Fall 2020, TESC MPA

Getting your feet wet! This is just a dip into the ocean of learning about Public Administration. We'll repeat these concepts many times. It's ok to let it wash over you. Another wave will be along soon.

Learning isn't about "getting it right". It is about being humble enough to admit you don't know something and then giving yourself permission to focus on learning more about what you don't know.

One of the reasons we have grad school is because people realize they still have a lot to learn about what they don't know!

There is no such thing as one definition of PA. It is contextual. An understanding of PA must be based in time, place, and purpose.

Practice means "practicing"; Discipline means "studying".

Praxis= imbrication of study and practice.

Many argue that the discipline of PA started in 1887 when Woodrow Wilson (28th President of U.S.) called for the study of public administration.

He argued that Public Administration should be about value free, neutral professionals who are experts that maintain bureaucracy. Army of experts. Made a clear distinction between politics (legislation that follows the public will and values) and administration (the execution of law by value free experts). Goal of administration in government is to keep chaos out.

We could spend a whole class just dissecting this statement.

Arguably, makes assumptions about human nature as bad and that we need government to curtail us.

James Madison was the 4th President of the U.S.

One of the Framers of the U.S. Constitution. Pro-Federalism. Favored a centralized government.

Thinking Critically and Creatively about Praxis:

You were asked to think critically about these concepts for your first assignment.

Who is included/excluded in your definitions of the public? and public administrators?

What are you assuming about the role of government? For example, if the role of government is to serve the public like a business, are you assuming government services have competition like a business? Currently, most government services have a monopoly on what they provide. No competition.

Is there only "one" way to view these concepts? Do we have to have an agreed upon universal understanding in order to be effective practitioners?

In the first assignment due today, you were asked to think critically about the role of government? Who are the public? Who are public administrators?

I can't give you concrete definitions. Indeed, the entire field of PA as a discipline doesn't agree on how to define the concepts of PA, the public, and the role of government.

That's why "it depends." These concepts are fluid and muddy.

"Public Administration is doing collectively that which cannot be so well done individually."
- Denhardt

Janusian thinking can help us with the "it depends" reality.

Doesn't have to be either/or.

Can be both/and.

Apply our Janusian thinking to the Readings

-- always look for what's missing

-- ask yourself to see what you don't know

-- do not accept the readings at face value

Thinking Critically & Creatively:

Let's examine the readings with some brief critiques and questions!

- written in 2001, are the big questions of 2020 different?

- how does using the phrase of "citizens" limit the ways we can effectively apply this article in the practice of PA?

- if PAs "make" and "shape" society, does this mean we are tasked with actively engaging in social engineering?

Kirlin, J. (2001). Big Questions for a Significant Public Administration. Public Administration Review, Vol. 61, No. 2, (Mar. - Apr.), pp. 140-143.

Thinking Critically & Creatively:

-- Debates are not resolved. Henry places date boundaries on the paradigms, but none of them are over. Why is it useful to see all of these paradigms/debates as alive today?

-- published in 1975. What paradigms would you add to public administration's field of study?

-- do public administrators have a shared identity yet?

5 Paradigms of PA

1. Politics/Administration Dichotomy. 1900-1926

2. The Principles of Administration. 1927-1937. The Challenge. 1938-1950

3. PA as Political Science. 1950-1970

4. PA as Administrative Science. 1956-1970

5. PA as PA. 1970-?

Henry, N. (1975). Paradigms of Public Administration. Public Administration Review, Vol. 35, No.4, pp. 378-385.

Thinking Critically and Creatively:

-- whose dark times?

-- do their assessments from 2011 stand up today?

-- can a bureaucratic ethos and a democratic ethos co-exist simultaneously? Must we prioritize one over the other?

Thinking Critically and Creatively:

-- when might it be important not to adapt to crisis and change?

-- does place matter in sensemaking during crisis? Was the Bhopal gas leak crisis unique due to place or should Union Carbide be studied as a universal organization?

One underlying theme that unifies the readings is a consistent focus on decision making.

Base decisions on:
- big questions
- paradigms
- democratic ethos
- emotional embodiment

Through the systems of government and day-to-day work of governing, public administrators inform & make decisions.

What is valued?
What are government decisions based on? What should governing decisions be based on?

