POL 228 Final Study Guide PDF

1. Accountability is deemed a critical part of democratic governance. What makes the government accountable? How can we generate measures of accountability? - Accountability in democratic government is the responsibility laid on each public officer to account for his decisions and action...

1. Accountability is deemed a critical part of democratic governance. What makes the government accountable? How can we generate measures of accountability? - Accountability in democratic government is the responsibility laid on each public officer to account for his decisions and actions. Woodrow Wilson, in "The Study of Public Administration," claims that accountability ensures that the public servants act in the public interest rather than their own political and private interests. Accountability comes through transparency in the decisions making procedures. As James Wilson describes in "Bureaucracy", the openness allows the people to look into the behaviors that could be held against them by the public servants. And as Weber's bureaucratic theory illustrates, set policies and procedures make administrators accountable, mainly because it keeps their arbitrariness at bay, allowing equal treatment. 2. How is running a government like and unlike running a business? - Although managing a business and a government both include resource allocation and decision-making, there are several notable distinctions. James Q. Wilson says that public benefit, not profit, is the goal of the government, which produces different incentives for decision-making than for companies that pursue financial gain. While efficiency is a concern for both corporations and governments, Woodrow Wilson's analysis of the struggle between political leaders and administrators highlights how responsiveness to citizens' interests and bureaucratic efficiency frequently clash in government. 3. What is the policy cycle and how does it affect policy decisions? Which part is the most difficult to manage for public administrators? Why? - The policy cycle includes agenda-setting, policy formulation, implementation, and evaluation. The reading that comes to me is Pressman & Wildavsky “Implementation” which they had mentioned the most difficult stage of the policy cycle for public administrators is policy implementation. They note that even well-thought-out policies often go left in implementation due to coordination problems, lack of resources, or politics interfering. The public administrator has to overcome all these challenges while ensuring the success of the policy. 4. How does the political appointee process affect leadership? How does the mode of leadership affect public appointees? - How political appointees are chosen impacts leadership in public administration. Heclo's work, A Government of Strangers, depicts the fight between the elected political leaders and the career civil employees who carry out the day-to-day operations. The political appointees might let their personal political ambitions override the impartiality and professionalism of the civil officers. Maslow's human motivation theory also upholds that the leadership by the public appointees may have a bearing on how well they perform. Authoritarian leadership can harm creativity and team spirit, while a leadership style building trust and encouraging motivation will increase the productivity of your employees. 5. In the literature we have read about public administration, it has been described as a science, a profession, and/or a craft. Explain using the readings. In your opinion, which author's approach is the most convincing and why? - Yes it may be viewed that way because Woodrow Wilson views public administration as a science, mentioning the requirement of having a clear way through which to make governance better and fairer. On the other hand the job view part Max Weber relates to profession because of his emphasis on the need for trained and skilled employees that observe specific rules that will ensure fairness. Frederick Taylor's approach is more aligned to the craft view, seeking to improve work through scientific management approaches and practical modifications. Of these, Wilson's approach as a science is most compelling because it aligns with the idea of developing a coherent, evidence-based system of governance to ensure it is valid and efficacious. 6. What is the relationship between policy and politics? How does each affect the other? Must they be intertwined? Why? - In public administration, politics and policy are closely intertwined. Although political influences shape public administration, administrators must work to implement policies based on competence and objectivity, as noted by Woodrow Wilson and Max Weber. Wilson contends that administrators invariably engage with the political sphere as elected officials set the course of policy, contrary to Weber's bureaucratic model, which holds that administrators must keep their work and political influence apart. Since political decisions determine policy goals, politics and policy must therefore be interwoven. However, public administrators should make an effort to execute policies free from political bias. 7. Compare, contrast, and evaluate three theorists' approaches to modes of public decision-making. - Three influential theorists in decision-making within public administration are Herbert Simon, Charles Lindblom, and James Q. Wilson. Simon's bounded rationality explains that the limitations of information and cognitive ability constrain decision-makers to make satisfactory, not optimal, decisions. In contrast to Simon's approach, Lindblom's "muddling through" suggests that decision-makers take small steps rather than make grand, rational planning, adapting incrementally to problems. Wilson looks into the conflict between what the elected officials want and how bureaucrats make decisions. Of the concepts presented, Simon's theory is most useful because it recognizes the limits of public decision-making and offers a clearer way to understand how administration works in complicated situations. 