Introduction

Answer : The dichotomy between Public and Private administrations dates back to the starting of administrative studies. The classical writers held the view that public and private administrations are the undifferentiated members of the genus administration. Henri Fayol, for example says that there is only one administrative science which can be applied equally well to public and private sectors. But then no private organization can hold as much as responsibility for public, as a public organization can hold.

Both public and business administration rely on common techniques relating to planning, organization, budgeting, delegation, control and the like.

There are many similarities between Public and Private administration:

1. Both adopt almost same methodology and processing as far as financial administration is concerned.
2. Both adopt POSDCORB as managerial technique.
3. There is same approach towards scientific inventions.

But again, public accountability is the hall mark of public administration in a democracy, which a private administration cannot afford to hold in any way. A public official carries on his work in a “glass bowl”. His actions are open to public review and scrutiny at all times. His activities must be guided by public needs and opinion.

Further public administration operates in large scale administration. The activities and policies of government affect the entire socio-economic structure of the society. It employs large army of officials and spends huge amount of money to carry out its numerous programmes and policies. Thus private organization is of no match here against public administration.

Again certain public services such as national security, law and order, health care, transport and communications are vital to the existence of community itself, which no private organization can ever do in a similar way. They also enjoy special values and techniques which are unique to public and private administration:

1. They have different orientation towards political direction.
2. There is also difference in their approach towards public accountability.
3. There is also difference in terms of financial control as public administration is subject to control by parliament.
4. There is also difference in terms offlexibility as the private administration is generally very flexible while the public administration is considered as rigid and opaque.

This dichotomy has taken many turns. And now through new public management, Good governance, entrepreneurial government, the public and private administrations are coming closer to each other.

Answer : The study of administration in India starts with the work of Kautilya. He finally blended the administrative studies with moral values.

His work, the Arthashastra contains Kautilya’s philosophy of state administration. Promotion of public security and welfare was considered as important aspects of the state policy and the king was responsible for the ‘security’ and ‘welfare’ of the subjects.

This has the great relevance to the contemporary Indian administration. Not only the law confers on the king the responsibility of protecting the citizens, but also made the king personally responsible for the restoration of the stolen property or its value to the owner.

Another point of relevance was the existence of a comprehensive programme of state relief against providential calamities. Another striking feature of the state administration was its policy of promotion of public health. This being looked after by Public Health Schemes in the contemporary administration. Another trait of administration was illustrated by the measures for protecting the public against the dishonest dealings of artisans and traders – crime prevention.

In the field of politico-administrative studies he laid out a well-planned structure of administration. He provided the monarchy as system of governance. Further, he gave seven organs of state viz. territory, capital, ruler, minister, treasury, allies and army.

He also gave certain principles for the smooth functioning of administration. He gave the principle of unity of command i.e. all the directions came from one centre i.e. king only. He gave the principle of coordination among all the organs of the State.

He also provided for the division of labour among all the officials for the smooth functioning of administration. The king himself has to act as the chief coordinator in the administrative set up.

Apart from politico-administrative studies, the moral values and teachings also formed an essential part of the work of Kautilya. He put moral restrain upon King to prevent him from becoming absolute. His system was essentially a benevolent monarchy. He provided duties to King to protect its citizens from outside danger. His concept of state was totally based upon the welfare of subjects. To sum up, Kautilya’s work is a great starting point in the administrative studies in India.

Answer : Virtually every society today has been experiencing a transformation in its structure and functioning which is the result of collective working of many factors like industrialization, urbanization, globalisation etc. When the society develops it becomes more complex to administer. For this purpose the public administration also need a change and innovation through conceptualisation to cope up with new challenges.

The world is slowly becoming a unified whole where the ‘nation state’ is no longer effective and the concept of ‘region state’ is taking its roots, which is determined by the economic boundaries rather than political boundaries. This puts extra burden on administration as the traditional means becomes insufficient to tackle new problems. With rapidly increasing technological advances as well complexity the work of administration has become not only complex but also its has widened its scope. If public administration has to survive and take care of all these then it has to develop more techniques and ideas.

All this requires more conceptualisation in public administration. This will not only give it a new direction and approach but also make it more flexible and innovative. It is imperative to impart new thinking in Public Administration now otherwise it will disintegrate like a closed system. That’s why the conceptualisation is essential not only for its effective working in changing scenario but also for its very own survival.

Answer : The relationships between politics and public administration have evolved over a period of time. The American statesman right from the beginning of their Republic have observed a difference between policy matters and administrative matters.