What should we base our decisions on in PA? We study the major debates and paradigms of PA because it can help us sift through differing world views. Our own and those of others. World views can influence our motivations for decision making.

The ways we think effect the ways in which we act and react. Like a picture, thoughts are “framed” or informed by our world view and then we see the picture by reasoning our way through it to find meaning.

Positionality: cultural accounts of experience. Draws attention to the conditions under which a position arises, the factors that stabilize it, the implications, and what forces maintain it.

We are each individuals with our own life experiences, work experiences, histories, and world views.

Positionality: Legitimacy of my presence. The ways we think effect the ways in which we act and react. Like a picture, thoughts are “framed” by our world view and then we see the picture based on the meaning our position filters.

Positionality is the notion that personal values, views, and location in time and space influence how one understands the world. In this context, gender, race, class, and other aspects of identities as indicators of social positions are not fixed, given qualities. Positions act on the knowledge a person has about things, both material and abstract. Consequently, knowledge is the product of a specific position that reflects particular places and spaces.

Issues of positionality challenge the notions of value-free decisions/governments that have dismissed human subjectivity from the processes that generate policy, programs, services, knowledge, and identities. Consequently, it is essential to take into account personal positions before engaging in governing.

“By positionality we mean […] that gender, race, class and other aspects of our identities are markers of relational positions rather than essential qualities. Knowledge is valid when it includes an acknowledgment of the knower’s specific position in any context, because changing contextual and relational factors are crucial for defining identities and our knowledge in any given situation. “Positionality,” also known as self-location, refers to an awareness that our life experiences and circumstances impact how we see and understand the world around us, and further, that this understanding is situational. Positionality always requires a fair degree of self-reflexivity and honesty, as well as acknowledgement that we are embedded within systems of power. When scholars include a discussion of their relationship to their research, such discussions are often referred to as “positionality statements.”- http://www.unwrittenhistories.com/the-historical-is-personal-redux-position...

Authentic voice

Legitimacy

Most decisions are based on either a universal truth or subjective contextual truths.

Big "T" truths are absolute universals that can be applied to all things.

Little "t" truths are those realities that can “depend” on the context and therefore the “truth” is not fixed or finite. It is subjective and as infinite as the people who may have the experienced the truth in question.

Big “T”ruth (singular): struggle between religion and science; both are beliefs about how the world really works and about the types of creatures we are… one set of "answers" must be accepted as the “T”ruth…the final word… the absolute reality…. objectively.

Little “t”ruths (plural): accept errors exist. One generation’s truths so often become the next generation’s falsehoods. Subjectivity. We have the ability to imagine new realities.

What should PAs base decisions on? Thinking Critically and Creatively about Praxis: practice + theory.

Major Debates in Public Administration. You will be able to connect everything you read in the MPA program to at least one of these debates.

This slide is what your workshop will use here next.

Divide between the classical approach and the challenge approach.

Henry walks you through most of these in his discussion of the 5 paradigms of PA.

The classical approach is not "over". These practices in government are not in the past.

Classics: Efficiency, Facts, Objectivity, Administration (Experts), formal authority, sameness (rational model), Scientific/Quantitative/ Evidence ….. vs….

Challenge: Effectiveness, Values, Subjectivity and Politics, informal authority (the faces of power), otherness (difference), Qualitative/ Experiences

Defining the Classics: Public organizations should operate with power located at the top to maximize efficiency. Public administration should be about value free, neutral professionals who are experts that maintain bureaucracy. Army of experts. Made a clear distinction between politics (legislation that follows the public will and values) and administration (the execution of law by value free experts).

Defining the Challenge: The aim of the challenge is to show what is wrong with the world and as it is and to help improve it. They question whether an effect is morally or politically desirable. Recognize that social constructions exist= we cannot know “facts” separate from interests. Emphasize the imbrication of theory and practice. The goal of the challenge is to bring about social and political change.

Both the classical approach to PA & the challenge approach are simply management approaches to getting things done in public service….. make decisions based on what?

Which areas will you have to make your own choices about in the workplace the most? Which do you favor in decision making? What will you base your choices on? What will you let in or keep out?

What events brought about the challenge? Government of the classics had three major external forces acting on it: 1) WWI, 2) the depression/New Deal, and 3) WWII.

