Symposium: Professionalization and professionalism in public administration

The Symposium on Professionalization and Professionalism in Public Administration, contained in this volume of The International Journal of Public Administration, presents some of the most recent outlooks of prominent scholars and practitioners in the field. They have offered their research and insights into a subject of perennial importance. They have charted the significant progress being made in public administration toward its professional development. This collection of refereed articles is a survey updating the evolution of the field in this regard. Several features are noteworthy. First, the articles are arrayed from general to specific--that is, from theoretical presentations and overviews to case studies. Second, the case studies have been arranged from the federal level to sub-national jurisdictions. Third, the Symposium examines not only professional developments in public administration but also the mechanisms engendering and supporting such changes--namely, associations and formal higher education.

In addition to their other relationships, the articles also bear epistimological links to one another. A precis of these contributions makes this point evident. The first article, “Specifying Elements of Professionalism and the Process of Professionalization” by John J. Gargan, offers an interdisciplinary perspective on these two concepts. His coverage suggests that characteristics of a profession are no different for public administration than they are for other disciplines in the social sciences or in the natural sciences as well, although the seventh essay in this symposium challenges this perspective. Gargan posits that all professions, developed as well as evolving, concern themselves with three broad issues: (1) theory generation (the creation of basic knowledge and the formation, alteration, or replacement of paradigms); (2) theory translation and advocacy (the establishment of education processes); and (3) theory implementation and routinization (the applications of knowledge to human affairs through standardized practice). All three processes are concomitants of one another, and public administration has been no exception.

The second contribution, “Public Official Associations and Professionalism” by Jeremy F. Plant and David S. Arnold, develops the second and third issues presented in Gargan's essay. They focus on the roles of associations as illustrations of a genre of education processes and as vehicles for bringing a greater degree of homogeneity to the field of public administration. Furthermore, they postulate that, in seeking to fulfill these roles, associations have been moving toward convergence. Their typology stipulates the existence of two kinds of public administration associations: (1) professional-specialist and (2) political-generalist. The first type, made up of public servant careerists, including members of federal and state senior executive services, has been becoming more political whereas the second kind, consisting of elected political officials (especially governors, mayors, and legislators) has been proceeding in a managerial direction, regardless of party affiliation and ideology. Both types of organizations are melding since they have become increasingly symbiotic hybrids. The authors captured this trend when they commented: “As players in the policy arena, professional association and generalist, political associations are increasingly finding ways to work together.”

The third essay, “The Ideology of Professionalism in Public Administration: Implications for Education” by Curtis Ventriss, also extends Gargan's work but in a narrower way than the Plant-Arnold article. Ventriss focuses on theory translation and advocacy not from an associational standpoint but from the vista of higher education. He fears that the pedagogical regime for public administration is succeeding too well in professionalizing the field and in thus making it more valuable in serving the state. He argues that professionalism tends to constrain thought in the discipline so that it cannot readily conceive of purposes apart from such service. This alleged parochialism detracts from what Ventriss thinks the primary purpose of public administration ought to be: the inculcation of citizenship. Radically, he proposes an end to traditional public administration instructional programs but scattering their elements among other disciplines. He questions implicitly the distinction, going back to Woodrow Wilson, between techniques, which can be value neutral, and their applications, which can involve normative choices. Stated another way, he asks whether public administration can be made safe for democracy because he doubts but hopes, like Frederick Mosher, that universities can perform such a function.

The fourth article, “The Future of Professionalization and Professionalism in Public Administration: Advancements, Barriers, and Prospects” by the co-editors of this symposium, is the last presentation falling within the framework of Gargan's piece. Whereas Gargan sought to delineate the nature of professional status, Gazell and Pugh examine the extent to which the field has reached this long-sought goal. They explore six broad areas of advancement and an equal number of obstacles and conclude that, despite widespread popular animus toward governments at all levels, the prospects of the field are favorable, mainly because of an expanding public need for its services. The authors view professionalization (process) and professionalism (result) as fully compatible with the achievement of a genuinely democratic state. In fact, the authors see professional status for public administration as necessary for making representative governments effective enough either to survive or become more democratic. There is always a risk that professional development could eventually become an end in itself, threatening the achievement of a pervasive democratic order. Implicit in the article are the ideas that the nexus between effectiveness and democracy is curvilinear but that the quest for effectiveness through professionalism has not yet reached a point of diminishing returns--that is, threatening democratic evolution.