8. In some countries, the bureaucracy is revered. Using at least two authors we have read this semester, why do you think that isn't the case in the US? - In the U.S., many people think of bureaucracy as bad because it seems inefficient and disconnected from the public. James Q. Wilson speaks to that in his book Bureaucracy, when he says that American bureaucrats are often viewed as rule-bound and  unresponsive. In contrast, other countries, such as those in Germany, where Weber's construct of bureaucracy is more accepted, see bureaucracies as stable and important to keeping things efficient and orderly. Wilson's criticism points out that bureaucratic jobs in the U.S. are politicized, therefore resulting in a lower regard for the people. Again, Heclo points out the predicament of American bureaucrats, who find themselves sandwiched between political appointees and the needs of the public, giving them a mixed opinion of public servants. 9. There have been many efforts to reform the American public administration. Select two approaches and compare and contrast them. Why has one been more successful than others in your opinion? - Two important reform efforts in American public administration are Reinventing Government, developed by Osbourne, and New Public Management. Osborne supports a more business-like government, focusing on policies that get results and allow for local decision-making that aims to make things work better and serve people well. NPM uses business management practices, such as the privatization of services and performance measurement. Osbourne's approach has worked better because it aims at changing the government to focus on results instead of just using business methods in public administration. It fits better with democratic goals of responsiveness and serving the public, unlike NPM's market-based ideas. 10. Key laments that there is no grand theory to explain "On what basis shall we allocate resources to program A instead of program B." Certainly, the authors we have read this semester have attempted to rectify that lack. In which ways does budgeting guide public administrative decision-making? 11. Throughout the semester, we have considered different ways of defining and organizing institutions in the public sector. In your opinion, which theory is most helpful in defining and organizing public institutions? Which theory is the least helpful? Why? - The Weberian bureaucratic model is useful as a theory in defining and organizing public institutions. It gives a clear and systematic way of ensuring a hierarchy, specialized roles, and clear rules that contribute to efficiency and accountability in a large organization. Max Weber points out the need for a structured bureaucracy where decisions are made based on knowledge and rules instead of personal connections or political influences. This model is very important in big government organizations where being consistent and fair is key to reaching public goals. On the other hand, NPM theory is less useful for running public institutions as it borrows too heavily from business ideas such as competition and efficiency in public administration, at the cost of public values like fairness, equality, and democratic accountability. While it is good to be efficient, NPM can ignore complex and public aspects of the public work. 12. At the federal level, how are regulations formed and implemented? What roles do regulations play in democratic governance? - Federal regulations are created in a multi-step process. First, the executive branch—primarily administrative agencies—proposes rules based on legislation passed by Congress. This process necessarily involves the public because of the requirement of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) for public comment periods. The public and interest groups participate in giving their views towards the final rulemaking. When rules are finalized, the agencies implement them through advice, condition checking, and ensuring that people comply with the rules. In democratic government, rules are really important because they turn general laws into clear, specific actions that can change the lives of individuals. James Q. Wilson, in Bureaucracy, says that rules help keep government actions fair and consistent but that the complicated procedures can sometimes slow down efficiency and responsiveness. But rules protect democratic values by making things predictable and ensuring that public policies are carried out as lawmakers intended. 