Approaches of Comparative Public Administration.

Kane Dane

Different Approaches to Comparative Public Administration are

Bureaucratic Approach.

Bureaucracy as an organizational model was first developed systematically by Max Weber. According to him, every organization can be defined as a structure of activities (means) directed towards the achievement of certain objectives (ends). To maximize efficiency and productivity every organization develops a system of specialization and a set of systematic rules and procedure.

A number of studies have been conducted in a comparative context employing this approach. The known scholars in this context were Michael Crozier, Roy Laird and Morroe Berger.

However in the developing countries where rapid change is required to bring about socio-economic transformation, the traditional structure of bureaucracy is ill-equipped in performing developmental task. However this model suits the dynamics of developed nation to analyze its infrastructure and administration.

Behavioural Approach.

It is concerned with the scientific study of human behaviour in diverse social environment. This approach aims at substituting empirical and realistic judgements for the purely value-oriented.

Herbert Simon and others have observed that administrative behaviour is a part of the behavioural sciences and the study of Public Administration should involve the study of individual and collective human behaviour in administrative situations.

Systems Approach.

According to this, a system is a collection of interrelated parts which receives inputs, acts upon them in an organized or planned manner and thereby produces certain outputs. All human organizations are open sub-systems engaged in transactions within the larger social system., i.e. society.

All sub-systems receive input in the form of human and material resources from the larger system, while giving out outputs in the form of products, services, or rewards to its members as well as to the larger system.

Also read | Analyze the relevance of Critical Theory to Public Administration.

Structural Functional Approach.

This approach as an analytical tool in the social sciences developed from the work of the anthropologist Malinowski and Radcliffe Brown. The important followers of this approach are Galbert Almond, Talcott Parsons, Merton and Fred Riggs.

The two concepts basic to this approach are structure and functions. While functions concern the consequences of pattern of action, structure refer to the patterns of action and the resultant institutions of the system themselves. The structural functional framework provides an important mechanism for the analysis of different social processes.

Here, social structure is viewed as “any pattern of behaviour which has become a standard feature of a social system.” There may be “concrete” structures. (e.g. Government, departments and bureaux) or “analytic” (e.g. structure of authority or power). All social structures perform some “functions”.

Here, “functions” involves “a pattern of interdependence between two or more structure, a relationship between variables.” However, it may be clarified at the outset that there is no clear and direct relationship between structures and functions. All similar structures may not perform similar functions.

According to Riggs, there are five functional requisites of any society economic, social, communicational, symbolic and political. He ha.s applied these functional requisites to the study of the administrative sub-system. Later he developed his Agraria-Transitia-Industria Model for the comparative study of administrative system as a part of the wider social system.

Ecological Approach.

Various scholars have often referred to the need to relate public administration to the environment in which it functions. Ecology refers to the mutual relations, collectively, between organism and their environment. Gaus advocated the concept of relating Government functions to the environment which included such factors as people, situation, scientific technology, social technology, wishes and ideas, catastrophe and personality.

This approach assumes that administrative behavior is molded by the values of the administrative culture in which it functions. Thus there is an interaction between values and traits of administration. Organization should adapt itself to the changing environment.