politically charged at a moment’s notice is not an easy task. As with any point of view there are always two sides to look at and with the issue of the public administrator’s role this is no different. The issue of keeping the officials restricted by only allowing him to follow existing rules that keep him within a structured framework or allowing him the versatility of using all tools available to him to get the project completed has been argued for many years. When Max Weber wrote his paper on Public Administration things were not as complex as they are today, they were a lot simpler and his theory was based on the rigid structured administration in Germany. The benefit of a restricted bureaucracy allows for the public administrator to only hone in on their little piece of the pie. Being responsible for only what is listed in their job description, being technically responsible for that area only without overlapping responsibility for other areas. Although this make the job easier those who work in the field they must be the experts in that area but they are only experts in that one area working from fixed set of rules with no deviation. Max Weber’s theory for public administration was put into layman’s term in an article in BusinessMates.org it stated [the jurisdictional areas are clearly specified, and each area has a specific set of official duties and rights that cannot be changed at the whim of a leader. The division of labor should minimize arbitrary assignments of duties found in more traditional structures in which the division of labor was not firm and regular, and in which the leader could change duties at any time] (BusinessMate.Org, 2012). This style of public Administration was seen in action in the article “How Kristin Died” in the one instance Kristin had called a Mr. Ellenhorn who was a counselor at Emerge an educational program for abusive men and it stated in the article. [When Cartier showed up at Emerge’s offices in Cambridge, around April 28th Ellenhorn was on duty and realized who Cartier was when he wrote down Kristin name under victim on the intake form. Ellenhorn asked Cartier “Are you on probation'” “I’m going to need the name of the probation officer.” Cartier said “[Expletive] this. No way,” With that Cartier ripped up the contract he was required to sign, ripped up the intake form, put the tattered papers in his pocket and walked out] (Stillman II, 2010, p.65). In this instance Mr. Ellenhorn was operating according to Weber’s administrative theory, he did his job according to what he was allowed to do based on the rules his agency had in place. The disadvantage was He had information that could have saved Kristin life had that information been passed on to those agencies who could have stopped Cartier from his abusive ways by revoking his parole and placing him in jail. Throughout this article each department did what it was supposed to do and each person handled their job as the subject matter expert but only in their area of responsibility. All the evidence was there for putting away Cartier it just wasn’t brought together to make a complete picture. You see this everyday in many public administrative jobs where the employee will tell you “sorry but I don’t handle that or I don’t know anything about that I only work with these issues.” It allows for complacency in the workplace and a complete lack of human interaction which is needed build trust in our Public administration, doing only enough to get your part of the job done forcing customers to have to see multiple people to get all the information needed. Although Weber conceives efficiency and productivity can be achieved by a bureaucratic system, he was still aware of its faults as demonstrated by the reality that he also associated it with “an overwhelming routine adverse to individual freedoms” (Fry, 1989, p.33). . He also recognized that a bureaucratic system restricts private freedom and makes it unmanageable for people to realize their actions. More significantly, bureaucracy prefers what Weber named the “deformed character of the specialties” (Fry, 1989, p.33). Allowing a public administrator to have a certain amounts of discretion in carrying out his assigned duties allows for that person to maximize his or her potential and job performance. Being able to think outside the box, looking outside their immediate areas of responsibility to make sure they have covered all scenarios that could affect their area either directly or indirectly, looking at the bigger picture not just one area to make sure they have covered all possible issues. This type of public administration was seen in a couple of the articles we read. The best one was in the article “William Robertson: Exemplar of Politics and Public Administration Rightly Understood” Mr. Robertson not only handled his area of responsibility but went further, thinking outside the box when it came to working with the people, getting the job done and getting the citizens involved to help him get funding by pressuring their elected officials. There are a couple of instance in the article where Mr. Robertson took matters into his own hands. In the article it stated that [during the winter of 2005, Los Angeles was hit by a series of heavy rainstorms that flooded streets, deteriorated infrastructure, caused devastating mudslides, and opened sinkholes on public roadways.” Throughout this winter season, Robertson worked without a day off and on the street with his crew. One informant described seeing Robertson at this time “drenched in water.” He worked alongside his employees in the rain, mud, and cold. His motivation to be out front in the storms – rather than in a central office –was based on his desire to lead by example]. (Stillman II, 2010, p. 91). In another situation he did it to cut through red tape to prevent possible injury to citizen. [Robertson reported the situation as involving a choice. On one hand he and the general manager could wait for the city council to authorize funds to perform tree maintenance. Alternatively, he could move forward without authorization. He chose the latter option and adopted a perspective that he feels all city managers should adopt –citywide perspective that is not bound by departmental lines of jurisdiction] (Stillman II, 2010, p.92). Finally Mr. Robertson stated in an interview “Although rules are important, there are too many of them. He maintains that as an administrator his position must have the flexibility to get to the point of a policy in any particular situation” (Stillman II, 2010, p. 93). Other examples were Mr. Robertson empowering his workers so that they could take over in the event he wasn’t there being able to get things done in his absence without missing a beat. This method allowed Mr. Robertson to be able to multi-task and do it effectively and efficiently. The downside to this type of public administration is the fact when he delegates authority those he delegates the authority to might not be as honest and forthcoming with others causing distrust and claims of mismanagement. It also leaves the door open for Mr. Robertson or others he empowers to push his/their agenda without checks in place to make sure it is being done above board. There are more advantages than disadvantages in allowing public administrators to use some discretion in carrying out their assigned duties. They must be allowed to work through solving the complex issues and problems, and dealing with show stoppers in a timely and cost effective manner. There is still the need for some type of over watch and those measures need to be in place to make sure abuse of power doesn’t happen and the trust earned by the public administrators isn’t foolishly lost due to someone who is in for himself and his agenda. References: Stillman II, R. J. (2010). Public administration concepts and cases. (9th ed.). Boston Ma: Wadworth Cengage Learning. BusinessMate.Org. (2012, MAY 05). Max weber's theory of bureaucracy. Retrieved from http://www.businessmate.org/Article.php'ArtikelId=30 Fry, B. R. (1989). Mastering public administration: from Max Weber to Dwight Waldo. Chatham House Publishers.