13. Classical organization theory (Weber and Taylor) deals with the "systematic processes necessary to make bureaucracy more efficient and effective." What were their basic contributions to the development of classical organization theory? Whose ideas are more useful in your opinion? Why? - Important individuals in classical theory include Max Weber and Frederick Taylor. Weber's greatest contribution is the ideal bureaucratic model. This model concerns a formal, layered structure with a clear role of specialization of tasks and a set of rules to make sure administration is consistent and fair. This helps in creating stable governance structures, which are necessary for large organizations. Frederick Taylor, on the other hand, created scientific management. This method focuses on being efficient and productive by dividing tasks into small, measurable parts and using organized methods to improve performance. Taylor’s approach was new and helpful for making work better, but it is criticized for treating workers like machines and not considering human needs. I find Weber's ideas more helpful because they deal with big problems in bureaucracies, such as being neutral, having specialized roles, and making organizations work well in public administration. These are key to keeping fairness and responsibility in governance. Taylor focuses on machines and the division of tasks—something more relevant to private businesses and something that may not fully consider the democratic duties of public institutions. 14. Political and especially presidential transitions are considered potentially perilous. What risks are present and what can be done to limit those risks? - Presidential transitions can be risky because they can bring about uncertainty in policies, disrupt public services, and bring changes in leadership that can upset how the government works. James Q. Wilson, in Bureaucracy, observes that political appointees and civil servants are usually in conflict during transitions. The new leaders try to push  their plans, while the long-term bureaucrats want to maintain the current systems and policies. This tension can cause problems and confusion during the changeover time. To reduce these risks, clear plans for the transition and teamwork across different parties are very important. Creating transition teams that work closely with the current administration can help make handovers easier, ensuring that government functions stay the same. Also, having a nonpartisan, professional staff in the civil service may help things run smoothly while lessening the problems generated by political appointees that may not know how government works. 15. Are whistleblowers in public administration a sign of an effective or a failing administration? Democracy? (Is there a difference in the US context?) - Whistleblowers can show whether a government is doing well or not, depending on the situation. Good governments always encourage openness and accountability, and whistleblowing helps preserve the public interest and ethical public behavior. As Woodrow Wilson points out, public administration should be responsible to the people; whistleblowers help prevent misfeasance and corruption from taking place in government administrations. Sometimes, the whistleblowers reveal that something is amiss with the management. That could mean the administration is not doing their job correctly. In the U.S., whistleblowing plays a critical role in bolstering democracy by preventing corruption and ensuring that the government works for the public good. The Whistleblower Protection Act in the United States provides protection from retaliation, which helps to ensure that there would be an open and clear system of governance, even if it uncovers issues in the administration. ( Mnookin, The Psychic Wounds of Being a Whistleblower) 16. How can public administration affect the development of social infrastructure? Using examples, explain how and why does it matter? - Public administration plays a very crucial role in building social infrastructure through resource management, rule-making, and overseeing. Max Weber's bureaucratic model reveals that top-ranked public administrators work within a system of rules and levels, which helps change policies into actions. This guarantees that infrastructure projects are well done and fair. James Q. Wilson also says that public administrators help make sure resources are shared fairly for social programs. For example, the various New Deal programs initiated by the Roosevelt administration through federal agencies helped in the building of important infrastructures like roads, schools, and public housing, which in turn had far-reaching social growth. Public administration is important in that it ensures programs are carried out with responsibility, openness, and public checking. This helps ensure that the development of social infrastructure meets the needs of all people, especially those who are often overlooked. 17. In what ways can interest groups influence the making and implementation of public policy? - Interest groups impact public policy through agenda setting, conversations with legislators, and influence on government agencies' decisions. Charles Lindblom in The Science of Muddling Through demonstrates how interest groups can change the policymaking process by pushing for specific policies that match their goals, especially when small decisions are often made. Interest groups may also impact the implementation of policies by providing information to the agencies or by pressuring them to implement certain policies. According to James Q. Wilson, the influence of public administration may be wielded by interest groups through direct lobbying and contributing financially to campaigns; that in essence alters what elected officials and public administrators focus on in a democracy, where while interest groups are essential to express various opinions, they sometimes might capture the process of policy-making, potentially to the detriment of fairness and equity. 