The fifth presentation, “Professionalizing the American States in the 1990s” by Beverly A. Cigler, is the first of a series of essays reporting on the progress of professionalism in government at various levels. The author furnishes an overview of professional developments in state governments throughout the nation. In particular, she meticulously catalogs efforts toward professionalism in the executive branches of such governments, although coverage of the judicial and legislative branches would be necessary for a complete picture. However, such an expansion would have taken her far beyond the scope of her article. Especially notable is her exploration of executive reorganizations, commissions on effectiveness, and multi-agency initiatives. She sums up a potpourri of efforts, often gubernatorially inspired and sustained, by remarking: “Collectively, the various activities pursued by the states have the potential to change what government does and how it operates.” She sees executive-branch professionalization and professionalism as steps toward revitalizing (or reinventing) government at the state level.

The sixth article, “Professionalization within a Traditional Political Culture: A Case Study of South Carolina” by Steven W. Hays and Bruce F. Duke, represents a specific example of what Cigler covers generally. Hays and Duke make at least three significant contributions. One is that they chronicle the earliest movements toward professionalism in a state, leading to the possibility that it has had similar origins in other jurisdictions at this level of government. A second contribution is that such change can take place despite a spate of systemic obstacles such as decentralized personnel systems, fragmented political authority, and an absence of gubernatorial support. A third feature is the presentation of an interstate model for measuring professional development, including such criteria as public management certification, graduate degrees, and formal ethical codes. Despite various structural problems the authors argue: “Considering the distance traveled and the obstacles overcome, there is no disputing the conclusion that tremendous progress has occurred over the past two decades [in South Carolina].”

The seventh study, “Professional Leadership in Local Government” by Ruth Hoogland DeHoog and Gordon P. Whitaker, presents an overview of professionalization and professionalism at the local level. What is novel here is the suggestion that professionalism at this level of government may be different than at other realms of government and than in the private sector. Broadly speaking, the primary difference is that professionalism in the public sector, especially in government, involves less autonomy because of greater accountability for appointed and elected officials. In particular, there are three salient distinctions: a respect for expertise on the part of elected officials, deference to their legitimacy and authority, and an additional acceptance of responsibility to the people at large (that is, the public interest). Also stressed is a greater role of ethics in professional development with a highlighting of the role of the International City Management Association's efforts to bring improvement in this area. For instance, the authors point out: “Managers must learn these values through professional education, professional association contacts, and work with other professionals in local government.”

The eighth article in this symposium, “The Possibility of Professionalism in County Management” by James H. Svara, complements the DeHoog-Whitaker essay by providing a case study focusing on local public management in one state: North Carolina. Svara interviewed a cross-section of county executives and concerned himself with the extent of their professionalization and professionalism. To illuminate these developments, he compared the positions of county and city managers, using the latter as a model towards whom the former aspire. Generally, he found, that county executives have less authority (that is, fewer administrators under their direct control) than their municipal counterparts. However, he also discerned a narrowing gap between these two kinds of officials because of similar pre-job and in-service training received by them and the elected officials to whom they report. In addition, he noted that almost all of the counties in this state now have professional executives and that their advancement has been substantial.

The ninth--and final--contribution, “Decentralization and Initiative: TVA Returns to its Roots” by John G. Stewart and Rena C. Tolbert, is significant in at least four respects. First, the essay presents another case study of professional development--but at the local headquarters of a federal agency: Knoxville, Tennessee. Second, this research centers on professionalization and professionalism in a third (or mixed) sector organization--namely, a public corporation rather than a governmental agency. Third, the professional development of the TVA is distinctive because it has been internally generated, especially due to the efforts of its early leaders (David E. Lilienthal and Gordon R. Clapp), rather than externally imposed, as in the previous case studies. This provenance is analogous to what often takes place in the corporate sector. Lilienthal was instrumental in promoting organizational decentralization and grass-roots democracy as approaches toward improving the viability of a controversial governmental innovation, one widely regarded as “socialistic” at and after its inception. Clapp fostered a managerial culture promoting employee initiative, easy access to top executives, organizational teamwork, labor-management collaboration, and partnerships with states and localities through councils and conferences. Fourth, the authors traced professional development in the TVA through what in this symposium is a unique pattern: strong early efforts, retrenchment through bureaucratization, and, recently, a return to the agency's roots.     