This developed into a dichotomy between politics and administration. Although this thesis was finally abandoned after the second World War.

Administration according to Woodrow Wilson lies outside the proper sphere of politics. Administrative question are not political questions.

Although politics sets the tasks for administration, it should not be suffered to manipulate its offices. The fields of administration is a field of business. It is removed from the hurry and strife of politics: it at most points stands apart even from the debatable ground of constitutional study.

It is a part of political life only as the methods of the counting-house are a part of the life of society; only as machinery is part of manufactured product. But it is at the same time raised very far above the dull level of mere technical detail by the fact that through its greater principles it is directly connected with the lasting maxims of political wisdom, the permanent truths of political progress.

Thus, it is true that Administrative questions are not political questions.

Answer : Democracy means popular government and it broadly takes two forms—parliamentary and presidential. These two forms refer to the differences in the distribution of political resources and in the sharing and exercising of power. It is a government wherein the whole people or some numerous portion of them exercise through deputies periodically elected by themselves the ultimate controlling power which in every constitution must reside somewhere this ultimate power, they must possess in all its completeness.

But the term Democracy shows contradictions with good governance. The term “governance” has wider meanings implications than those of the term government. It embraces governmental institutions as well as the informal, non-governmental regulatory mechanisms.

Governance, thus, is a network of multiple agencies and organizations than a fixed “government” agency or department. The concept of government agency of department. The concepts of governance and good governance were first used by World Bank in 1992.

Good governance would involve role of government only in core, strategic and sovereign functions. This may mean, the government, whose primary business is to govern,should govern the least leaving man, society institution and all else to govern themselves. This is reflected in privatisation, corporatisation, contracts out etc.

This shows contradiction between good governance and democracy. New patterns of interaction between governments and society can be observed in areas such as social welfare, environmental protection, education and physical planning. These new pattern are apparently aimed at discovering “new possibilities” for governing. It is this search for “new possibilities” that brings out the true meaning of good governance.

Good governance is central to creating and sustaining an environment, which fosters equitable development and it is an essential complement to sound economic policies. Governance stands for establishment, operation and networking of social institutions. Empowerment is a pre-condition of good governance.

In today’s complex world of governing government alone is not capable of coping with myreid problems. A degree of networking with other societal organizations will enhance the capacity of governance in the society as a whole. Again to the extent governance would be bringing in transparency, openness, rule of law and human rights observance, this will facilitate strengthening of democracy.

Thus, Good governance has wide coverage area vis-à-vis to Democracy or government.

Answer : Public administration as an activity has existed in human society from time immemorial, its emergence as a branch of study and learning is rather recent, going back no farther than the closing years of 19th century.

As a field of systematic study, the development of public administration has been only recent. The credit for making a beginning of the academic study of public administration goes to Woodrow Wilson.

The view of the earlier writers like Wilson, Goodnow, Wiloughby, White, Luther Gullick, Fayol andWiwick was that public administration was a separate activity with its own well marked field and principles. Its field was demarcated on the basis of the so-called politics administration dichotomy.

In the early part of the 20th century many American Universities began to take active interest in the reform movement in government, and thus scholars got attracted to the field of public administration.

The second period in the history of public administration can roughly demarcated between 1920s to late 1930s. This was largely based on certain ‘principles’ of administration and it is task of scholars to promote their application.

This period opened with the publication of W. F. Willoughboy’s principles of public administration (1927). Some other works also got published mainly by Follet, Fayol, Mooney and Reiley’s. This period reached its climax in 1937 when Gullick and Urwick’s papers on the science of Administration appeared. To summarise, the year 1927-1937 were the golden years of ‘principles’ in the history of public administration.

The third phase of the growth of the discipline of public administration began from late 1930s to late 1940s. In 1938 C.I. Bernard’s ‘The functions of the executive’ was published. Herbert Simon wrote an article entitled, “ The Proverbs of Administration” in 1946, and its argument was further developed in his Administrative Behaviour, which published in 1947.

Simon developed a rationalistic theory of administration along with ‘bounded rationality’. The claim that public administration is a science was challenged by Robert Dahl in 1947. Public administration as a result of all this, found itself in a deflacted state, the status of the discipline was low. It was on this note that public administration entered the fourth phase in its history.

The fourth phase of the growth of (1948-1970) public administration as a discipline proved to be in crisis, searching for its identity. Many scholars responded to this crisis of identity by returning to the fold of the mother science, namely, political science. But, soon the process of de-emphasis of public administration in the larger discipline of political science got, if anything, accelerated in the 1960s. Here, thus public administrative was in search of alternative in the form of administrative science.

