Public Administration

When I first thought about ‘Public Administration’, mental pictures of working in a government agency like GSIS where I am presently working, more so leading a public organization, flashed in my head. For instance, being the President and General Manager of GSIS; or being the President of the Philippine Association of Schools Superintendents like my grandmother; or being the President of a country like Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. Then I thought, ‘Public Administration’ — very tough responsibility, very challenging task. While all these things were swimming in my head, this definition came to mind: “the willful and well thought of process of organizing and mobilizing organizations which are geared towards the service of the general populace in a manner that best serves its function.” That’s my rough definition of those two heavy words which I later found out is not that different from the other definitions given to it. And yes, my definition is also quite general but so did some of the early definitions of Public Administration coined by various scholars of this field. To name some:

-Woodrow Wilson: “Government in action involved in the detailed and systematic execution of public law” (Waldo, 1953);

- Leonard White: “ …the composite of all laws, regulations, practices, relationships, codes and customs that prevail at any time in any jurisdiction for the fulfillment and execution of public policy…(White, 1955)”;

- Waldo: “the organization and management of men and materials to achieve the purposes of government” (Waldo, 1955);

- Fritz Morstein Marx: “…signify primarily the organization, personnel, practices, and procedures essential to effective performance of the civilian functions entrusted to the executive branch of government…”(Marx, 1959);

- Nigro and Nigro: “..a cooperative group effort in a public setting, covers all three branches – executive, legislative and judiciary – and their interrelationships, has an important role in the formulation of public policy and is thus part of the political process, is different in significant ways from private administration, and is closely associated with numerous private groups and individuals in providing services to the community.” (Nigro and Nigro, 1955);

- Rosenbloom: “ ..The use of managerial, political, and legal theories and processes to fulfill legislative and judicial governmental mandates for the provision of regulatory and service functions for the society as a whole or for some segments of it…” (Rosenbloom, 1986).

Those were some of the definitions. However, in order to understand Public Administration more easily, we can also dissect the various ways ‘Public Administration’ can be defined.

 First, let us examine the respective meaning of the words ‘public’ and ‘administration’. As stated in our book, the Tapales material described the word ‘public’, being a modifier, as referring to something that’s collective, the community, all or something general. And the word ‘administration’ was described as having both a rational and generic meaning. Rational because broadly defined as a cooperative human action, administration seeks to achieve specific goals; generic because it can happen in any organization, political system or culture.

Second, ‘Public Administration’ was viewed both as a field of study and as a field of practice (Waldo, 1955) which means that it is both a professional and scholarly discipline (Ocampo, 1993). According to these scholars, as a field of study, it means that it involves a system of study to improve the policy-making and decision-making processes in order to get the desired results. And as a field of practice, it involves not just theorizing but the application of these theories in administering public affairs and carrying our governmental functions. To better elaborate, ‘Public Administration’ as a field of study is like what I am doing right now. I am enrolled in this elective course to examine, to hypothesize, to better understand what this subject is really all about so that in the future, as a field of practice, when I become a manager or vice president of GSIS for example, I can better lead my people and colleagues in providing excellent insurance services to our members.

In consonance to this, ‘Public Administration’ can also be viewed as both a field of art which is related to it being a field of practice and a field of science which is related to it being a field of study.

Third, delineating ‘Public Administration’ from ‘Private Administration’ could also help us in better understanding what this field is all about. You may ask, what are these differences? They’re the following:

- They have different goals/mission. While private administration is profit-centered, public administration is service-oriented.

- They vary in the nature of goods and services they provide. Private administration provide for those who can afford their products and services while public administration provides basic services and goods which can be enjoyed by almost everyone whether they can afford it or not.

- Moreover, those into public administration are more subject to public scrutiny, criticism and regulation than those into the private administration mostly because of its peculiarities that separate it from other institutions. [These being unavoidable; able to compel obedience from the citizens because it has monopoly of coercive power; able to carry our activities of major priority; able to provide people with a wide range of public services; able to directly report to a political leader as its boss; able to measure performance with difficulty because of its broad scope, functions and nature; and able to meet public expectations. (Caiden,1971)]

With these things in mind, I can say that the definition of ‘Public Administration is very broad and could even be limitless. I believe that this is because it is very universal that if we look closely enough, we can say that it has, is and will always be a part of our daily life whether directly or indirectly, from the time we wake up to the time we go to bed at night. We can’t escape from it. Therefore, the more we need to study it so that we can better handle and apply it in our lives for the good of the majority concerned. Consequently, we need to peek into its historical evolution.

Life in earlier times was fairly simple. Government functions were not as complex. Populations were of manageable numbers and properties were of simple sorts (Wilson). Then everything changed. Chief nations of the modern world experienced growth & development, thus the emergence of ‘Public Administration’ and the need for its study.

As an overview of its historical evolution, it was in the 17^th century in monarchical Europe when the term ‘Public Administration’ was first used to distinguish between the King’s public affairs and management of his private life. From there, studies on this matter were conducted &  taught  specifically  designed  to  prepare  potential  public  servants,  first  in Prussia until it reached the American shores which later on  brought it to us.

Here in our country, the study and practice of ‘Public Administration’ could have probably started back in the pre-colonial times when baranggays and barrios were constituted to better facilitate the citizenry. Upon the advent of colonialism, changes in organization and management emerged and continued to develop. The way the Spaniards ruled us were different from the way the Americans ruled our land. Nevertheless, from these came the roots of Public Administration in the Philippines.