The ideology of professionalism in public administration: implications for education

One of the most influential themes in contemporary public administration is the focus on professionalism. As Dwight Waldo has argued, public administration should act as if it were a profession even if there is hardly any chance of becoming one. This article will explore the pedagogical implications of the ideology of professionalism on education, and how it has impacted the intellectual development of the field. It will be argued that the intellectual baggage of professionalism poses critical challenges to the meaning and substantive purpose of public administration.     

Specifying elements of professionalism and the process of professionalization

The redefinition of occupations as professions has been a defining characteristic of the past century. Professions are based in bodies of esoteric knowledge and related skills. Organizational structures associated with professions include advanced university programs and professional associations. Both the schools and the associations socialize neophyte and career professionals to exemplary practices and criteria of ethical behavior. Over time, the success of a profession depends upon developments in three domains of activity: theory generation, theory translation and advocacy, and theory implementation and routinization.     

Public service: present problems,future prospects

The concept of public service, which is too often approached simplistically, is worthy of both support and serioui reexamination. Contributors to this symposium provide four distinct perspectives which, taken as a whole, provide an optimistic view of possibilities for solving problems associated with this necessary and productive link in our social fabric.     

Purpose and practice in public administration education: The place of substantive public policy areas

Public administration's early identification with the concept of a strong executive has resulted in an emphasis on staff functions in its graduate education programs. In the practicing world, staff functions are viewed as tools employed in the actual practice of public administrators, namely the delivery of substantive public services. Although public administration is characterized as an applied field, it does not focus its theory building and educative efforts on that which practicing public administrators actually do. The field necessarily imports other disciplines, but it does not provide the unique focus that would justify this borrowing; its current research agenda and training curricula are available in other disciplines. Public administration graduate students should concentrate in individual substantive policy areas, and the field should focus on optimizing organizational arrangments for delivering societal knowledge as public services. Interorganizational theory can provide the common theoretical framework necessary to mitigate the centrifugal effects of a variety of “administrations” within the field. The approach developed by J. Kenneth Benson is outlined; it provides a unique theoretical niche for public administration, yields a framework for comparative analysis, and defines the field's relationship to political science.     

Teaching public administration,public management and policy analysis: some international comparisons

This article compares the design and content of domestic and foreign programs for teaching public administration and management. At the Master's level, curriculum designers, irrespective of location, emphasize organization theory, personnel, policy analysis, and microeconomics. However, domestic programs place much more emphasis on research methods and budget management. International programs place more emphasis on public law and management information systems. At this time, neither domestic nor international programs report much required training in leadership, bargaining, or institutional design.     

Public administration in hong kong: Crises and prospects

Current studies on Hong Kong public administration have overlooked three emerging crises of the administrative system -- the crises of mediocrity, the public service, and the metapolicy -- which may result in a complete collapse of the colonial regime. The analysis reveals the following. Firstly, operating within a paradoxical context, civil servants find it difficult to maximize their contribution. Hard pressed by the delimma of “to strive for excellence or to observe medicoirty,” many choose the latter. Thus, the overall performance of many Hong Kong public agencies and civil servants is unacceptable. Secondly, at the absence of a political theory which redefines the relationship between the political system and socio-economic system and thus the mission of the public service, many civil servants lack commitment to the public service and therefore the norm of medicority is reinforced. And thirdly, the government has reformulated its metapolicy in a way that system overloading is likely, thus making Citizen insubordination probable. It is conclusded that the future of Hong Kong is bleak and that remedial actions are awaiting: the first task is the quest for a new set of political ideology and public philosohgy; the next is reformulation of a new metapolicy, followed by forceful pulbic sector management reform.     

The temporal,social, and responsiveness dilemmas of public personnel administration

Public personnel administration is confronted by three intertwined dilemmas. Responsiveness to political leadership is essential to a democracy. Yet placing responsibility for personnel administration in the hands of political appointees introduces a transcience that is incompatible with a sustained commitment to organizational improvement through applications of the behavioral sciences. Vesting careerists with personnel administration authority is the best way to address the three dilemmas. Doing so will require a rapprochement with political leaders, one that establishes a normative orientation to personnel administration in which responsiveness to policy leadership is asserted along with other essential values associated with public service.     

Science,technology, and public administration: the government-university nexus

The relations between governments and universities, particularly with respect to science and technology, is traced from the agricultural period and the land-grant era to the research and development era involving particularly the fields of medicine and defense, to the modern era which is lacking a coherent national policy.

