B.A. (Hons.

) Political Science Semester-III

CORE COURSE
Paper-VI : Perspectives on Public Administration
Study Material : Unit 2, 3

SCHOOL OF OPEN LEARNING

UNIVERSITY OF DELHI

Editor :- Prof. Tapan Biswal

Department of Political Science
 Graduate Course

Paper-VI : Perspectives on Public Administration

Contents
Pg. No.
Unit-2 : Theoretical Perspectives
(a) : Classical Theories
iii. Ideal-Type Bureaucracy (Max Weber) Anchal 01
(b) : Neo-Classical Theories
i. Human Relations Theory (Elton Mayo) Dr. Neelam Jain 11
ii. Rational Decision-Making (Herbert Simon)
Dr. Devarati Roy Chowdhury 19
(c) : Contemporary Theories
: i. Ecological Approach (Fred Riggs) Bijendra Jha 36
ii. Innovation and Entreperneurship (Peter Drucker) Dr. Vaishali Narula 46
Unit-3 : Public Policy
(a) : Concept, Relevance and Approaches Dr. Devarati Roy Chowdhury 55
(b) : Public Policy: Formulation, Implementation and Evaluation
Dr. Devarati Roy Chowdhury 70

Edited by:
Prof. Tapan Biswal

SCHOOL OF OPEN LEARNING

UNIVERSITY OF DELHI
5, Cavalry Lane, Delhi-110007
 Unit-2 : Theoretical Perspectives
(a) Classical Theories

iii. Ideal-Type Bureaucracy (Max Weber)

Anchal

Structure
 Introduction
 Max Weber: His Life and Writings
 Bureaucracy: Meaning
 Max Weber on Authority
 Types of Authority
 Max Weber: The Concept of Bureaucracy
 Max Weber: Characteristics of Bureaucracy
 Max Weber: Limits on Bureaucracy
 Max Weber’s Bureaucracy: Criticism
 Conclusion
 References
Introduction
The German sociologist Max Weber’s thoughts has influenced generations of scholars on
bureaucracy and formal organization. He occupies a central position in the bureaucratic
model and tries to study it in a theoretical framework. He was the first one to use and
describe the term bureaucracy. It is also called the bureaucratic theory of management or the
Max Weber’s theory. His formulation deserves careful analysis as his writings covered a
wide range of subjects including economics, sociology and administration. He also outlined
the impact of religion on the growth of capitalism and his thoughts are the larger
considerations of socio-economic and historical forces that led to the growth of complex
organizations. His thoughts represent the macro view of all these aspects. Weber believed
that bureaucracy helps in administering and establishing the organization in the most efficient
manner.
Max Weber : His Life and Writings
Max Weber (1864-1920) was born in a business family involved in textile manufacturing in
western Germany. He studied law from the University of Heidelberg after completing his
preliminary schooling in 1882. He completed his doctorate and worked as an instructor in
University of Berlin and wrote number of papers on law highlighting the social, political and
economic factors. In his writings, Weber main focus was on analytical and systematic study,
he always preferred to gain knowledge through practical experience as he was of progressive

1
outlook. His major writings include ‘The Theory of Economic and Social Organizations’,
‘General Economic History’ and ‘Protestant Ethic and Spirit of Capitalism’.
Bureaucracy: Meaning
Bureaucracy simply means ‘Desk Government’. Vincent De Gourney, a French national was
the first one who coined the term ‘bureaucracy’ in 1745. After him, several French writers
were involved in popularizing the word bureaucracy but as a term it was used in 19th century.
The famous economist J.S. Mill and the sociologists like Mosca and Michels extensively
wrote on bureaucracy. For Weber, bureaucracy is an “administrative body of officials”, who
all are needed to bring out the efficiency in the organizations. In his opinion there is a lot of
economic competition in the modern era, due to which capitalist organizations required a
highly efficient kind of organization system. The bureaucratic principles gave a scope to the
organization to go ahead with economic planning and maintain the stability in the market.
Weber observes, “The capitalist system has undeniably played a major role in the
development of bureaucracy. Indeed, without it capitalist production could not continue…Its
development, largely under capitalistic auspices, has created an urgent need for stable, strict,
intensive and calculable administration.” (Weber, 1953, p. 48) He further said that
“capitalism is the most rational economic basis for bureaucratic administration and enables it
to develop in the most rational form, especially because, from a fiscal point of view, it
supplies the necessary money resources”. (Weber, 1953, p 48)
Max Weber on Authority
Weber tried to explain bureaucracy as a sociological phenomenon; where theory of
domination can be understood in general context. Domination basically refers to a power
relationship that is authoritarian power of command between the rulers and the ruled. But
power is accepted, only when if it is justified and legitimate. Authority legitimizes the
exercise of power, where a person willingly complies with commands or orders; and on the
basis of this belief Weber identified three types of legitimation, each correspond to a
particular type of authority.
Types of Authority
i) Charismatic authority
ii) Traditional authority
iii) Legal-Rational authority
i) Charismatic authority: The term charisma can be defined as ‘gift of grace’. The
charismatic leader holds some personal qualities which makes him different from the
common man. He may be a hero, masiha or a prophet and by virtue of his magical powers he
has a wide acceptance which forms the basis of legitimate system. People follow his
commands or order without questioning him, they believe in his extraordinary capabilities.
The disciples of the charismatic leader have full devotion in him; however they don’t have
any special qualification or status. The administrative apparatus in this type of authority is

2
unstable and is very loose as the disciples work in accordance to the likes and dislikes of the
leader.
ii) Traditional Authority: Traditional Authority derives its legitimacy from the goodness of
the past where actions are based on customs and traditions. Individuals who exercise this
authority are referred as masters and those who obey the masters are called followers. The
masters have authority by virtue of his status which he inherited from the previous rulers; and
his commands are obeyed by the followers who have personal loyalty towards him and faith
in traditional status including household officials, relatives and personal choices of masters.
iii) Legal Rational Authority: Under legal rational authority, rules are applied judicially and
are applicable on all the members of the organization. In modern society, this authority plays
a dominant role. It is legal as it is based on systematic rules and procedures and it is rational
because it is well defined and more in accordance to proper channel to achieve an end. The
members who exercise this authority are referred as superiors, who follow an impersonal
order; and others include the administrative staff who obeys the laws. Strict adherence to
rules and procedures delimit the authority of the superiors.
Max Weber: The Concept of Bureaucracy
For Weber, in the administrative staff the appointed officials is referred as bureaucracy.
Bureaucracy explicitly includes the appointed officials and elected representative has no role
to play in it. Weber considers that legal rational authority which is based on rules, norms and
procedures holds a predominant position in bureaucracy. For Weber: "Bureaucratic
administration means domination by the force of knowing: that is its fundamental character,
specifically rational" (Cruz, 1995, 689).
“The development of the modern form of organization concurs in all sectors with the
development and continuous expansion of bureaucratic administration […] Because the
bureaucratic administration is always observed under equal conditions and from a formal and
technical perspective, the most rational type [...] The main source of the superiority of
bureaucratic administration lies in the role of technical knowledge, which, through the
development of modern technology and economic methods in goods’ production, has become
absolutely indispensable [...] Bureaucratic administration fundamentally means the exercise
of domination based on knowledge. This is the trait that makes it specifically rational. It
consists, on the one hand, of technical knowledge, which is, per se, sufficient to ensure a
position of extraordinary power for bureaucracy. On the other hand, it should be considered
that bureaucratic organizations, or those in power who use it, tend to become even more
powerful by the knowledge that comes from the practice that they attain in the function.”
(Weber, 1966, pp. 24-26)
The bureaucracy presented by Weber is an ideal or a mental map of a fully developed
bureaucracy, which means that it is an abstract and cannot be found in reality. This ideal type
model of Weber is based on the studies of ancient bureaucracies of Egypt, Rome, China and
Byzantine Empire. It was also influenced by the modern emerging trends of bureaucracy in