18. What are the similarities and differences between the Weberian bureaucratic model, scientific management, and organizational theory approaches to public administration? How have each shaped the particular American form of public administration? - Weberian bureaucracy emphasizes hierarchy, specialization, and rule-based decision-making in order to promote efficiency and neutrality in American administration. - Fredrick Taylor's scientific management is intended to make work more efficient, but in fact, it works better in private companies and, sometimes, can go against the values of public service. - Organizational theory with Herbert Simon's work focuses on decision-making, communication, and coordination, which helps create flexibility in management. - In the U.S., Weberian bureaucracy has had the most lasting influence, shaping a formal, rule-bound system, while scientific management and organizational theory have contributed to performance-driven reforms and adaptive leadership. 19. Describe the various theories for public administrative decision making. Which is the most useful and why? Which is the least useful and why? - Rational Decision-Making: This theory is based on Max Weber’s ideas and supports making decisions in a logical and organized way by using complete data and analysis. It assumes that administrators can look at all choices fairly and select the best one based on clear standards. - Incremental Decision-Making: Charles Lindblom proposed this idea, which says that decision-making usually involves small changes to current policies instead of big, complete changes. This way of thinking understands that there are limits to being completely rational and that political pressures can have an effect. - Garbage Can Model: Developed by Michael Cohen, James March, and John Olsen, this theory explains that decision-making within an organization can be messy. Problems,  solutions, people, and choices come together in a random way. Decisions happen when the right mix of these parts aligns—not always through careful thinking. - Bargaining and Political Decision-Making: This approach views how decisions are made in politics. Decisions result from bargaining and negotiation among various groups, such as interest groups and political leaders. - In my view, Incremental Decision-Making suits public administration best because it takes the political realities and limits of government agencies into consideration. Public administrators can rarely come up with perfect, rational decisions but have to invest among many more or less relevant political bargains and resource constraints in their work. This thereby helps public administrators carry out policy in a way that is practical and able to adapt to changing situations in light of focusing on making small, flexible decisions based on this theory. - The Garbage Can Model is probably the least useful, as it views the decision-making process as highly random and unorganized. This completely runs against the grain of efficiency and accountability, which are so dear to public administration. It may explain parts of the decision-making processes of organizations, but works less well in situations requiring clear, open, and careful processes. 20. Explain the evolution and structure of the civil service and how the shape of the service affects public administration and policy outcomes? - A few major periods can be traced in the development of civil service in the United States. Based on the original patronage or spoils system—whereby jobs in the government were granted through a political loyalty-based system and not based on merit—since the Pendleton Act of 1883, which established the civil service under the merit system, employees began to be appointed according to examination results and qualification and not necessarily due to political affiliations. The present civil service structure has been based on the merit system, which strives for professionalism, fairness, and accountability. It has comprised both career civil servants, who are nonpartisan, and political appointees, who are nominated through elected officials. Such duality in the structure gives way to both stability and flexibility within the public administration. The shape of the civil service has implications for public administration because policy decisions are implemented by professionals, experts in their fields. It has also had a bearing on the outcomes of policies in which long-term projects and initiatives are not interrupted by changes in politics. This influence of the appointees has created tensions between the permanent civil service and political leadership since the bureaucrats resist change in ways that conflict with their established practices. 21. Explain the roles of internal and external factors and actors in the administration of government? (I am asking you here specifically to think about the relationship between branches, departments, federalism, interest groups, and others). - The internal factors would include the organizational structure of government, for example, the relationship of the executive, legislative, and judicial branches. For instance,  the Department of Justice or the Environmental Protection Agency are some of the executive departments that implement laws passed by Congress and are subject to oversight by both the legislative (through hearings and funding decisions) and judicial (through judicial review) branches. The administrative state is also composed of internal actors: career bureaucrats and political appointees, whose interaction can shape policy outcomes. These external factors