Among the institutional relations that are critical to science, technology, and public administration, those involving government-university linkages stand out. In the past, there have been two major eras of government/university relations: the land-grant era and the federal mission agency era. More recently, a third era has emerged—what we call the new federalist era. The first period featured a decentralized institutional model focused on a single economic sector: agriculture. The second was characterized by a more centralized federally dominated approach. This third era is still evolving. Its primary ingredients include university ties with many segments of industry. And government includes that as well as federal agency roles.

During the land-grant era, dating from 1862, a large number of universities, devoted initially to problems of agriculture and the mechanical arts, were created. The era was characterized by a research system involving a federal agency, state government, universities, and an industry of individuals with little or no research capability. It was a highly decentralized system, responsive to multiple needs throughout the country, with a heavy emphasis on technology transfer. It gave the initial impetus to the university in fashioning an applied role. Whatever else may be said about this system—good or bad—it certainly made the American agricultural industry more productive.

In the federal mission agency era, dating from World War II, federal agencies spent vast sums to pursue national goals in defense, space, energy, and other fields by creating programs supporting universities. On the expectation there would eventually be practical payoffs, federal agencies supported basic research largely on the universities’ terms. States were not involved in any significant degree. Industry was, of course, very much a part of this system, but in the case of defense and space, it was primarily as developers of technology for government rather than users of technology for civilian goals.

This system worked unevenly. The greatest continuity was the Department of Defense (DOD) as a sponsor of research and development, including research in universities. That is what was seen as a problem in the era of Vietnam. For many critics, it is a problem today, with Star Wars merely the most dramatic example of a too close university involvement with DOD.

There were discontinuities in most of the areas of federal mission agency support. At the time of Minnowbrook I, the desire was to redeploy science and technology to other mission areas that would improve the human condition. The process was difficult, as various domestic agencies had problems establishing and maintaining relations with science and technology. In the 1980s, most of the civilian programs were cut back and the energy program was slated to be eliminated altogether.

Today, the United States research system, and thus the government-university partnership, is in a new-federalist era of science and technology. Here, the federal government, state governments, industry, and universities cooperate and collide as each tries to make the most of several new technologies now emerging with a perceived high economic potential. Meanwhile, the university-DOD relationship has been rebuilt after a decade of rupture. In an environment of increasing global competition, the old institutional models are giving way to novel arrangements.

What has happened is that a new mission—a new problem or opportunity—has become more salient in the 1980s. This is the mission of economic development and competitiveness. Economic competitiveness is a broad and diffuse mission. The juxtaposition of this mission with science and technology is because a good part of this competition is expected to be waged on the frontier of new technology. Japan, in particular, has made technological leadership in the cluster of fields cited above a national imperative, and other nations are following suit.⁽¹⁾

No federal mission agency is clearly identified with, much less in charge of, a mission. Indeed, the mission has not been officially proclaimed but exists only as a rallying cry. The question to be resolved is whether the present scattered response is enough, or if a more comprehensive national policy should be established. If established, should a new federal mission agency be set in motion to lead the assault—perhaps one modeled after the Japanese MITI? If so, how would it relate to the other players? Given the role of the states in particular, it would seem that a cooperative model drawing on federal and state resources might be designed.     

Professionalism and public administration: A bibliography

Abstract

This paper tests public budgeting to ascertain if it has both a long‐run equilibrium and short‐run incremental process. In the model, the decision‐maker strives to achieve budgetary balance over the long‐run but is constrained in the short‐run and follows incremental decision‐making. The interaction between expenditures and revenues, along with several control variables, is tested for each of the Canadian provinces using data between 1961 and 2000. The results show that in the long‐run, expenditures force the budget toward balance in all the provinces with the exception of British Columbia. In that province, there was a fiscal synchronization of revenues and expenditures working in combination. In the short‐run, incrementalism occurs in nine of the ten provinces.     

Chinese public administration: misunderstanding and implications

This paper argues that current research works on Chinese public administration are atheoretical or pre-theoretical, that findings generated could not serve as a basis for the development of a general (or medium-range) theory of Chinese public administration or Chinese bureaucratic behavior, and that atheoretical or pre-theoretical research contributes very little to advancement of usable knowledge for problem-solving. The foci of the discussion in this paper are four major fallacies and problems, namely, over-simplification of causes, misformation of concept, stereotyping, and non-usable knowledge. It is concluded that China scholars should be more theoretically rigorous and work with their counterparts in China in order to contribute to theory-building and practical problem-solving.     