The fifth period 1970s to 1980s, despite the uncertainty and turmoil of the preceding period, public administration registered progress and entered the seventies with an enriched vision. Public Administration started attracting within its fold scholars from various disciplines and thus was becoming truly interdisciplinary in its nature. Public Administration has come closer to policy science and related areas and has been showing ample concern for issues in the field.

The sixth period starting from 1991, seeds of which had been sown in the preceding period. The public bureaucracy was viewed as the society’s favourite solution to the problems confronting. New Public Management and the civil society are the emerging new paradigms.

As a academic field, public administration’s evolution may thus be viewed as a succession of five over-lapping paradigms. Thus, the growth of public administration as a discipline owe to the American contribution, especially in the 20th century.

The scope and significance of the discipline of public administration has grown widely as a subject of study.

It the 21st century growth of public administration especially in the first decade is widening, particularly in parliamentary democracies, where a healthy combination of politicians and administrators is most, urgently needed.

Modern view about public administration is that it is government in action. It is being increasingly realised that with the concept of welfare state becoming more and more popular, state is undertaking increasingly more and more responsibilities and this, tendency in turn has widened the scope of public administration especially in the developing countries.

Public administration has emerged as an institution of central importance in all countries in the world, and most impressively in the developing countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America.

The governments of the developing countries are solemn obligation to bring about all round development of the people. They have assumed enormous responsibilities to improve the socio-economic conditions of the people. Their commitment to achieve higher levels of economic and social development has increased the scope of public administration in the coming decades of 21st centuries.

Answer : With the ever increasing complexity of Public Administration and its scope, it has become very difficult for the governments to seen the administrative set up. The roll back of state in 1989 a humble concept given by former U.K. Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher has given a great opportunity to shed off its burden but not its responsibility.

The scope of public administration has widened to an extent that the governments has to deploy more and more machinery and use resources to cater the needs of citizens of a state. With this increases in the activities new dimensions and new fields are appearing on the scenario of administrative set up which have administrative concerns. As there is a limit for the govt. to take care of all these and it also have limited resources its high time that the government gives the private players some opportunity to take initiative in this regard.

Giving the power to private player will not only enhance the quality of the services but it also will give the govt. opportunity to concentrate more on the more important areas. The government can save a huge amount of resources also, that it can apply or use elsewhere.

But the role of government does not end here only. It will be playing the role of a regulator and facilitator than the actual doer. It will have to take care of the rights of the citizens so that they do not get exploited by the private players.

In this the role of govt. in the human society will no doubt alter but it will not be out of focus, as it will remain in the centre for the welfare of society. It will beep a check on the private players. It will make sure that the imitative taken by them do not hamper the initiatives taken by the citizens to develop them fully and freely in order to convert his society in to a prosperous one.

Answer : The discipline of public administration, despite the uncertainty and turmoil in the pre-1970s it registered progress and entered the seventies with an enriched vision. Public administration attracted within its fold scholars from various disciplines and thus was becoming truly interdisciplinary in its nature. Indeed of all the social sciences, it is the public administration which is most interdisciplinary. It is focussing its attention more and more on the dynamics of administration. It is also drawing heavily on the management science.

Public Administration has come closes to policy science and related areas and has been showing ample concern for issues in the fields. Since 1970, some significant developments have been taken place in public administration as a discipline.

In 1970, the National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration was founded. It has been recognized that public administration be called a separate “self-aware” field of study. Although there is not yet a focus for the field in the form of “pure science of administration” progress, particularly in the area of organizational theory and information science, has been made in the direction. There has been less movement towards delineating a locus for the field. Nevertheless, public administration does appear to be emphasizing such areas as state and local government, executive management, and administrative law.