3
Europe during the 19th and early 20th century. He believed that in modern state system the
ideal type of bureaucracy should be followed which is based on the rationalization of
collective activities and assures the predictability of the behavior of employees.
According to Weber, “Bureaucracy is by far the most efficient instrument of large-scale
administration which has ever been developed and the modern social order has become
overwhelming dependent on it… this type of organization is in principle applicable with
equal facility to a wide variety of different fields. It may be applied in profit making business
or in charitable organizations, or in any number of other types of private enterprises serving
ideal or material ends. It is equally applicable to political and to religious organizations with
varying degrees of approximation to a pure type; its historical existence can be demonstrated
in all these fields.” (Weber, 1946, pp. 329-340)
Max Weber: Characteristics of Bureaucracy
According to Weber the bureaucratic rationality in organization consists of following main
characteristics as depicted in figure 1 also.
1) Division of work with high specialization: The task of the organization should be
divided on the basis of number of specialized function. Every employee is specialized
and efficient in one type of job. This ensures increased productivity and efficiency of
the organization as a whole.
2) Functions defined by law (formalized written rules and regulations): Bureaucracy
operates in accordance to complete strict adherence to formal rules. These written
formal rules and regulations have been stressed by Weber so that personal favors,
arbitrariness, or gratitude may not infringe the working of the organization; and the
conduct of the organization is based on the defined technical rules or norms.
3) Hierarchy of authority (Observance of legitimate order): Hierarchy holds an important
position in rational type of bureaucracy. The concept of hierarchy holds lot of
importance as administrative system is heavily structured in subordinate services and
management positions. Each lower office is under the control and supervision of higher
one. This system offers the governed to appeal to the higher authority against the
decision of the lower authority in a regulated manner.
4) Assessment and selection of employees for their technical competence: The employee is
appointed on the basis of free and fair selection and this selection is based on tenders,
exams and diplomas which also requires special training programs for the candidates.
The assessment is based purely on the capabilities and performance of the candidates.
5) Formal social relationship according to the position held: The concept of impersonality
should be followed in bureaucratic form of organization. The relationship is based on
formal social aspect and not on irrational sentiments; there is no space for personal likes
and dislikes. The commands of the superior to the subordinate are based on impersonal
order.

4
6) Employees’ regular wage: The employee wage is in the form of the fixed salaries which
are given in accordance to the nature of the job and responsibility. The salaries are
given according to the internal hierarchy of the organization; moreover, there are
chances of career advancement through promotion on the basis of seniority and merit.
7) Separation of ownership and the employee function: There must be a complete
separation between the ownership and employee function. The personal demands and
interests should be kept separate and not to interfere with the organizational activities,
since no employee can be the owner of his or her position.
8) Regular career of employees’ overtime: The promotion of the employees is based on the
objective criteria and not on the discretion of authority which helps in the enhancement
of the regular career advancement of employees over the time.

Source: Adapted from Ferreira et al., 2004, pp. 24 and 25.

The above mentioned characteristic clearly highlights, Weber’s theory of bureaucracy as

ideal, pure, neutral, efficient, hierarchical and rational and inevitable in contemporary society.
He referred the ‘ideal type’ of bureaucracy as an ultimate efficiency machine. Weber said
“Experience tends universally to show that the purely bureaucratic type of administrative
organization... is, from a purely technical point of view, capable of attaining the highest
degree of efficiency and it is in this sense formally the most rational known means of
carrying out imperative control over beings. It is superior to any other form in precision, in

5
stability, in the stringency of its discipline and in its reliability. It thus makes possible a
particularly high degree of calculability of results for the heads of organization and for those
acting in relation to it. It is finally superior both in intensive efficiency and in the scope of its
operations and is formally capable of application to all kinds of administrative task.”
(Maheshwari, 1992) When Weber characterizes bureaucracy as value neutral, he
conceptualizes bureaucracy as a form of social organization which can be examined from
three different points of view. First is the structural view which gained maximum importance.
The features like division of work and hierarchy are included under the structural aspect.
Secondly, bureaucracy can be viewed in terms of behavioral characteristics; and includes the
characteristics like objectivity, precision and consistency. To quote Weber, “when fully
developed, bureaucracy also stands in a specific sense under the principle of sine ira ac
studio. Its specific nature, which is welcomed by capitalism, develops the more perfectly the
more the bureaucracy is ‘dehumanized’, the more completely it succeeds in eliminating from
official business love, hatred, and all purely personal irrational, and emotional elements
which escape calculation. This is the specific nature of bureaucracy and its special virtue.”
(Gerth and Mills, 1946, p. 215) Lastly bureaucracy is defined from the instrumental point of
view which includes the achievement of purpose. In the opinion of Peter Blau, “the
organization that maximizes efficiency in administration or an institutionalized method of
organized social conduct in the interests of administrative efficiency.” (Blau, 1956, p. 60)
Max Weber: Limits on Bureaucracy
While emphasizing the importance and need of bureaucracy, Weber was aware of the fact
that bureaucracy has an inherent tendency of accumulation of power. Albrow also pointed out
that due to this issue Weber considered number of mechanisms to limit the scope of system of
authorities in general and bureaucracy in particular. These mechanism falls into five major
categories.
i) Collegiality
ii) The Separation of Powers
iii) Amateur Administration
iv) Direct Democracy
v) Representation
Collegiality: The principal of collegiality is opposite to monocratism. In monocratic
bureaucracy Weber pointed out that at each stage of the official hierarchy there is only one
person but the moment more than one person get involved in decision making the collegial
principal come into being. Collegiality helps in limiting the role of bureaucracy but it also
results in to the disadvantage in terms of speed of decision and fixing of responsibility.
The Separation of Power: Separation of power meant dividing the same responsibility or a
function between two or more bodies. All the involved bodies have to make compromises, so

6
that they can reach to a decision. This will help to make bureaucracy free from monopoly of
decision by a single body; however, such a system is inherently unstable.
Amateur Administration: Under amateur administration, administration is run by those
people who have public esteem to command, general confidence and their activity is basically
unremunerated. But this system lacked in the expertise of professionals and experts which
modern society requires.
Direct Democracy: Direct democracy also limitize the power of bureaucracy, as under this
system officials are guided by and answerable to an assembly. It may take many forms like
short term of office, selection by lot and possibility of recall. But this system is successful
only in case of small organizations and in local governments.
Representation: Elected representatives of people shares the authority of bureaucracy which
helps in limiting or controlling the power of bureaucracy. But there is a possibility that these
representatives being bureaucratized. However, Weber believed that through the
representation, there is a greatest possibility of a check on bureaucracy.
Thus, Weber was conscious about the excessive authoritarian role of bureaucracy and that is
why he wants to limit the role of bureaucracy. There is a need to control the administrative
apparatus.
Max Weber’s Bureaucracy: Criticism
Weber’s bureaucracy is marked with several criticisms which mainly revolve around the
bureaucratic design, authoritative norms, administrative efficiency; and concept of rationality,
individuality and reliability.
Weber theory failed to take in to consideration the individuals and their behavioral
aspects within the organization. It is constructed as an ideal which cannot be found in reality.
Carl J Friederich observes the term ‘ideal type’ is unfortunate in that the entities to which it is
applied are certainly not ‘ideal’ even in a platonic ‘ideal’ sense; there is, more particularly
nothing ‘ideal’ about bureaucracy. Furthermore, if they were ‘ideal’ they would not be
‘types’ since ‘types’ derive their significance from the empirical reality which they typify…
But Weber, instead of thus proceeding by empirical observation and analysis of the
ascertainable givens of such experience, set forth his ‘ideal types’ as mental constructs which
are neither derived by a process of deductive ratiocination from higher concepts, nor build up
from empirical data…” (Friederick, 1963, pp. 469-70)
Critics are of the opinion that Weber’s theory is not fit for the task which involves
innovation and creativity as it is fit for routine and repetitive work of the organization
following strict rules and regulations. Robert K. Merton viewed that no doubt strict rules and
regulations; and impersonality helps in maintaining reliability and predictability of employee
behavior but it results in to rigid and formal structure in an organization and loss of
organizational effectiveness. Weber emphasized on specialization and differentiation and the
focus is on decentralization and delegation of responsibilities. The outcome is that there is a

