| Abstract: | Abstract: In this paper we first examine the dominant instrumental paradigm of organization, and the critique to which it has been subjected from both social action theory and a more structural analysis of organizational life. Secondly, we draw on critical theory to construct an alternative paradigm. This addresses some of the problems left by critiques of the dominant paradigm, focuses on the relationship between structure and action, and the way in which each of these constitutes, and is constituted by, the other. In the final section we outline the implications of this analytical approach for analysis and practice in public administration. Public administration is about what people do, but also about how this activity is perceived and talked about. This distinction between thought and practice is not the same as the distinction between the academic and the practitioner. Although the academic operates largely in the world of thought — through teaching, research and writing — the work of the practitioner also rests on foundations in the world of thought, namely, the perception of the organization as an instrument for the accomplishment of some purpose, and of the administrator as the controller of that instrument for the better achievement of the end. We contend that these approaches to analysis and practice mask significant aspects of the ways that relationships within and between organizational contexts come to be structured and conducted, and do not provide a basis for understanding or evaluating either organizational processes or the activities of managers within these. |