The new development in the discipline of public administration can be discussed under the following heads:

1. Normative concerns as value questions have recently been reassesed in public-administration; the emergence of the philosophy of neo-liberalism provided a powerful base for the setting of public administration in public interest philosophy. Restoration of communication between philosophers and administrators and raising the level of value consciousness have been the main aim of the writers like Hodgkinson. It provided ethical dimension to public administration.
2. Public administration like other social sciences, too adopted interdisciplinary approach in recent years. Three distinct inter-theoretical linkages have been identified (a) politics-administration union, (b) Economics-administration confluence and the political economy paradigm; (c) organization theory-administration intermixing.
   • Now, in the post 1970 unlike earlier politics-administration dichotomy, politics came to be reunited with administration. New public administration movement asserted the importance of values in administration and said that public administration is just another expression for the study of politics relating administration to the ‘political’ - environment has been the main focus of Peterself.
   • Economics–administration confluence and the political economy paradigm, brings public administration within the purview of economic analysis. The contribution of economists to organization theory has also been quite good.
   • Again political economy paradigm regards political economy as the study of interplay of power, the goals of power wielders and the productive exchange system.
   • However, a recent development that deserves attention is the consistent attempt to construct a radical organization theory based chiefly on Marxist thought. It criticizes traditional theory on the ground that it is system-maintaining and capitalism serving.
3. The debate over bureaucracy-democracy relationship is a reaction to over bureaucratization in the wake of rapid expansion of governmental activities and dissatisfaction with bureaucratic inefficiency. Four streams of thought have emerged in this context. The first is public choice school. It does not accept that bureaucracy is rational and efficient; it is highly sceptical of its structure and actual operating behaviour.
   • David Beetham, for instance, says that “the central political problem posed by bureaucracy, was how to restrict it to its proper function, how to ensure that the officials concern with administrative effectiveness, and hence with power was properly subordinate to the politician’s function of defining the ends that power was to serve and taking responsibility for them”.
4. The concept of “development administration” which was an important feature of administrative theory in the 1960s, came under criticism in recent years. The development administration concept has been criticized on various grounds. For instance Riggs said, “The existence of a career bureaucracy without corresponding strength in the political institutions does not necessarily lead to administrative effectiveness- without firm political guidance bureaucrats have weak incentives to provide good service, whatever their formal, preentry training and professional qualification.
   • Its criticism has come also from techno-managerial school and the ecological school. Development administration was also criticized as ideological and Eurocentric.
   • As an academic field, public administration’s evolution may thus be viewed as a succession of five over-lapping paradigms. The emerging focus of public administration is organization theory and management science, its locus is the public interest and public affairs. Today, a large number of universities in India provide for the teaching of Public Administration. To this end, there are departments of public administration in many universities. Besides, this is also taught in the joint departments of political science and public administration as well as in the department of political science.

Answer : The classical writers held the view that public and private administrations are the undifferentiated members of the genus administration. Henri Fayol, for example says that there is only one administrative science which can be applied equally well to public and private sectors. But then no private organization can hold as much as responsibility for public, as public organization can hold.

Both public and business administration rely on common techniques relating to planning, organization, budgeting, delegation, control and the like.

But again, public accountability is the hall mark of public administration in a democracy, which an private administration cannot afford to hold in any way. The public carries on his work in a “glass bowl”. His actions are open to public review and scrutiny at all times. His activities must be guided by public needs and opinion.

Further public administration operates in large sale administration. The activity and policies of government affect the entire socio-economic structure of the society. It employs large army of officials and spends huge amounts of money to carry out its numerous programmes and policies. Thus private organization is no match here against public administration.

Again certain public services such as national security, law and order, health care, transport and communications are vital to the existence of community itself, which no private organization can ever do in a similar way.

Answer : Organisation whether public or private is primarily concerned with co-ordination of all the resources through the process of, planning, organizing, staffing, commanding and control to achieve the predetermined goals or objectives of an organisation.

Now, in the above paragraph it is clear that any organizations have certain goals and it is this goal which directs the various units of an organization to work for the achievement of these objectives and goals.

Now, it is the top level of an organization which actually decides the primary foremost objectives of an organization. So it is duty of the top executives or administration to bring together all the different level of an organization and they must decide common goals taking into consideration, the aspirations of various people of the society and people of an organization. This is possible only if the organizational goal is in congruent with society goals or their basic needs. This is possible through participative management technique, and this way an executive can easily handle the organization and motivate people to direct their behaviour to achieve predetermined goals of an organization.

Answer : The Minnowbrook conference held in 1968 in U.S.A. was a youth conference and it was this young academic get together which give rise what has come to be known as ‘New Public Administration’. The conference patronage by Dwight Waldo identified four features: (a) Relevance, (b) Values, (c) Equity and Change.

1. Relevance: Public administration has traditionally been interested in efficiency and economy, disregarding the contemporary problems and issues. The new movement demanded radical curriculum change to facilitate meaningful studies, oriented towards the realities of public life.
2. Values: Value neutrality in public administration is to be rejected and administration should be sensitized to the needs of the society. The new movement advocated openness about values being served through administrative action.
3. Social Equity: The movement calls for reduction of economic, social and physic suffering and enhancement of life opportunities for those inside and outside the organization. A bold social-equity attitude is expressed.
4. Change: Social change is necessary to bring in social equity. The attack is on the status quo and against the powerful interests entrenched in permanent institutions that steadily grew into self-perpetuating power centre of dominant interests.