7
goal displacement as mentioned by Philip Selznick. There are differentiated goals of different
sub units and the goals of the organization as a whole takes a second place as the focus of the
employees is on the goal of their sub units.
To quote Merton, “An effective bureaucracy demands reliability of response and strict
devotion to regulation. Such devotion to the rules leads to their transformation into absolutes;
they are no longer conceived as relative to a given set of purposes. This interferes with ready
adaptation under special conditions not clearly envisaged by those who draw up the general
rules. Thus the very elements which conduce towards efficiency in general produce
inefficiency in specific instances. Those very devices which increase the probability of
conformances is also lead to an over concern with strict adherence to regulations which
induces timidity consumerism and technicism”. (Merton, 1957, p. 156)
Another criticism was posed by Alvin Gouldner, he viewed that rules and regulations of
the organizations tend to highlight the minimum levels of acceptable behavior or
performance. If the focus of the superiors and subordinates is more on the rules and
regulations and less on the organizational goals then this would result in to goal displacement
of the organization marked with apathy and constant rifts amongst the superiors and
subordinates. Victor Thompson also put forward his argument that superiors are dependent
on the lower level specialists for the fulfillment of the organizational goals. They try to
formulate more and more rules and regulations to escape from the insecurities and their
answerability towards the performance of the organization. There is complete formal
structure followed by Weber in his theory, he failed to recognize the informal relationship
which plays an important role in the growth of an organization. Lloyd Rudolph and Susanne
Rudolph pointed out that, “Formal rationality (and technology) can contribute to
organizational efficiency, but can also contribute to organizational ineffectiveness by
building up the sources of alienation and resistance, and fuelling the struggle for power
against authority. The Persistence or retention of patrimonial elements in bureaucratic
administration can mitigate if not eliminate the struggle, just as the presence of bureaucratic
features in patrimonial administration can (and did) enhance its efficiency and effectiveness”.
(Rudolph and Rudolph, 1979)
Weber equates the authority of the administrative staff with the technical superiority,
Talcott and Parsons criticized this aspect as it leads to internal inconsistency. According to
them, it is not always possible that those who possess authority to give orders are equally
good in their technical skills. Another important drawback of Bureaucracy is that employees
do not get opportunity to express themselves, their opinions or decision making abilities do
not hold any value. As a result employees feel disheartened and demotivated. With the course
of time they are not bothered about rules and regulations and started boycotting them or
simply criticizing them.

8
Conclusion
Despite of several criticisms, many empirical researches have accepted the importance of
Weber theory of bureaucracy. It is of great benefit for managing the large scale organizations
which includes multi-level hierarchy, work based on well-structured established rules and
procedures; and also helps in increasing overall efficiency. In the present day administration
also the utility of Weber’s theory of bureaucracy is clearly visible. It is beneficial in both the
societies whether it is capitalist or socialist. In free economy where state has a minimum role
to play, bureaucracy performs some of the necessary functions of the state and fulfills day to
day requirements. He is a first theoretician who gave a theoretical base to bureaucracy and
highlights its importance in maintaining the organization in an efficient manner.
References
Albrow, M. (1978), Bureaucracy, The Macmillan Press Ltd., London
Bhattacharya, Mohit, 1981, Public Administration: Structure, Process and Behaviour, The
World Press Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata.
Braverman, Harry, 1979, Labour and Monopoly Capital, The Degradation of Work in the
Twentieth Century, Social Scientist Press, Trivendrum.
Lakshmanna, C. and A.V. Satyanarayana Rao, 2004, Max Weber, in D. Ravindra Prasad,
V.S. Prasad and P. Satyanarayan (Eds), Administrative Thinkers, Sterling Publishers, New
Delhi.
Clegg, Steward & David Dunkerley, 1980, Organisation, Class and Control, Routledge &
Kegan Paul, London.
Cruz, M. B. (1995). Teorias sociológicas. Os fundadores e os classics in Sociological
theories: The founders and the classics, Lisboa: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian.
Ferreira. J. M. C. (2004). Abordagens clássicas [Classic approaches]. In J. M. Ferreira, J.
Neves, & A. Caetano (Coords.) Manual de psicossociologia das organizações [Handbook of
psychosociology of organisations]. Lisboa: McGraw-Hill.
H.H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills, Bureaucracy (Ed.), From Max Weber: Essays in sociology,
Oxford University Press, 1946
Friederick, Carl J., (1963), Man and his Government, New York, McGraw Hill.
Maheshwari, S.R. (1992). Bureaucracy on Bureaucratic Theory, Employment News, 17-23,
October
Merton, R. (1957), “Social Theory and Social Structures”, Free Press, Glencoe, III
Blau, Peter M. (1956), Bureaucracy in Modern Society, Random House, New Jersey
Rudolph L and Rudolph S. (1979), Authority and Power in Bureaucratic and Patrimonial
Administration: A Revisionist Interpretation of Weber on Bureaucracy”, World-Politics

9
Weber, M. (1946), The Theory of Social and Economic Organizations, translated by A.M.
Henderson and Talcott parsons, New York
Weber, M. (1953), “The Monocratic Type of Bureaucratic Administration”, in Dwight Waldo
(ed.) “Ideas and Issues in Administration”, McGraw- Hill, New York
Weber, M. (1966). Os fundamentos da organização burocrática: Uma construção do tipo
ideal in The basics of bureaucratic organization: A construction of the ideal type. AAVV.
Sociologia da Burocracia. Rio de Janeiro: Zahar Editores.

10
 Unit-2
(b) Neo-Classical Theories

i. Human Relations Theory (Elton Mayo)

Dr. Neelam Jain

Structure
1. Introduction
2. Professor George Elton Mayo
3. Early Experiment:
4. The Hawthorne Experiment
4.1. The Great Illumination Experiment (1924-27)
4.2. Relay Assembly Study (1927-1932)
4.3. Human Attitudes and Sentiments (1928-31)
4.4. The Bank Wiring Observation Study (1931-32)
5. Main Findings of Hawthorne Experiments
6. Chester I Barnard’s Contribution to Human Relations Theory
7. The Essence of Human Relations Approach
8. The Human Relations vs. Classical Theories
9. Evaluation of Human Relations Approach
10. Conclusion
11. References and Further Reading

1. Introduction
The Human Relations theory is a path-breaking theory in the organization with its emphasis
on the human side of management and organization. The human relation movement come as
a criticism of classical theories, particularly, Scientific Management theory propounded by
Frederick W. Taylor. The Great Depression and economic damage of 1920s to 1940s lay bare
the shortcomings of earlier approaches to management. During this period, there was a
growth of labour unionism and an increasing demand of improved work conditions, labour
rights and social security. Such issues created a gap between the managers and labourers and
there was need of increased communication for developing more humane way of addressing
various problems of organization.
The Human Relations theory views organization in a holistic social perspective and
highlights the limitations of mechanistic approach to labour productivity and efficiency of an
organization. The pioneer of this theory was Professor George Elton Mayo. He is regarded as

