DICHOTOMY Models
DELMER
DUNN and JEROME LEGGE
Classified Dichotomy into three parts or models--
1) Orthodox dichotomy model
2) Modified Dichotomy Model
3) Partnership Model
Classified Dichotomy into three parts or models--
1) Orthodox dichotomy model
2) Modified Dichotomy Model
3) Partnership Model
ORTHODOX DICHOTOMY MODEL
-Wilson and Goodnow earliest propounders
-"administrative questions are not political questions" -- Wilson
-" administration has only to do with execution of the political will" -- Goodnow
The arguments on dichotomy in the orthodox era revolved around the logic of --
-Political neutrality
-Specialised functioning in the specific sphere
-Capability of the knowledgeable elite to play a role in public service
-Making way for scientific efficiency
This model was challenged for the first tym in a major way by F M Marx in 1946 in his book "Elements of Public Administration"
He quote, " apparently neutral administrative decesions are often laden with political preferences"
1950s J M Gaus completely denied the orthodox dichotomy model.
"a theory of administration in our times is also a theory of politics"
-Wilson and Goodnow earliest propounders
-"administrative questions are not political questions" -- Wilson
-" administration has only to do with execution of the political will" -- Goodnow
The arguments on dichotomy in the orthodox era revolved around the logic of --
-Political neutrality
-Specialised functioning in the specific sphere
-Capability of the knowledgeable elite to play a role in public service
-Making way for scientific efficiency
This model was challenged for the first tym in a major way by F M Marx in 1946 in his book "Elements of Public Administration"
He quote, " apparently neutral administrative decesions are often laden with political preferences"
1950s J M Gaus completely denied the orthodox dichotomy model.
"a theory of administration in our times is also a theory of politics"
MODIFIED
DICHOTOMY APPROACH
Many thinkers have recommended flexibility in appreciating the dichotomy theory. Infact Goodnow himself did not propose a rigid dichotomy.
In his book he observed "the actual political necessity requires that there shall be harmony between expression of state will and its implementation "
To attain this harmony independence of either politics or administration has to be sacrificed.
Goodnow also argued that there shud be some political control over administration. For example the budget sanctioned for a particular programme can be curtailed at political will.
The most prominent explanation of modified dichotomy has come from MONTJOY N WATSON who interpreted dichotomy as 'professional standard' ie they argued that the eventual test of dichotomy li
Many thinkers have recommended flexibility in appreciating the dichotomy theory. Infact Goodnow himself did not propose a rigid dichotomy.
In his book he observed "the actual political necessity requires that there shall be harmony between expression of state will and its implementation "
To attain this harmony independence of either politics or administration has to be sacrificed.
Goodnow also argued that there shud be some political control over administration. For example the budget sanctioned for a particular programme can be curtailed at political will.
The most prominent explanation of modified dichotomy has come from MONTJOY N WATSON who interpreted dichotomy as 'professional standard' ie they argued that the eventual test of dichotomy li
PARTNERSHIP
MODEL
The ultimate governing yardstick for deciding the extent of dichotomy is the yardstick of publicness.
To illustrate --
If the civil servants overlap in the policy making role and this overlap is conducive for enhancement of public interest then such an overlap is welcomed. On the contrary if this overlap is in the nature of self-aggrandizement then such encroachment must be stopped. In other words in the name of dichotomy dilution the civil servants shud not be allowed to usurp the rightful policy making discretion belonging to the political executive.
Similarly if the political executive overlaps in the implementation function with a view to improve the implementation such overlap shud be welcomed. Because it enhances the publicness. However if the overlap is politically motivated and seeks to favour certain favourites or vote banks then it must be stopped.
Dimock n Dimock
"no administrator can sit quietly outside the ring and watch the pulling n hauling, rather he must become kind of a ringmaster and the strategist combined into one who must not only direct his programme but also try to win support for his programme from the political executive or the legislature "
The ultimate governing yardstick for deciding the extent of dichotomy is the yardstick of publicness.
To illustrate --
If the civil servants overlap in the policy making role and this overlap is conducive for enhancement of public interest then such an overlap is welcomed. On the contrary if this overlap is in the nature of self-aggrandizement then such encroachment must be stopped. In other words in the name of dichotomy dilution the civil servants shud not be allowed to usurp the rightful policy making discretion belonging to the political executive.
Similarly if the political executive overlaps in the implementation function with a view to improve the implementation such overlap shud be welcomed. Because it enhances the publicness. However if the overlap is politically motivated and seeks to favour certain favourites or vote banks then it must be stopped.
Dimock n Dimock
"no administrator can sit quietly outside the ring and watch the pulling n hauling, rather he must become kind of a ringmaster and the strategist combined into one who must not only direct his programme but also try to win support for his programme from the political executive or the legislature "
No comments:
Post a Comment