These features revolutionalized the concept of public administration.

Answer : Administration is a process formulating policies with collective effort. It is a corporative effort, directed towards the realization of a consciously laid down objective. Public Administration is that species of administration which operates within a specific political setting.

The significance of ‘Publicness’ of public administration is that public administration is concerned with purposes of society as a whole as opposed to groups within it. Public administration is concerned therefore with the purpose of the state.

The state is uniquely placed in society. In a democracy, it operates in the name of the land and its people. The government, a specialized group of people, representing the people of state in a democracy, can be said to provide policies for society aimed at establishing the goals or ends of that society whilst public administration is concerned with achieving them. Public administrators deal with the activities of the state as compared to private administrators who is concerned with the goals of non-state organizations.

This ‘public’ aspect of public administration can be looked at formally to mean ‘government’. So, public administration is government – administration which has vital role to play in a modern democratic state. The focus is basically on public bureaucracy. A wider meaning of public administration has sought to expand its ambit by including any administration that has considerable impact on the public. In another sense the term – ‘public’ refers to transparency or open scrutiny, under constant public ‘gaze’. Public accountability is one of the values affecting public administration.

Thus, in modern democratic society, the role of public administration has increased manifolds. We are witnessing the emergence of ‘Administrative State’. With the state regulating and controlling every activity of individuals from ‘womb to tomb’.

Answer : Coordination implies synchronisation of several activities to achieve pre- determined goals of an organization. In order to achieve coordination other elements of an organization has be proper designed, like there should be clearly defined objectives and purpose of organisation, authority and responsibility of individuals comprised should be clearly defined.

If there activities are clearly stated in an organization and administrator of any department can easily coordinate these activities and achieve the predetermined goals of an organization with great ease.

So, we can easily say that coordination is very important junction of an administrator and it is very comprehensive function, which involves all other elements or basic concepts or principles of an administration like, communication, authority, specialization and purpose.

Answer : According to Golembiewski, each phase may be distinguished and understood in terms of its locus or focus. ‘LOCUS’ refers directly to the ‘where’, to the context’s that are conceived to yield the phenomena of interest. ‘Focus’ refers to the analytical targets of public administration, the ‘what’ with which specialists are concerned.

Now, Nicholas Henry has described the five paradigms in the intellectual development of Public Administration, in the following manner:

Paradigms 1 : The politics/Administration Dichotomy, 1900-1926

Paradigms 2 : The Principles of Administration, 1927-1937.

Paradigms 3 : Public Administration as political science, 1950-1970

Paradigms 4 : Public Administration as Administrative Science (Management), 1956-70

Paradigms 5 : Public Administration as Public Administration.

Paradigms 1: The Politics/Administration dichotomy, in this phase of Public administration, it is in U.S.A where advocacy of Politics and Administration dichotomy was initiated by Woodrow Wilson. He views public administration and politics should be separated. Politics should work for framing policies and projects where as Administration should concerned itself with execution part of these policies. And politics should not inferred with Administration.

Paradigms 2: During second Paradigm stage, scholars believed that there are certain principles of administration which could be discovered and applied to increase the efficiency and economy of public administration. They argued that administration is administration of the nature and context of work because the principles of administration have universal validity and relevancy. Hence they claimed that public administration is Science.

This stage witnessed many scholars who have cove up with various principles of administration:

1. Henri Fayol’s Industrial and General Management (1916).
2. M. P. Follets Creative Experience (1924) etc.

Paradigms 3: Public administration as Political Science, during this stage the main theme was the advocacy of ‘human relations-behavioural approach’ to the study of public administration.

Both the defining pillars of public administration were challenged. It was argued that administration cannot be separated from politics because of its political nature and political role. Administration is not only concerned with implementation of political policy decisions, but also plays an important role in policy formulation-which is the domain of politics.

Paradigm 4: During this stage public administration as Administrative Science (Management) was initiated with the view that public administration should use Principles of Management to achieve pre-determined goals. Through these principles, efficiency and economy of public administration can be enhanced.

Paradigms 5: During this or final stage public administration as public administration evolved by 1970 and onwards. The main theme in this final stage of evolution is the concern for public policy analysis. Public administrations are showing much interest in the related fields of policy-science, political economy, policy-making, policy analysis, and so on.