11
the father of Human Relations approach to organization. In collaboration with his colleagues
of Harvard Business School, Mayo conducted series of experiments in this field.
2. Professor George Elton Mayo
Professor Elton Mayo was born in Australia in 1880. He studied Psychology and Philosophy
at University of Adelaide. He joined as lecturer in Logic, Ethics and Psychology at the
University of Queensland in 1911. Later on he was elevated to the rank of professor of
Philosophy there. He pioneered research on psychoanalytic treatment of shell-shock. His
research findings from the study in the Hawthorne Plant of the Western Electric Company
throw light on industrial and organizational psychology as well as certain aspects of
sociology.
3. Early Experiment
In 1923, Mayo conducted his first research in a Textile Mill near Philadelphia. It was later
termed as ‘first inquiry’. This research site was a highly organized sector. The environment
for workers there was conductive. Despite this, the general labour turnover (absenteeism) in
all the departments was estimated to be approximately 5 per cent per annum. Again in the
mule-spinning department the turnover was approximately 250 per cent. Various incentives
were provided to the workers to improve the situation, however, without much success.
Subsequently, Elton Mayo and his team studied the multi-spinning department from various
directions. On the basis of his research, he found that workers suffered from fatigue or lack of
adequate rest and there was a need of introducing rest periods to them. The motivating effect
of the scheme was tremendous. Mayo’s study was comprehensive in nature. It took into
account production levels, rest periods, working conditions, occasional accidents etc. By
delegating the decision of resting periods to the workers, the management in the Textile Mill
set in motion the social interaction between management and workers. It started a new
beginning.
4. The Hawthorne Experiment
The Hawthorne Plant of Western Electrical Company at Chicago happened to be one of the
progressive firms in the US. It was reputed for better working environment, favourable
workings hours and various facilities. But from the early 1920s, the firm was reduced to
moderate level of productivity. The management of the firm attempted every positive change
to improve productivity as suggested by the Scientific Management theory and Classical
theories of organization but the result were not satisfactory. Under this circumstance, the
management of the firm had approached Harvard Business School to find out the solution of
the problem of low productivity. Hence, Elton Mayo and his associates took this
responsibility and conducted a series of experiments and put forward their Human Relations
Approach to organization. The notable studies of this Hawthorne experiment are as follows.

12
4.1 The Great Illumination Experiment (1924-27)
In this experiment, two groups of female workers who were engaged in assembling telephone
relays, were placed in two separate rooms. One was a test room and another was a control
room. The object was to study the level of production. The hypothesis was that the level of
productivity corresponds positively with the enhanced degree of illumination. The control
group remained with constant illumination of the level and the type with which the two
groups started. Experimental changes were introduced periodically in the test group’s room.
Then slowly a change was effected in the working conditions. Its object was to mark the
effect of this change on the output. The research work continued for two years. It was
observed that regardless of the level of illumination, production increased in both the control
and experimental groups. The findings were a bit surprising. Then the rest periods were
deliberately altered. Change was also effected in wage payment, duration of work, room
temperature, humidity etc. to assess their impact on productivity. However, quite contrary to
the expectations of the researchers, the groups kept a steady growth rate. The researchers
concluded that the better communication between managers and workers during the
experiment and increased attention to the worker’s situation by the research group led to the
positive result.
4.2 Relay Assembly Study (1927-1932)
With a view to critically analysing the hypothesis on illumination theory and assessing the
impact of variety of factors on productivity, two new groups were formed. It was based on
the two hypotheses which were proposed by the researchers after the illumination study:
The first hypothesis: Firstly, it was found that the individual wage enhancement
stimulated increase in the output.
The second hypothesis: Secondly, it was observed that positive changes in supervision
methods improved the attitudes and output.
In this study, the two groups were offered individual incentive on piecework basis. It was
observed that initially the total output improved whereas it remained constant after a certain
period. The second group was placed on individual incentive plan. Variations in rest periods
and duration of work and their impact on productive output were also studied. There was an
average rise of productive output over a period of 14 months.
The researchers did not confirm the first hypothesis. It was found that not wage but other
conditions enhanced output in both the groups.
In order to find out the validity of the second hypothesis, working condition was made
more relaxed, conductive and cordial. Free and frank communication was encouraged among
fellow workers and supervisors. Supervisors modified their managerial practices. They
responded with the workers in a democratic manner. The workers came to realise that they
were integral part in the productive system. It led their response turning more positive.

13
 It was observed by Mayo that work satisfaction largely depends on the informal social
pattern of the working group. It was observed that cordial techniques of supervision
positively impact productivity.
4.3 Human Attitudes and Sentiments (1928-31)
Mayo and his team conducted another study during 1928-31. It was related to human
attitudes and sentiments. For this, they interviewed 21000 workers and asked them to express
freely their opinion about the working conditions and the policies of the management. These
interviews were more of an attempt to boost the morale of the workers than collecting data
about the various problems faced by the workers. It was observed that without proper
appreciation of the feelings and sentiments of the workers, it is difficult to delve deep into
their real problems. In the process, the research team acquired new insight in understanding
the concerns of the workers.
The study identified mainly 3 things:
First, Collection of information about the problems faced by the workers create a feeling
of equality among the workers, since they find place to participate in managerial decision
making. This create hope of improved working environment.
Second, the observation of the research team encouraged managers and supervisors to
become more responsive to the problems of workers.
Third, it was felt by the researchers for understanding the real problems of the workers it
is necessary to appreciate their sentiments and feelings. This in turn derive both from
employee’s personal history and social situation.
4.4 The Bank Wiring Observation Study (1931-32)
This experiment involved a group of 14 men (9 wirers, 3 soldiers, 2 inspectors) who were
assigned to do a wiring job which also included the job of soldiering and fixing the terminals.
Wages were paid on the basis of a group incentive plan and each member got his share on the
total output of the group. In contrast to their expectations, researchers found that the workers
were not reacting positively to the incentives. Workers fixed their own productive target
which was the lower than the target fixed by the management. There was an informal
consensus among the workers to maintain uniform rate of output and workers did not try to
increase or decrease production from the standard they agreed for themselves. Thus the
researchers uncovered an underlying group psychology and informal code of behaviour that
influences overall industrial productivity. Such behavioural pattern among the workers was
directly attributed to the deep seated distrust against the management. In this particular
experiment, the group used informal pressure to rectify the deviant members. The following
rules were framed:
 Too much work should be avoided. If one does so, s/he will be regarded as ‘rate
buster’.

14
  Too little work should be discouraged. If one does so, s/he will be regarded as
‘chiseler’.
 Anything negative about a fellow worker should not be reported to the supervisor.
 Nobody should attempt social distance or act in an officious manner.
Thus this study was very useful in highlighting the fact of intra-group forces in the working
of an organization.
5. Main Findings of Hawthorne Experiments
The Hawthorne experiments and subsequent studies were very important in highlighting the
working of informal organization and socio-psychological factors as major determinants of
worker’s satisfaction and organizational output. This study has led to the understanding of
importance of human factor in organization and necessity of proper communication system
between the management and workers. The findings of experiments of Mayo and his
associates can be summarized as below:
1. Social Factors in Output: The level of organizational effectiveness is determined not
by the official prescriptions but by the social norms. Workers are not mere cogs in the
machine. They are human beings with social characteristics which in turn determine
the productivity and efficiency in organization.
2. Group Influence: In the organizational setting, workers not merely act as an
individuals but do as member of the group. Group standards exert major impact on
individual behaviour. The productivity of workers corresponds to this standard. The
group also provide protection against executive retaliations. In these ways, the
working of the informal groups somehow limit the executive power.
3. Rewards and Sanctions: Non economic rewards such as social rewards and group
sanctions are more effective than economic incentives for the increment of
productivity.
4. Supervision: Organizational objectives become acceptable to workers if they are also
involved in discussion and their informal leader is consulted. This necessitates
effective communication and willingness on the part of management to ensure
participation of the workers in decision- making.
5. Communication: Communication is key to develop a better environment for work
and development of organization. The rationality of a particular decision or action
should be properly communicated to workers. Management should try to identify the
attitudes, social and psychological factors, and methods of working of workers
through proper communication.
6. Chester I Barnard’s Contribution to Human Relations Theory
Another important exponent of Human Relations approach to organization is Chester I
Barnard, which is reflected in his work The Functions of Executive (1938). The main features
of Barnard’s theory of organization can be summarised as below:

