Techniques and processes of administration

Abstract. Since the Glassco Commission in the early sixties there has been a plethora of administrative changes: Program Planning and Budgeting, Operational Performance Measurement Systems, Management by Objectives, and Cost/Benefit Analysis have all been introduced as technical panaceas. In terms of processes, some should probably have been changed but remain the same(such as the personnel selection-promotion process), while others have been circumvented (the regular budgetary process). Still others have been changed (the cabinet committee process) but have produced results of questionable value and perhaps positive harm to majority governments. It is contended that the Glassco injunction ‘let the manager manage’ and the assumption that private sector practices should be adopted by government, virtually without modification, ignore fundamental differences between the two sectors. The war between competing interest groups is inevitable and hence perpetual. Governments engage in a rolling set of compromises between factions in an essentially adversarial process under rules, formal and informal, that restrict the field of battle. Frequently, those who advocate administrative changes are in pursuit of their personal interests. They frequently find themselves in alliances with one or more of the contending parties who look upon them as guns for hire to be used or rejected on strategic grounds. After an impressionistic critique of each of the processes and techniques previously cited, the paper ends on a more positive note. There is a plea that the powers of the auditor general be expanded to encompass reporting upon (as distinct from undertaking) the extent to which a ministry is carrying out efficiency and effectiveness studies, where there is a consensus about the validity of the data and methodology. It is also suggested that the auditor general report upon the disposition of these studies with the aim of breaking down present secrecy barriers. A better informed public would change the incentive structure within which ministers, aided by officials, reach their decisions. Sommaire. Depuis la Commission Glasscoe, au début des années 60, il y a eu une pléthore de changements administratifs. La Planification et l'établissement des budgets par programme, les systèmes de mesure des performances opérationnelles, la gestion en function des objectifs, l'analyse des coûts et avantages, tous ces systèmes ont été utilisés comme panacées techniques. Du point de vue des processus, certains, qui auraient dû sans doute être changés ne l'ont pas été (comme par exemple la sélection du personnel et le processus de l'avancement) alors que d'autres ont été contournés (le processus budgétaire normal). D'autres encore ont été changEeAs (le processus des comités de cabinet) mais pour produire des résultats de valeur douteuse et parfois franchement défavorables pour les gouvernements majoritaires. L'auteur soutient que l'impératif de la Commission Glasscoe « laisser gérer les gestionnaires » et le postulat suivant lequel les pratiques du secteur privé devraien être adoptées pratiquement sans modification par les gouvernements ignorent les différences fondamentales qui existent entre les deux secteurs. La lutte entre des groupes aux intérêts divergents est inévitable, et done perpétuelle. Les gouvernements s'engagent dans tout un jeu de compromis dynamiques entre les différentes factions dans ce qui essentiellement un processus antagoniste, à l'intérieur de règies formelles ou non formelles, qui réduisent la portée du conflit. Fréquemment, ceux qui réclament des changements administratifs le font dans leur propre intérêt et ils se trouvent souvent alliés à un ou plusueurs des partis d'opposition qui les considèrent comme des mercenaires à utiliser ou rejeter pour des raisons stratégiques. Après une critique subjective des divers processus et techniques cités précédemment, l'auteur conclut sur une note plus positive. Il demande que les pouvoirs de l'Auditeur général soient étendus pour qu'il fasse connaître (et non pas pour qu'il étudie) la mesure dans laquelle les ministères effectuent des études sur l'efficience et l'efficacité, là où il existe un consensus quant à la validité des données et de la méthodologie. Il propose aussi que l'Auditeur général fasse rapport sur l'usage qui est fait de ces études, afin de supprimer le secret qui l'entoure actuellement. Un public mieux informé transformerait la structure de la motivation qui entoure actuellement les ministres qui prennent des decisions et leurs fonctionnaires.     

Anarchism, Internationalism and Nationalism in Europe, 1860–1939

This article is part of a broader project on the social history or histories of anarchism. The standard accounts of anarchism (Nettlau, Joll, Woodcock, Marshall etc.) have been combinations of the histories of ideas and political/social movements. A larger project I am engaged in uses another methodology and is reliant upon the vast outpouring of published and unpublished academic writing on social history that has been produced since the 1960s. I will cover only several interconnected themes here: anarchism, internationalism and nationalism in Europe. This article will give a synoptic overview of the internationalism of the European anarchist and syndicalist movements during the “classical” period of anarchism (1860–1939). It focuses on the First and Second Internationals and the birth of the Third. It examines the ideology and culture of Internationalism, which was the nursery of the modern anarchist movement. The linkage between federalist and regionalist republicanism is stressed and the legacy of the Paris Commune of 1871 is highlighted. The desire to secure a global level playing field in labour markets promoted labour internationalism during the First International and a revival of this strategy by anarchists and syndicalists during the era of the Second International. The mismatch of industrial development and union density between industrialised Britain or Germany and artisanal and industrialising France and southern Europe limited internationalism in the 1860s and the 1900s. Equally the patriotic legacy of the Commune of Paris undermined the internationalism of anarchists and syndicalists when war broke out in 1914. In 1917–1918 anarchist and syndicalist internationalism seemed to be revived as Europe entered a period of revolutionary discontent. But very quickly the Bolsheviks and the Soviet Union channelled this wave into the Third International and ultimately the interests of the newly born Soviet State. Anarchist and syndicalist internationalism had little effect on the fortunes of the anarchists in the Spanish Civil War in a world of nation‐states and state‐centric political parties and movements.     

Identity Style,Parental Authority,and Identity Commitment

The role that parental authority patterns and social-cognitive identity styles may play in establishing identity commitments was investigated. The results indicated that family authority and identity style variables combined accounted for 50% of the variation in strength of identity commitment. As hypothesized, the relationship between parental authority and identity commitment was mediated by identity style. The findings are consistent with the view that family authority patterns may contribute to the way in which late adolescents negotiate the task of constructing a sense of identity. Alternative explanations of the findings are considered.     

Corruption, Reform, and Virtue Ethics

Books reviewed in this article:
Gerald E. Caiden, O.P. Dwivedi, and Joseph Jabbra (eds.), Where Corruption Lies
Susan Rose-Ackerman, Corruption and Government: Causes, Consequences, and Reform
Peter Kobrak, Cozy Politics: Political Parties, Campaign Finance, and Compromised Governance
Raymond J. Devettere, Introduction to Virtue Ethics: Insights of the Ancient Greeks     

State Reform in Turkey: Reasons, Needs and Strategies

The state structure in Turkey including all its branches of government (executive, legislative and judicial) at both the national and local levels has been shown to be ineffective, even irrelevant, to the ingrained demographic, social, economic and political exigencies of the country. One of the main reasons behind this is the collapse of public finance. Conventional rhetoric limiting solutions to administrative reform fails to provide a sufficiently broad enough context within which public sector reform in Turkey can be discussed. Turkey's determination to become a full member of the EU also necessitates a comprehensive and radical overhaul of the Turkish public sector with respect to efficiency and productivity. Five main strategies are proposed to assist Turkey in overcoming its state governance predicament: initiating and carrying out a state-wide reform by employing modern principles of public management; understanding and solving the problem of internal and external debts; enhancing the conditions of governance; reintroduc-ing and strengthening the principle of meritocracy in public sector and cooperating more with the EU.