Answer : The growth of the discipline of Public Administration under capitalistic system in U.S.A. is due to its great diversity in capitalistic economy. Capitalistic system is a political, social and economic system, in which properly, including capital assets, are owned and controlled for the most part by private person. Under capitalism the price mechanism is used as a signaling system, which allocates resources between uses. The extent to which price mechanism is used, the degree of competitiveness in markets and level of government intervention, distinguish the exact forms of capitalism.

Market-economies usually also involve a system of private ownership of the means of production; they are ‘capitalist’ or ‘free enterprise’ economies.

The United States is a country of great diversity. At the core of the varied land are the people – the most varied of all, for they stem from countries and social levels throughout the world. But in spite of many differences, certain traditions – freedom, equality and individual rights – are common to all. No doubt, under this environment capitalism flourished, as capitalism is founded on the freedom of the individual.

Public administration is a discipline was born in the US and that country continues to enrich it even today. Wilson in 1887 emphasized the need for a separate study of Public Administration. Frank J Goodnow (1900) developed the Wilsonian theme further and with greater courage and conviction argued that politics and administration were two distinct functions of a government.

L.D. White in 1926 further reinforced the premises that politics and administration are to be kept separate and efficiency and economy are the watchwords of public administration. These were the theme of the contemporary period in US and reflected the values cherished in a society in which democracy as a political philosophy and capitalism as an economic foundation were deeply founded. The second period (1927-39) in the history of Public Administration has as its central theme the principles of administration. The central belief of this period was that there are certain ‘principles’ of administration and it is the task of the scholars to discover them and to promote their application. Willoughby, Follet, Gullick and Urwick were the scholars during this period. This was the period when Public Administration commanded high degree of respectability and its products were in great demand both in government and business, which flourished in a capitalist system.

The third phase (1938-47) was the period when the advocates of principles of administration began to be challenged. The fourth phase (1947-70) witnessed the spectacle of political science separating from public administration. Public administration was in search of an alternative and the alternative was available in the form of administrative science.

The next phase, which is continuing, registered great progress with enriched vision. Public administration is focussing its attention more and more on the dynamics of administration. It is also drawing heavily from management sciences. It has come closer to policy science and related areas and has been showing ample concern for issues in the field.

Thus, the discipline of public administration was born in the USA and it strongly bears the marks of its parentage, freedom of individual, private enterprise, democratic ideals and capitalist ideology.

It is ‘managing’ as in a private, enterprise striving to achieve its goals using least resources. The goals could be citizen needs, wealth and welfare as in any systems module with input-process-output elements applicable to business in a capitalistic system.

These values became clearer in the growth and emergence of New Public Administration which also has its origin in U.S.A. The keynote of public administration is an intense sensitivity to and concerns for the social problems of the day. The proponents of New Public Administration express their dissatisfaction with the state of the discipline of public administration and want to be alive to problems presented by the ‘turbulent times’. The advocacy for a post-positive approach emphasized the need to abandon value-free and value-neutral administration and instead to cultivate and approach emphasizing social equity. New Public Administration is a uniquely American phenomenon founded in circumstances, where the enterprising spirit burns brightly. Freedoms on which the capitalist society is founded are enshrined in the American Constitution accepted as a way of life in USA.

The discipline of Public Administration has been founded on four factors predominant in USA: (1) the administrative theory (2) the influence of democracy, coming into full play during the time of Andrew Jackson (3) the influence of moral reform (4) the influence of technology and management arising out of the scientific management movement and decade by decade becoming more conclusive. U.S.A. is the bastion for capitalism. Naturally the spirit of capitalism influences and operates in the administration.

Answer : The concept of governance and good governance were first used by World Bank in 1992. Good governance would involve role of government only in core, strategic and sovereign functions. This may mean, the government, whose primary business is to govern should govern the least, leaving man, society institution and all else to govern themselves. This is reflected in privatization, corporatisation, contracts out etc.

The World Bank on the past experience has realized that despite technical soundness, programmes and projects have often failed to produce desired results. Laws are not forced properly and these are often delays in the implementation. Privatised production and market-led growth do not succeed unless investors face clear rules and regulations. Against this backward of mal-governance, the World Bank mooted the idea of good governance. Four key dimensions identified in this context are: (a) Public Sector Management (b) Accountability (c) Legal Frame made for development and (d) Information and transparency.