15
  Organization as cooperative system: Cooperation is necessary for proper working of
an organization. Individuals have limited capacity to manage the affairs of
organization without the cooperation of others.
 Formal and Informal Organization: Barnard believed that formal and informal
structure complement each other in the proper functioning of the organization.
 Consent Theory of authority: According to Barnard ‘consent’ or acceptance should be
the basis of authority. Effectiveness of the authority is determined by the willing
participation of the subordinates. He has identified four essential preconditions;
intelligibility, conformity to the purpose of the organization, compatibility with
personal interests and physical and mental ability to comply behind the acceptance of
authority.
 Inducement-Contribution balance: Bernard sought to bring equilibrium between
contribution in an organization in terms of labour and satisfaction level generally
calculated in terms of inducements and incentives.
 Moral Responsibility: Moral responsibility of executive form the backbone of an
organization.
 Communication: Success of any cooperative system depends on proper
communication network.

7. The Essence of Human Relations Approach

First, Human Relations theory, in contrast to other classical theories, views organization
in its holistic social perspective emphasising on the human element in the working of
organization.
Second, the Human Relations theory believes that each worker carries with him/ her
culture, attitude, belief and way of life. Organization should take proper cognizance of all
these socio-cultural factors. The social and psychological factors are responsible for
worker’s productivity and job satisfaction.
Third, this theory identifies the impact of informal groups on motivation and productivity.
Fourth, it emphasises on sense of belongingness among the workers and need of social
solidarity in an organization.
Fifth, Human relation theory discovers a new form of management; participative
management, which may reduce the gap between workers and management.
8. The Human Relations vs. Classical Theories
Like other Classical theories, The Human Relations theory acknowledges the importance of
‘management’ in efficient production, however, it differs in its basic approach to the
organization from the former. Organization is in fact a social system. In addition to its formal
structure, it involves individuals and informal groups. The Human Relations theory is
regarded as a vital theory in relation to its impact on productivity. It is also called the ‘neo-

16
classical theory’ as it emphasises efficiency and regards productivity as the essence of an
organization. But this theory rely on different techniques to achieve desired objectives.
Though alike in terms of achieving objectives, Classical and Human Relations theory are
different in their approaches. The Human Relations theory attempts to eliminate the
dehumanising factors of the classical theory.
9. Evaluation of Human Relations Approach
The Human Relations theory brings a new perspective in organization theory by
acknowledging the importance of workers in their respective socio-cultural milieu. However,
this theory is also criticised on the following grounds:
1. Critics have pointed out several shortcoming of research methods of Hawthorne
survey. It is argued that the sample size at the Hawthorne plant was inadequate. It did
not deal with the entire organization. Carey’s criticism is based on the fact that small
groups of ‘cooperative girls’ do not indicate the general pattern. Inadequate samples
cannot help us to arrive at acceptable conclusions. The theory supports the old view
that monetary incentives, conductive working environment and discipline are the vital
impacting factors of productivity. According to Carey, the theory lacks scientific base.
2. Peter F Drucker is also a critic of this theory. According to him it does not attach due
significance to economic dimensions. The Harvard group neglects nature of work. It
primarily focuses on inter-personal relations.
3. This theory is also criticised for its lack of understanding the role of unions in an
organization. Mayo and his team substitute human relations oriented supervisors for
union representatives. Scholars like Loren Baritz and others criticise the theory as
‘anti-union’ and ‘pro-management’. Some Marxist critics prefer to call Hawthorne
researchers as ‘cow sociologists’. According to them conflict free organizational
situation is utopian.
4. The theory is also criticised for the reason that it draws inspiration mainly from
classical theories. It did not go far enough to ensure ultimate contentment and well-
being of employers.

10. Conclusion
No theory can be regarded as all-inclusive and perfect. Elton Mayo’s Human Relations theory
has also certain short comings. But in spite of this, it may be regarded as milestone in
augmenting subsequent development of organizational practices. His ideas of adequate
communication system, participative management, importance of informal organizations, and
human side of organization among others are regarded as very crucial in organization
theories. His ideas led to the further development of Neo-Human Relations approaches,
particularly in the analysis of the work design and management evolved in the writings of
Douglas Macgregor, Abraham Maslow, Frederick Herzberg, Chris Argyris. At last we can

17
say that Elton Mayo and his Human Relations approach is relevant still today not only for its
innovative ideas but also for practical application.
11. References and Further Reading
Baritz, L. (1960). The Servants of Power, Westport, CT: Greenwood.
Carey, A. (1967). “The Hawthorne Studies: A Radical Criticism’’, American Sociological
Review, 32 (3), pp. 403-416.
Chakravarty, B & Chand P. (2006) Public Administration in a Globalizing World, New
Delhi: Sage.
Chester, B. (1954). The Functions of the Executive, Cambridge: Harvard University Press
Drucker, Peter F. (1961). The Practice of Management, London: Mercury Books.
Jha, P. K. & Dubey, S. N. (Eds) (2015) Administration and Public Policy, New Delhi:
Scholar Tech Press.
Mayo, E. (1933). The Human Problems of an Industrial Civilization, Cambridge, MA:
Harvard.
----------(1945). The Social Problems of Industrial Civilization, Andover, Massachusetts:
Andover Press.
Roethlisberger, Firtz J., and Dickson, W. J. (1939). Management and the Worker, Cambridge:
Harvard University Press.

18
 Unit-2

(b) ii. Rational Decision-Making (Herbert Simon)

Dr. Devarati Roy Chowdhury

Structure
 Introduction
 Definitions of Decision Making
 Types of Decision Making
 Principles of Decision Making
 Meaning of Decision Theory
 Intuitive Decision Making Model
 Creative Decision Making Model
 Rational Decision Making Model and Criticism
 Rational Decision Making and Herbert Simon: Concept of Bounded Rationality
 Critical Evaluation of Herbert Simon’s Model
 Conclusion
 References

Introduction
The subject of decision making is very extensive. Decision making is a multi-step process
which is considered as the most significant activity of the organization. It is the most basic
and central function of management at all levels. Decision making involves a clearly defined
elements based systematic process of selecting a course of action from multiple possible
alternatives for the achievement of the desired objective. Each defined element involves a
decision in itself and also serves as a building block of the decision process.
The main objective of the whole activity is to guide and channelise the human action for
the achievement of a proposed goal. It involves systemizing the organizational infrastructure
and required resources into the suitable course of action which would lead to achieving the
desired results in an orderly manner. The course of action involves questions like ‘what is the
objective’, ‘what is to be done to achieve the objective’, ‘how it is to be done’, ‘who all will
be involved’, ‘what are the resources’. By considering all the questions, alternative
possibilities are chalked out and then the best alternative is selected which is called as
‘decision’ and the whole process through which the final decision is taken is known as
‘decision making’. The word “decision” is derived from Latin word “decido”, which means