Public administration and public policy: old perspectives,new directions

Public administration has rather studiously avoided serious consideration of its ties to public policy throughout most of this century. The politics/administration dichotomy leaves a lasting legacy. Policy has a central place in the ongoing effort to explain what public administration is and how it functions. Policy defines the purpose of agencies, stipulates much of the detail about their organization, provides authority and legitimacy, and makes them important -- probably the most important--instruments of policy effectuation and evaluation. Public administration has traditionally displayed an interest in management; it has been studied, taught, and practiced as method, “how to.” This instrumentalist orientation has addressed successively different perspectives, all subsumed within the rubric of public administration. The first of these emphasized administrative reform, followed by an interest in scientific management. These left a legacy that largely treated administration as an end in itself, divorced from matters of policy. Further developments during the depression and post-war years gave prominence to human relations and decisionmaking. These newer orientations emphasized public administration's non-involvement with policy, although decisionmaking proved less inward-oriented and contributed some methodological insights for better understanding policy's ties to public administration. Decisionmaking's preoccupation with unifunctional organizations accountable to a single power center has proved a formidable obstacle to empirical investigations of policy/administration ties, however. This dilemma calls for new perspectives from which to study these ties; one promising perspective is the examination of administrative involvement in successive stages of the policy process.     

The ethical foundations of american public administration

From the founding of the Republic to the age of Jackson, Federalist administrators dominated the federal public service, infusing it not only with a high level of ethics, but also with an active religious covenant that gave the new Republic a fundamental political purpose. That convenant was eventually lost, but has been restored a few times in our history. By comparison, the modern respect for the privateness of political power is poorly suited to support an ethical and committed public service.     

Luther gulick,public administration and classical management

The late Luther Gulick (1892-1993), often known as the dean of U.S. public administration, left behind him an enormous and wide-ranging literary corpus, but no single systematic work. This essay presents both a personal and an intellectual portrait of Gulick. The personal portrait is accomplished primarily through Gulick's own words derived from relevant published works, autobiographical fragments, and a series of interviews with the author. The intellectual portrait concentrates on a single stream. of thought--classical organization theory and design--and outlines the evolution of Gulick's thought through time, with comments here and there.     

The difficulty with ethics education in public administration

This article suggests that ethics education has not become a regular part of the public administration curriculum for two reasons: (1) the issue has been misperceived as a pedagogical problem, and, more importantly, (2) the field has developed three competing paradigms for moral conduct-do what is right, do good, and do no harm. The origins of each paradigm and the implications for the teaching of ethics in public administration are discussed.     

Ethics and public administration: critique and reconstruction

In the post-Watergate era, many observers saw the renewed interest in administrative ethics as a passing fad. Now, over a decade later, the continued interest in this area belies this judgment. Indeed, this increased concern with administrative ethics is rooted in the realization that administration is as much an ethica, as technical pursuit. One cannot read John Rohr's "Ethics in Public Administration: A State of the Discipline Report," delivered at the 1986 ASPA Conference, without receiving the distinct impression that administrative ethics is an area of practice and study that is experiencing a profound upheaval. Views are diverse and often inchoate. Assumptions behind ethical prescr- ptions are still frequently unstated and unexamined. In addition, we still continue to seek techniques that will ensure administrative ethicality without understanding the nature of the ethical problems confronted in public administration and the reasons they are confronted. In short, there exists a need for theoretical clarification and classification in the area of ethics and public administration.     

Asian immigration to Australia: past trends and future prospects

Recent trends in immigration trends to Australia from Asia are analyzed, and future prospects are considered. Concerns about the ethnic composition of the population due to different levels of Asian immigration are emphasized, as are the policy options available to affect immigration levels.     

Private administration of a public function: The news election service

The United States government has no elections office and does not attempt to administer congressional and presidential elections. The responsibility for the administration of elections and certification of winners in the United States national elections rests with the states. The states divide election administration responsibilities between state and local election officials, whose objective is an efficiently administered honest election, with the ballots correctly tabulated. The formal structure of election administration in the United States is not capable of providing tirely results of the presidential and congressional election. Similar structural difficulties in other policy areas often result in ad hoc operating agreements or informal cooperation among agencies at different levels of the federal system. In the case of election administration, however, the public officials have abdicated responsibility for election night aqgregation of the national Vote totals to a private organization, News Election Service, which is owned by five major news organizations. This private organization performs without a contract, without public compensation, and without supervision by public officials. It makes decisions concerning its duties according to its own criteria. The questions of responsibility and accountability have not arisen in part because of the private organization's performance record and in part because the responsibility was assumed gradually over a lengthy period without ever being evaluated as an item on the public agenda.