In today’s complex world of governing, government alone is not capable of coping with myriad problems. A degree of networking with other societal organizations will enhance the capacity of governance in the society as a whole. Again, to the extent governance would be bringing in transparency, openness, rule of law, and human rights observance, this will facilitate strengthening of democracy. Therefore, the concept of good governance is an admirable concept.

However, the World Bank’s approach of tic up good governance with aid giving has been criticized. World Bank is seeking to ‘politicise’ the otherwise technical issue of financial aid to the third world countries.

Answer : The Minnowbrook conference was designed to compare and contrast the changing epochs of public administration. During Minnowbrook-I in 1968, the mood of the discipline of public administration was such that it sought to identify values and ethics as the critical issue of 1970s. By contrast, in 1988 the social environment of Minnowbrook-II was markedly different from that of its predecessor. The context of public administration changed in favour of less directly performing government and governance, more privitisation and contracting out. The values of public purpose came to be steadily replaced by the emerging values of private interest.

If the 1968 conference had been radical and confrontational, the 1988 conference was, by contrast, more practical and respectful to the ‘seniors’ in the profession. Minnowbrook-II includes some of the themes that were not so prominent in 1968 such as leadership, constitutional and legal perspective, technology policy and economic perspectives gave the second gathering an identity of its own. The first conference (1968) offered a challenge to public administration to become practice with regard to burning social issues. By contrast, the second conference in 1988 held in the midst of governmental cutback and ‘privatization’ policy. The outcomes of Minnowbrook-II were therefore more pragmatic and less radical.

A comparison between the two Minnowbrook brings out both continuity in thinking and an eagerness to break new grounds. The following five major themes of Minnowbrook-II were related to the legacy of Minnowbrook-I: (i) concerns for social equity that predominated at the first conference and was acknowledged as important in 1988 also (ii) democratic values and the centrality of public administration strongly reaffirmed in 1988 with special focus on ethics, accountability and administrative leadership. (iii) continuity of the earlier debate between normative and behaviouristperspective with special emphasis on epistemological questions regarding how people learn about the field. (iv) acceptance of the heterogeneous nature of work force in response of social diversity including the emerging gender dimension, and the need for free interchange between ‘generalists’ and ‘specialists’. (v) changing outlook on ‘government’ in Minnowbrook-II as government was no longer seen as the train on which people wanted to ride.

Answer : There is a contrast made between Art and Science. It is said that while science is systematic knowledge, art is systematic practice. Practically every social discipline finds itself confronted with the question whether it is or can be a science. The turn of events during and after World War II changed the state of literature on comparative public administration. It became different from the earlier literature on public administration. It is for this reason that the period of World War II is often regarded as the dividing line between the old and the new literature on the subject. A number of studies were made during this period which made significant contribution to making public administration a universal science.

During the war, the western, particularly the American, scholars and administrators came in contact with the public administration of many developing countries, wherein they found some few features which interested them. The emergence of large number of new nations on the world scene and attempts by them to achieve rapid economic development which inevitably had to involve public administration, created new motives and opportunities for scientific investigation. This furthered theoretical speculation among the scholars of public administration. Again, the scholars had become dissatisfied with the culture bond character of the traditional public administration. In the 1940s and thereafter, the student of comparative public administration being aware of the intellectual developments in comparative sociology, anthropology and other areas “became interested in developing theoretical constructs with a cross-cultural, cross-national and cross-temporal relevance in their field. They recognized that hypothesis developed in American cultural context, in order to be valid and part of a science of public administration, should be tested in cross-cultural settings.

There are many who hold that public administration is already a science in the sense that other social sciences are, namely, that a more or less well-defined field for it has been marked out, and a vast amount of data has been collected to which the methods of scientific enquiry are applied.

Thus, as long of the study of public administration is not comparative, claim for a ‘science of public administration’ sounds hollow.

Answer : The scope of the subject is ever widening, particularly in parliamentary democracies, where a healthy combination of politicians and administrators is most, urgently needed.

Modern view about public administration is that it is government in action. It is being increasingly realized that with the concept of welfare state becoming more and more popular state is undertaking increasingly more and more responsibilities and this tendency in turn has widened the scope of public administration. It is usually agreed that the functions of public administrator are similar to those of the state and as such it is difficult to narrow the scope of the former. It is the latter which infuses a sense of practicability in the abstract notion of the former. A public administrator is supposed to be an executive, legislator and judicial officer. Necessarily, it is to be studied as part of the larger political processes in a country. There is besides, that sector of activities which though not governmental in the strict sense is nevertheless supported, either wholly or partially by the public exchequer, educational institutions, cooperatives etc.