19
settlement, a fixed intention bringing to conclusive result and decision making means arriving
at a conclusion as a solution of a problem.
All the administrative activities such as planning, organisation, direction, budgeting and
control etc are performed through decisions. That is why, the whole decision making process
is the most crucial aspect of administration.
Definitions of Decision Making
According to Koontz and O’Donnel, “Decision-making is the actual selection from among
alternatives of a course of action.”
Melvin T. Copeland said “administration essentially is a decision making process and
authority is responsible for making decision and for ascertaining that the decisions made are
carried out.”
According to Peter Drucker, “Whatever a manager does, he does through decision
making.”
Above mentioned definitions show that as the core function of management process,
decision is an act of choice selecting a particular alternative out of many possibilities. As an
act of choice, the whole process involves thinking, designing and deciding at each step. This
makes it a cognitive process where the knowledge about the problem helps to decide what to
do about the problem, how to solve it. Decision making involves gathering the available
information which is known, identifying the resources, chalking out the alternatives,
assessing the risks involved and making the best decision weighing all the alternatives in a
timely manner and evaluating decision effectiveness. This is fundamentally basic for each
individual decision to big organization, however, process of arriving at final solution is
complex can vary from individual to organization and at each level. (Bhattacharya and
Chakrabarty 2005)
Types of Decisions Making
There are many types of decisions which can be classified in a number of ways:
a.) Programmed decisions and non-programmed decisions
Programmed decision are structured and recurs after a regular interval. These types of
decisions involved routine and repetitive problems. The conditions of the programmed
decisions are highly certain which means that information about these problems are already
available and solutions are offered in accordance with habit, rule or procedure in a pre-
planned manner.
Non-programmed decisions are relatively unstructured and occurs much less often than a
programmed decision. Problems are unique and novel and conditions for non-programmed
decisions are highly uncertain and non-repetitive in nature. There are no prespecified
procedure to rely upon while taking decisions. Each situation is different from the other,

20
involving situations and problems which are not often seen and thus, requires more
innovative solutions.
b.) Organisational decisions and personal decisions
Organisational decisions involve organizational goals and are made for the advancement
of the organization. These are the decisions which an executive or manager takes on behalf of
organisation. These can be delegated or transferred to others. These decisions making involve
decisions pertaining to practices and problems of the organisation.
Personal decisions are concerned to an employee of the organisation. These are basically
the decisions which are made by an executive or manager as an individual and not as a
member of the organisation. These decisions are made to achieve personal goals and cannot
be delegated to others.
c.) Individual decisions and group decisions
Individual decision is taken by an individual. In this an individual can often reach
decisions more quickly and it is less expensive in comparison to group decision. The clear
accountability lies with the individual who has taken the decisions.
Group decisions are those decisions which are taken by group or organisational team
which is constituted for the purpose. These decisions involve more information, process of
deliberations and the accountability lies with the whole group.
d.) Routine (tactical) decisions and strategic (basic) decisions
Routine decisions concerned with routine and repetitive problems. These types of
decisions neither require collection of new data nor conferring with the people. These can be
taken without much of deliberation. The primary purpose of these decisions is to achieve high
degree of efficiency in the ongoing activity. Within an organisation, lower level units can
take routine decisions in accordance to organisational rules.
The strategic decisions are taken on the serious problems and these require fact finding
analysis of the possible alternatives. These decisions require lengthy deliberations and has
long term implications. The strategic decisions are taken by top level management in an
organisation.
e.) Policy decisions and operative decisions
Policy decisions are the decisions that define the basic principles of the organization and
determine how it will develop and function in the future. These are taken by top level
management to change the rules, organizational procedure.
Operative decisions involved determining and planning short term objectives and goals
concerning routine tasks. These decisions are taken by lower management in order to put into
action the policy decisions.

21
 Apart from these categories, there are more types of decision making like departmental,
interdepartmental and enterprise decisions, major and minor decisions, short term and long
tern decisions, simple and complex decisions etc. Each decision making model has its own
advantages and disadvantages.
Principles of Decision Making
 Marginal principle of decision making: it is based on principle of diminishing
returns. This principle maintains after reaching the optimal level of utilization, any
further addition of factor of production will yield diminished per unit returns. The
principle works to identify the optimal level and is applied for training, promotion,
sales, advertisements.
 Mathematical principle of decision making: this principle gives scientific approach
to managers in organization. It rationalizes the filtering of all the data, information
which are used for analysing a problem, balancing all the possible alternatives and
taking decision thereafter. It helps in balancing the overwhelming flow of
information in form of data in a orderly manner. It underlies computer programme
and venture analysis, probability theory, game theory are based on these principles.
 Psychological principle of decision making: it works on the idea that decision
making is a cognitive process in which analysis of the problem, exploring alternatives
and choosing the best possibility, all these elements are based by expectations,
aspirations, technological skills, personality traits, organisational and social status
etc.
 Limiting factor principle: as per this principle, the basic fundamentals of problem
are analysed and on that basis possible inferences or conclusion are drawn.
 Principle of participation in decision making: this works on the idea of team
participation. It maintains that decision influenced by human behaviour and thus are
the by product of human relationship. Like in organization, this principle favours
consulting the subordinate for reaching to decisions.
 Alternative principle idea in decision making: according to this principle all the
possibilities are evaluated one by one and after weighing all the possible alternatives,
best alternative is considered as final decision.
All the decisions are fully or partially based on these principles. (Bhattacharya and
Chakrabarty 2005)
Meaning of Decision Theory
Decision theory is considered as an interdisciplinary process to take decision which are
considered as the best possible decision in unknown circumstances. As an interdisciplinary
process, analysis of the decision making process is done through a diverse lens of
psychology, philosophy, mathematics, statistics, sciences and social science.

22
 On the basis of that three different areas of decision theory have been generated which
examine the decision making from three different point of view. These are descriptive,
prescriptive and normative decision theory.
 Descriptive decision theory examines that how the irrational beings understand the
problem and take decisions.
 Prescriptive decision theory provided fundamental guidelines to a decision taker in
order to draw possible inferences and make the best possible decision in uncertain
environment.
 Normative decision theory highlights the importance of values and norms and
provides guidance for taking decisions based on set of norms and values.
Types of Decision Making Model
Decision making model describes the methods which is taken to make the decisions. There
are four main models of decision making and each model is relevant for a specific kind of
decision. It is important to mention here that each model of decision making has its
advantages and risks. The models are:
 Intuitive decision making model
 Creative decision making model
 Rational decision making model
 Bounded rational decision making model
Intuitive Decision Making Model
Intuitive decision making model focuses on the idea of reaching the decisions without
considerable conscious reasoning. With great deal of uncertainty attached, constraints of
time, finances, and limitation in terms of lack or imperfect information, it is often found that
people are taking decisions without considering the formal steps of the rational decision
making. But it is important to note here that, as it is seldom criticized from an outsider that it
is more based on gut feeling and guessing power, it is also a systematic model of decision
making. (Lumenlearning course)
Unlike rational decision making model, in this model decisions are not taken on the basis
of exploring best alternative out of possible options. Rather the decision taker here, analyses
the environment and figure out the pattern and use past experience and takes the suitable
course of action. If it is not coming out to be a workable solution then another new idea is
picked so at one given point of time, one choice is considered. Once a workable course of
action is recognized, the decision maker uses it to solve the problem. The basic strategy here
is trial and error, testing one solution at a time, understanding the patterns, scanning the cues
and thus reinventing the wheel every time.
Intuitive model is opposite of rational decision making model which is a multi-step
process of taking a decision based on facts analyse. This model is good to analysis ill-
structured and fragmented problems.