include interest group power, the media, public opinion, and other organizations—such as NGOs—or even international bodies. Interest groups lobby both the executive and legislative branches to help in shaping policy and gaining favorable regulations; they are instrumental in how policies are executed on the ground. Public opinion can mobilize the elected to act in response to concerns by citizens, and media can report favourably or critically on government action to shape public perceptions of its legitimacy. Another area in which federalism has helped in the relationship with governments of different levels, whether local, state, or federal, is in asking for decisions from the center to be questioned or influencing these. In this interaction between center and state and even further down to the locality, federalism also performs as a counter to prevent power centralization. This creates a system wherein policies, instead of exclusively originating from the center, must correspond to the needs stated locally. 22. How can bureaucrats and bureaucracies be held accountable? By whom and by what means can they be held accountable? Describe the steps and the measures that can be taken to increase bureaucratic accountability. How do the judicial, the executive, and the legislative branches of government hold bureaucrats and bureaucracies accountable? - Judicial Accountability: This is where the courts ensure that government agencies operate within the set rules by reviewing their actions. Reviewing ensures that agencies do not act outside the Constitution and the laws. Individuals or groups of people who feel affected by agency decisions may also go to court, which will ensure that agencies stay within the law. Congress has bureaucracies doing their jobs, by overseeing them, holding hearings, and controlling the budget. Legislative committees oversee what the federal agencies do to ensure that they adhere to the laws rightly. Congress passes laws that regulate the work of the bureaucrats and also holds investigations into the works of agencies whenever there arises a problem. Bureaucratic Accountability: The President holds bureaucrats accountable—first, through the nomination of leaders in agencies, second, with management approaches by setting goals, and, third, assisted by OMB, to ensure that agencies observe budgetary rules and policy objectives. The President is also granted the authority through executive orders to initiate or modify certain policies of an agency. Steps toward increased bureaucratic accountability would include more transparency, more opportunities for public participation in decision-making, and better training of public servants to become more responsive to public needs and ethical standards. Independent supervisory institutions or the establishment of ombudsman offices could  also contribute to a review of the activities of the bureaucracy on a regular basis concerning their fairness and compatibility with democratic values. 23. It can be said that administrative agencies roughly replicate the three constitutional powers exercised by the executive, legislature, and judiciary (courts). Name each of these powers and discuss how they are used by public bureaucracies in American government. - Executive Power: The administrative agencies have the authority to execute and enforce the laws. Agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) enforce the regulatory laws and executive orders for the purpose of making everybody comply with the rules. - Legislative Power: The ability of some agencies to act like lawmakers by making rules that are like laws. Congress gives these agencies the power to add details to laws with specific rules and regulations. For instance, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) makes rules about telecommunications policy. - Judicial Power: Many administrative agencies have the power to make decisions regarding disputes arising from their rules or policies. Thus, for example, the SSA and NLRB have hearings, reach a final decision, and issue an order in those cases as if they are courts when they interpret and apply rules to particular instances. 24. As the readings from this semester frequently reveal, there are often conflicts between the executive and the public managers, even (especially?) those the president has nominated. Why do the authors believe this is the case? Select one and explain why you believe their approach best describes the reasons for conflict. - James Q. Wilson, in "Bureaucracy”, states that "problems between the executive and public managers often occur because the presidency is political and career bureaucrats are professional." As a general rule, public managers are long-term careerists, with extensive knowledge of certain areas of public policy, while presidential appointees might focus more on political goals or want to act very fast to implement their ideas into action, creating conflicts. Wilson believes bureaucrats often resist changes that threaten their expertise or undermine institutional stability, while political appointees may push for fast, politically motivated changes. The tension between policy continuity and political change is a considerable source of conflict. I think Wilson's explanation is the best because it shows how the conflict is based on structure and institutions. Top public managers usually view their job as keeping government programs stable and efficient in the long run, whereas short-term political goals by the presidential appointees could be a source of more conflict.