Thus, the scope of administration is determined by the scope of government functions which is decided chiefly politically.

Answer : Centralization stands for concentration of authority at or near the top; decentralization, on the other hand, denotes dispersal of authority among a number of individual or units. Decentralisation means systematic efforts of top management to delegate as much authority as possible to the lowest levels.

Decentralisation helps to spread decision-making and relieves the management of high work load. More effective and prompt decisions are possible because of the speed and first hand knowledge that decentralization provides. It encourages initiation at lower levels of management and provides increased motivation. Decentralisation is unavoidable in large diversified organizations.

Apart from consideration of administration efficiency, decentralization may be political. Political decentralisation implies the setting up of new levels of government. Centralization is concentration of power at the top level. Another dimension of decentralization is the association of the people with administration and this is secured by the dispersal of political and administrative authority in achieving the political goal of power to the people. This encourages self-determination.

Centralisation may refer to the relations between headquarters and held in any given jurisdiction, as a description of the relative amount of freedom left to field agents of the trends in his relationship according to White.

The establishment and maintenance of a smooth-working organization are profoundly influenced by the location and delegation of authority. Within any administrative agency, all authority is usually vested in its head. Subordinates are not generally granted and direct authority by law. Officials at the lower levels of operation thus normally derive their authority by delegation from the head to the agency.

Although a variety of reasons exist for the growth of overhead controls, their acceptability varies with political culture.

Centralization and decentralization reflect on philosophy of the whole administrations. It requires careful selection of which decisions to push down and which to hold near the top, specific policy-making to guide the decision-making, proper selection and training of people and adequate controls.

Absolute decentralization nullifies the role of head office or higher-level officials in an administration. A proper balance on the basis of function and performance is essential.

Answer : The present day theory at business does not concede the public or private. It denies, for example that modern business is run only for profit. Its object too is the provision of service for the people, and no business could make a profit for any length of time unless it served some need of people. The law had placed increasing restrictions on business to ensure that it makes its earning by catering for the socially desirable needs of the people. Any business activity, which sought to make money by endangering the safety, health or morals of the people, would not be tolerated.

Today, public administration is engaged in the performance of an unequalled range, scale and variety of functions in the society. There are many activities performed in Public Administration, which have no counterpart in the private world. Indeed, the functions of govt. remain more undefined than defined, at least in developing societies like India.

The efficiency of administration is more important than it’s being public or private. The scope of administration is ever widening, particularly in parliamentaries democracy where a healthy combination of politicians and administration is most, urgently required.

Answer : The scope of public administration is ever widening, particularly in parliamentary democracy, where a healthy combination of politicians and administrator is most urgently needed. One of the views is that its scope includes all governmental activities whereas the other view, is that scope of public administration is confined merely to the execution of the policies. Whereas the former is supported by Woodraw Wilson, Dimock & Pfiffner, Gullick and Merson have supported the other view.

The former viewpoint considerably widens the scope of subject, vis-à-vis to latter. However, modern viewpoint about public administration is that it is government in action. It is being increasingly realized that with the concept of welfare state becoming more and more popular state is undertaking increasingly more and more responsibilities and this tendency in turn has widened the scope of public administration. Public administration includes political, legislative, executive, financial, defensive and many other functions.

Public administration is a great stabilizing force in society. Government changes very often, but administration seldom experiences violent changes. Thus the scope of public administration is over expanding especially in the 21st century.

Answer : Among social sciences, Public Administration is most closely related to politics. It is necessary to bear in mind that both politics and administration are certain kinds of activities as well as the names of certain studies and so the relationship between the two must be considered in both the aspects.

Politics is concerned with the rules of accountability and control of administrative power while administration is concerned with the rules of effective work in an organization and task performance.

Traditional administrative thinkers, like Wilson & Goodnow etc., believe that administration lies outside the proper sphere of politics and administrative questions are not political questions. They say that politics has to do with policies while administration has to do with the execution of these policies.

With more and more policy-science orientation in public administration, politics however, came to be reunited with administration. But the real thrust toward political and value loaded public administration came from the New Public Administration for which public administration is just another expression for the study of politics. Appleby stated that public administration differs from all other administrative work by virtue of its public nature. According to him, public accountability, political character, breadth of scope, impact and consideration etc. differentiate public administration from private administration. He argues that administration is politics interests. Government organizations are not merely administrative entities, they are and must be political organisms.