23
Creative Decision Making Model
Creative model of decision making highlights the power of imaginative new ideas. With the
multi-disciplinarity approach, 360 degree outlook, increasing competition and providing
something new, setting up new trend momentum, individuals and organizations are
constantly trying to be more creative and unique with the decisions. The criteria for this
model ranges from cutting costs to offering new innovative ways to do something. One point
which is need to be clear here is creativity and innovation are noy synonyms to each other, in
the innovation process, creativity is the first stepping stone. Innovation is a combination of
creative and realistic, workable planning.
Steps of creative decision making process:
• Problem recognition: identifying and understanding the problem
• Immersion: conscious thinking and gathering information
• Incubation: setting aside the problem, however brain is working on the problem,
unconscious state.
• Illumination: in a least expected scenario, solution become visible, similar to a ‘eureka
moment’
• Verification and application stage: conscious verification of the solution leading to the
implementation of the final decision. (lumenlearning course)
The combination of three factors evaluate the level of creative in the decisions making
process. These are fluency (ability to generate the maximum number of ideas), flexibility
(range of different ideas), and originality (newness and uniqueness of ideas).
Rational Decision Making Model
The rational decision making model presents a multistep process for making decisions
through logic and reasoning between possible alternatives. It is known as rational model of
decision making because the decision taken by this model seems to optimize utility and
minimize the cost involved (Simon 1947). It is also rational because the inferences are drawn
based on logical evidences as in form of facts and information and are not based on any guess
work or imagination. According to this model, any decisions which has been taken without
considering the information and reasoning is seemed to be highly irrational.
It is a model of making logical decisions based on objectivity, utilization of experiences,
economizing on efforts and give lesser importance to intuition and subjectivity.
Stepwise Rational Decision Making Model
 Identifying the problem
The very step involves defining and framing the problem
 Establishing decision criteria

24
 In this step, people need to establish the relevance of all elements which are involved in
taking decisions like all the information, stakeholders involved, their requirement,
interest, preferences etc.
 Weighing the decision criteria
This step revolves around putting the priorities and information in the decision in a
correct order.
 Exploring possible alternatives
After the identification of the problem, and collection of the relevant information, the
next step is assessing them and chalking out all the possible alternatives.
 Evaluate each alternative
This is the fifth step and in this step all the possible alternatives are evaluated on the
various parameters like feasibility, realistic and reliability of the alternatives, merits and
demerits of each alternative.
 Choosing the best alternative as decision
Once the evaluation of the alternatives are finished, the decision maker now choose the
best suitable alternative and clearly state as decision.
 Implementation of the decision
The final decision is implemented by the decision maker in order to solve the problem.
 Evaluation of the decision
The last and final step involves evaluation the results of the decision.
Assumptions of the Rational Model of Decision Making
This model maintains that people choose the best alternative out of possible inferences on the
basis of maximization of benefits and minimization of cost analysis. The basic assumption of
rational model are:
 People have complete and perfect knowledge about the problem and related
information on the basis of which they will make choices.
 People have the perfect data to measure cost benefit analysis.
 People possess the required cognitive ability to process the data, evaluate all possible
combinations against each others and has sound logical and objective ability to choose
the best possible alternative. (lumenlearning course)
Problems with the Rational Decision Making Model
The very basic problem with the model is its unrealistic assumptions of the decision maker
knows everything starting from the problem to all available choices, to choosing the best
alternative. The rational decision maker is expected to choose the ‘optimal alternative’ which

25
has minimum cost and maximum benefits. In this decision making process, the ethical and
normative parameters are not taken into account. This model is dominated by the idea of
giving more preferences to fact, data and scientific analysis. (Henry 2003)
Critiques of the Rational Decision Making Model
The model have been criticized for having bias to the over-simplified and unrealistic
assumptions like:
The model assumes that all information is available pertaining the problem. It may not be
the true case and secondly, the decision maker might not be able to get and retain all the
information. There are many sort of limitations to it. As per the stepwise decision making
process, all information has to be gathered and analysed in order to create all possible
alternatives. There are some inherent problems with the very assumption as, first, it is tough
to get all information about any problem, there are some limitations to how much information
we can gather.
Secondly, pile of information can lead to ‘information analysis paralysis’ where too
much time would get wasted in analysing information and making sense out of it without any
conclusive decision. Too much reliance on these unrealistic assumptions has its problems.
Thirdly, individual rationality has its own boundaries to see through the data and figure
out alternatives out of that. There are cognitive, infrastructural, ecological restraints to it.
And, the more complex is the problem, more tough is to get information regarding it and
more are the limitations in order of making more rational decision.
Rational Decision Making and Herbert Simon
Nobel prize winning economist Herbert Simon’s (1916-2001) most celebrated work is
Administrative Behaviour: A decision making process was published in the year 1947. His
notable works are:
Administrative Behaviour (1947)
Fundamental Research in Administration (1953)
Organization (1958)
Human Problem Solving (1972)
In his book ‘Administrative Behaviour’ Simon mentioned that “decision making is the central
concern for understanding the organization and its working. And, in order to understand the
organization better, one need to analyse the human behaviour and its ethical and values
preferences in the whole decision making process.
Herbert Simon attacked the scientific and structural approach for their contradiction and
oversimplified, idealistic assumptions and thus making the discipline of public administration
inconsistent with no universal relevance. Simon in particular, questioned the theoretical basis
of rational decision making and challenged its universal validity. (Simon 1947)

26
 Herbert Simon’s investigation of the role of rationality in decision making has led to the
growth of behavioural approach in the field of administrative behaviour with focus on
decision making. For Simon, decision making is a universal process and has contextual
relevance. In his own words, “a theory of administration should be concerned with the
processes of decision as well as the processes of action. Mere setting up of a theory and no
relation to reality is of no value.” (Simon 1947)
For Simon, “administration is the art of getting things done” and for that he emphasized
on choices which ensure actions. Simon highlighted that in administrative study, more
attention has been given to action than choices. Choice precedes actions and without
understanding the choice properly, action cannot be analysed. And, decision making study is
the study of choices in behavioural approach. (Simon 1955)
Simon asserted that one has to understand that every administrative activity involves two
different and interrelated activity. These are:
 ‘deciding’ (decision)
 ‘doing’ (action)
‘Doing’ is integrally related to deciding. And, that is why deciding factors should be
analysed, should be based on sound principles so that it ensure effective action. Simon argued
that traditional administrative thinkers did not diagnose the situations thus lacked the frame
of reference which eventually made them suffer with the problem of universal validity. Thus,
Simon proposed his model of rational decision making which is based on logical positivism
and excluded value judgement, preferences and any normativity. Simon favoured that
administrative behaviour should only take into account those knowledge which is coming
from rigorous factual analysis. It is important to mention here that ‘logical positivism’ (a
philosophical movement arose out of Vienna Circle in the 1920s) basically holds the idea that
the only knowledge is scientific knowledge and meaningful knowledge which is based on
facts. Logical positivism differs from erstwhile schools of empiricism and positivism and
maintains that knowledge acquired by verification, experimental process should be
considered as basis of knowledge. (Bhattacharya and Chakrabarty 2005)
On the basis of logical positivism, Simon supported empirical approach and negated the
use of normative approach in the study of decision making in administration. According to
Simon, “factual information can be verified and tested, they are highly objective in nature but
value based judgements are subjective in nature and cannot be tested”. (Simon 1947)
Simon believed that decision making is a tough task as the decisions maker within an
organization is constantly facing new, complex challenges and out of the many possible
alternatives, the decision maker has to select the most suitable alternative to provide a
practical and workable solution to the problem.
Simon’s decision making theory is based on the basic idea that rational administrator or a
rational decision maker possesses perfect and complete knowledge about understating the

27
problem, has all the required information, cognitive ability to interpret the information and
has the farsightedness to vision out the possible alternative and best alternative too.
Flowchart of Simon’s decision process

Is there a problem?

R
E
What are the V
alternatives? I
E
W

Which course of action

one should choose?