The New Deal got us out of the depression and placed public administration in the daily lives of citizens through hands on improvement projects to re-build this country. The aftermath of the war forced public administrators to be human. They could not ignore the gravity of the human atrocities in WWII and realized that it was humans with subjective values that would have to prevent a WWIII. The objective, rational, controlled bureaucracy would have to change. Normally, change in government is very slow. But in these situations, government had immediate and major needs of its citizenry to respond to . So tons of agencies and commissions started cropping up to respond to the real human issues at hand: jobs, hunger, polio, race relations. Government had to help government to help the people. Government still wanted to be efficient, but mainly they wanted to be effective.

What happened? Well the efforts and events of the 1940's through 1970's made bureaucracy and bureaucrats definitely change forever, but they also became completely overwhelmed and inefficient and ineffective. Bureaucracy grew so big, it became the 4th branch of government. There were so many rule making and regulatory agencies and commissions that the right hand did not know what the left was doing. Because government could no longer handle the work they had created for themselves, they looked outside of government for help. This is where privatization and non-profits came in to assist government in doing what was necessary to meet the needs of an ever growing citizenry.

https://judiciary.house.gov/hearing/the-chevron-doctrine-constitutional-and...

If Congress hasn't detailed the implementation or enforcement of a law, the Federal agency's interpretation of a law it administers is permissible and should be deferred to.

Courts are supposed to defer to bureaucrats in interpreting the law. The Chevron Doctrine applies if there is ambiguity.

Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh spoke out against the Chevron Doctrine in their confirmation hearings.

Issue: should agencies or courts interpret ambiguous laws?

Example: federal courts must defer to the Department of Veterans Affair’s determination of when it can reconsider a denial of disability benefits.

Workshop: go back to the slide about major debates, "classics vs. challenge." Which debates do you think apply to the Chevron Doctrine? How?Discuss in small breakout groups for 20 minutes. We'll have one or two groups briefly report out when you come back to the main Zoom room.

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/high-court-could-take-first-step-...

Thank you!

Here is one world view...

We frame our initial responses to issues based upon the world view we’ve formed over time (our epistemology). After that first reaction, we then reason through issues based upon where we deem "T"ruth or “t”ruths come from. Our frames of reference and our lines of reasoning inform each other in a continuous feedback loop.

“Knowing” comes from accepting or rejecting information filtered by your world view. Knowledge is the basis for ideas generating governing systems, policies, programs, services, and evaluations.

Think about all of the authors you've read so far. Their world
views shaped the "knowledge" they conveyed.

“Theory does not simply reflect life; it also projects life.”- Denhardt

(Jorgensen writes about bureaucracy in ch. 6)

Bureaucracy: Max Weber (1864-1920) was a sociologist who observed the division of labor in a pin factory and he developed his "ideal type" theory of work. In the post-industrial revolution world, he admired the manufacturing industry's top down hierarchy, formal authority, rational, efficiency, expertise/specialization, and accountability.
Result: he argued to impose the “one best way” procedure on the whole workforce, universally, in any organization or place. If there was one best way to accomplish a production task on an assembly line then there was one best way to accomplish the task of setting up organizations= bureaucracy.

Rational decision making ("Rational-Choice"): relies on concepts from economics and psychology. An individual makes a rational decision by assessing all of the alternatives known to them and selecting the one decision that will maximize his or her utility (value) and maximize the attainment of objectives. This assumes that perfect information is available to the decision maker, that all the alternatives available have one and only one clear meaning, and that all alternatives have a common denominator to be weighed against each other. Assumes an objective, market, model of society and a closed environment for decisions to keep chaos and politics out.---see classic PA theorists such as Herbert Simon, Frederick Taylor, Luther Gulick, Max Weber, Charles Goodnow.

Incremental decision making ("Incrementalism"): groups of decision makers formulate small goals and consider only a limited number of options. A decision is rarely, if ever, made from scratch. Start from current situation and small changes are more likely than dramatic or revolutionary changes. Favors status quo over radical change because small changes are always possible at the margin. Favors the power of communication through argumentation due to the intersubjective meanings and understandings of options available to decision makers. This practice entails "muddling through" issues in context. Consensus may only be reached through the better argument and clear understanding of meanings and consequences. ---see theorists such as Charles Lindbloom and Jurgen Habermas.