As a study, significant features emerged. One would be this administrative scientific approach to Public Administration and characterized by Stillman as the “one best way” viewpoint highlighted in the works of Taylor (1911), Urwick and Gulick (1937) and similar scholars of the POSDCORB era and subsequent permutations which struggled to find and prescribe that elusive “science of administration” based on a single, specific, and correct view for doing and thinking about Public Administration (Stillman, 1991). They thought that by being more efficient and effective in public management, society can be improved. However, this approach is focused on internal operations of public organizations concerned and is very closed and compartmentalized. In the Philippines, a similar era emerged, which was called by Danilo Reyes as the “inward-looking perspective”. It looked at the phenomena of administrative institutions, their dynamics, processes, resources, structuring, the operations that pervade within them and the efficiency of these institutions. This perspective valued efficiency, effectiveness and economy of public organizations (Reyes 1995).

Then, there was this dualistic vision or dialectical approach — the so-called dichotomy between politics and administration which emerged from the argument that modern Public Administration is not a subfield of Political Science because its focus, concerns and interests encompass and are very distinct from those of the latter (Waldo 1948; Caiden 1971; Barton & Chappel, Jr. 1985). This method tackles Public Administration   by fighting over ideas associated with politics and administration. Here in our country, the evolution of Public Administration did not come from those fields of social science particularly that of political science. It did not emerge from the fission of public policymaking and administration. “It was never insecure about its place in the academic community, and perhaps, never competed with the discipline of Political Science as to what it must address…” (Reyes 1995). Public Administration in the Philippines did not experience the various issues it did in the U.S. It was first brought here for the sole reason of improving our government and the conditions in our country.

Another feature would be its pluralist perspective or its being eclectic. As it expanded its concerns, it drew from the techniques and approaches of other disciplines. It started to incorporate methodologies and knowledge from other fields like economics, engineering, psychology, sociology, history and even operations research (Garson and Overman 1983). In the Philippines, this could be related to the “outward-looking perspective” coined by Danilo Reyes. This was when the study and practice of Public Administration in our country began to focus on its interaction with the public and the environment. It no longer confined itself to the study of public organizations but extended their concern on the impact it brings to its clients, the general public, and their linkages and interaction with their surroundings (Reyes 1995).

Formally, Public Administration was introduced when the Institute, now College of Public Administration in the University of the Philippines was established in 1952 through an agreement between the University of Michigan and U.P. Its chief concern was to improve the Philippine Government and the condition of the country because that time, our country was in very bad shape and our bureaucracy was the one blamed for it. And so, the Institute helped out to better prepare potential public servants who were expected of course to clean up the mess left by the colonial times. Later on, academic degrees were offered to better facilitate the learning process.

At present, we can say that we have nothing to be worried about regarding Public Administration as a scholarly pursuit. We have so much data on the studies of public organizations, economic policies, graft and corruption, reforms & reorganizations, foreign services, civil service, public accountability, bureaucracy, social and community development, population, health, urbanization, housing problems, politics, and so much more.

It is in the practical application of that knowledge that we fail miserably. Sadly, our public services are far from exemplary. One is compelled to ask, “why is this so?”. In my humble opinion, the reasons, although grave, are actually quite simple. First and foremost, most of our leaders posses merely an intuitive knowledge of what Public Administration is. Very few have formal training to what it is or how it works. Just looking at our recent presidents this is already quite evident. After Marcos we had Cory, who was more a mother and a housewife than anything else. Although she exuded comfort and hope, her administration was beleaguered by numerous coup attempts and a weak economy. After Cory came FVR. Under him, the Philippines experienced an economic boom. However, public services did not really improve much. And the boom could not be sustained. After the retired general came the action star, Joseph Ejercito-Estrada. And we all know how that went. Although this is not to say that a degree in Public Administration automatically makes a good leader, we may argue that there is much to gain if our leaders would take the time to get to know these concepts. If not, how will they be able apply ideas that they do not know?

                 An even bigger hindrance to translating Public Administrative theory into practice is the fact that our political parties in the country are for the most part nominal. They do not necessarily stand behind a particular set of ideals. They do not have a mission vision. Because of this, continuity of programs is often compromised. Whenever there is a change in leadership or composition, the programs of the government feel a tremor. And more often than not, the programs of the previous leader are thrown out the window. We’ve already lost a good deal of beneficial programs that way. In the GSIS for example, PGM Winston Garcia has a lot of innovative projects that if implemented, would spell much better service to GSIS members such as the releasing of ATM cards that in theory would allow them to get loans in a matter of seconds. However, PGM Garcia’s term is almost up. Can the public be assured that his projects will be continued by whoever replaces him? This is true both in a specific sense (as depicted in my example) and in a general sense, wherein even the most useful projects are disposed of whenever a new president rises to power. These projects then, though grand and noble in themselves become a big waste of money, time and effort. Add to this a convoluted bureaucracy, laden with graft and corruption and it would really bog down any country. In the present administration, there even came a time when the country’s president and even the officials under her were more concerned with politicking and photo shoots, on being recognized by the press and playing tactics on how to win in the next election on 2004. If we keep this attitude, there is a possibility that no amount of studies in Public Administration can ultimately help our debt-ridden country. Yes, we can all know the important theories by heart, but without correct application, it will just be another journal in the History of the study of Public Administration.