This process of decision making comprises of number of stages:

 Intelligence activity in this stage the environment is analysed to identify the issues
and events which require decision. Information as data is gathered, processed and
analysed to define the problem.
 Design activity involves development of the possible alternatives on the basis of
processed data and each course of possible action is evaluated. This ranges from
problem analysis, figuring out possible alternatives and testing alternatives for their
feasibility and practicality.
 Choice and Implementation stage comprises of selecting the most suitable
alternative and that is implemented.
 Review stage involves monitoring the performance of the implemented course of
action and evaluate outcomes.
As per the rational decision making model, a complete rational decision maker is a ‘economic
man’ as defined by neo-classical theory. And, in the state of classical perfect rationality
condition, each possible alternative would be given numerical utility value and the alternative
having highest value would be selected as rational perfect decision. (Henry 2003)
As stated above, in this manner, it is assumed that the rational decision maker:
 Knows all about problem, information and alternatives

28
  Knows the outcome of each alternative
 Knows all the preferences of all the outcomes
 Have a sound computational cognitive ability to compare and choose most preferred
possible course of action.
Simon mentioned that it is a condition of perfect rationality but in an imaginary world. In real
life situation, the whole decision making process suffers from many limitations like
inadequate information, cognitive limitations, no possibility of chalking out all possible
solutions, decision maker’s own biases, beliefs, intellectual and skilled capacity, external
environment, organisational factors etc. (Henry 2003)
Simon didn’t negate that crucial role of rationality in decision making and highlighted
the importance of rationality stating that “all decisions should be based on rational choices as
preferred behaviour alternative in terms of some system of values whereby the consequences
of behaviour can be evaluated.” He explained rationality as means-end construct. Out of
many possible alternatives, picking the one doesn’t signify that rest alternatives are not
suitable or wrong. As per Simon, if we go by rationality, we will understand that in that
particular situation, that particular course of action is selected by decision maker. However,
in different situation, the decision maker might opt for some other alternative. So, rationality
helps to understand the problem better.
Simon suggested that there are mainly six types of rationality.
 Subjective rationality: a decision is considered as subjectively rational if it leads to the
maximization of the achievement in comparison to the knowledge of the subject.
 Objective rationality: a decision is considered as objectively rational if it maximizes
the given value in that given situation.
 Deliberate rationality means deliberately adjusting the means to ends.
 Conscious rationality refers to the conscious process of adjusting means to end.
 Personal rationality is related to decision directly to individual
 Organization rationality refers to the extent to which decisions are related to
organisation. (Simon 1947)
Herbert Simon’s theory of rational decision making differed from traditional rational decision
making model because in Simon’s theory, values and preferences and rationality have given
major importance. Simon’s theory have adequate analysis of behavioural approach and has
universal application.
According to Simon, “the Rational-Economic Model (Classical decision theory) assumes
the manager faces a clearly defined problem, he knows all possible action alternatives and
their consequences, and then chooses the optimum solution. Whereas in Administrative
Model (Behavioural), the Behavioural decision theory accepts the notion of bounded
rationality. It assumes the manager acts only in terms of what is perceived about a given
situation, and then chooses a satisfying solution”. (Simon 1947)

29
Understanding the Concept of Bounded Rationality
Rationality is the central point in Simon’s decision making model. On the basis of this
bounded rationality concept, Simon has tried to show the limitations of human rationality and
how human rationality differs from pure economic rationality.
‘Bounded rationality’ decision making model of Herbert Simon provides a holistic
understanding of how decisions are taken. The basic principle of this theory works on the
same line that decision making is a rational process. However, Simon gives a condition here
that as decision maker lacks the basic cognitive ability and due to many other limitations like
time constraints, lack of information, organizational procedure etc. decision maker cannot
attain the optimal decision which can maximize benefits with minimum costs. (Bhattacharya
and Chakrabarty 2005)
Instead the decision maker, in such cases, on the basis of his/her rationality opt for
suitable course of action thus making ‘good enough’ decisions. The rationality here is that
decision maker is fully aware of limitations and then opt for most suitable possible
alternative.
The theory of bounded rationality highlights the point that decision maker should adapt
the rational approach, and must determine the extent and range of information which needs to
be gathered and processed for identification of the problem, creating alternative solutions at
information gathering and analysing stage and finally choosing the alternative.
Simon clearly points out that the decision maker is not in control of all the stakeholders
and of environment and that is why it is almost impossible for a rational man to take rational
decisions knowing its limitations. So, with limited information and manageable alternatives,
the decision maker would settle with suitable alternative without exhaustive exploration.
(Lumenlearning course)
The most important principle of bounded rationality model is the ‘principle of
satisficing’ which means that choosing the most suitable possible alternative which meets the
minimum criteria. The concept of satisficing is similar to rational decision making but
whereas in later, the best possible alternative becomes the final choice thus leads to
maximization of benefits and minimization of costs, in the former, opting for suitable
alternative meeting minimum criteria saves efforts, time and the most viable realistic
approach to decision making.

30
Image 1. Courtesy Figure on ResearchGate.

Herbert Simon said that “the word satisficing is actually a combination of two words: satisfy
and suffice. As one can get all information, and even if one gets all information, he will not
be able to process it. In contrary, in bounded rationality, seeking ‘good enough’ something
which is satisfactory, fulfilling minimum threshold, acceptable works best and in the practical
world, this satisficing decision making is the most realistic approach.” Simon applied the
concept of bounded rationality and satisficing to individual to organisational decisions.
(Simon 1947; 1955)
So, in nutshell, there are some basic factors which are leading to satisficing decisions
based on bounded rationality. These are:
 Dynamic and Complex nature of reality and administrative objectives.
 Limited ability of decisions maker to foresee the alternatives and outcomes.
 Lack of information and lack of cognitive and computational ability to process the
information.
 Organizational pressure and other external factors in environment.
 Personal interests, preferences and biases are bound to influence the decisions.
(Bhattacharya and Chakrabarty 2005)
On the basis of that, the administrative man has following traits:
 On the basis of bounded rationality, administrative man takes satisfactory decisions
with meeting minimum threshold
 He takes a simplified version of problem with only that much information which he
thinks adequate and do not fall for information analysis paralysis.

31
  Administrative man looks for satisficing conditions rather than maximization
conditions. (Bhattacharya and Chakrabarty 2005)
Simon developed a more realistic workable model of decision making. Whereas the classical
theory product ‘the economic man’ maximizes, Simon’s ‘administrative man’ satisfices.
Administrative man simplifies the situation by considering fewer for deciding which he
thinks as crucial.
A practical decision maker would opt for a satisfactory decision in order to solve the
problem rather going for an endless hunting of ideal perfect option. A good decision maker
will only consider information which he is aware of, see the relevance of these, which he can
process and interpret for proper decision making.
Critique of Simon’s Bounded Rationality Model
The bounded rational model of decision making is an acclaimed theory of decision making
but many researchers claim that this theory despite its difference still it comes under the
school of rational decision making model. Scholars like Huber, Das and Teng stated that
there is no clear cut distinction between perfect and bounded rationality. As per these
scholars, Simon himself admitted that this theory of bounded rationality is a theory of rational
decision making with condition.
Simon has also been given criticized for giving too much importance to the role of
decision making and setting up decision making process as the only most important activity
of the organisation. In that process Simon neglected the role of political, social, cultural and
economic factors and how they are influencing the administrative behaviour. Critics point out
that decision making is the important function of organisation but by theorizing and analysing
only decision making, one cannot understand the organization fully.
Critics like Norton E. Ling and P. Selznick commented that the dichotomy of fact and
value in Simon’s theory is basically a revision in a new way the discredited dichotomy of
politics administration. They further stated that Simon undermined the role of bureaucracy in
administrative studies and limited it to a neutral agent which is not true in real sense.
Bureaucracy is the most important agency in the administrative studies and without
understanding the bureaucracy, the study of administrative behaviour would always remain
flawed and narrow in its approach. (Henry 2003)
Das and Teng criticised Simon’s theory of bounded rationality for its factual based
analysis and excluded values. For them, the bounded rationality theory of decision making is
more relevant to business administration, for private organisation and not for public
administration and governmental activities. In public administration, along with the factual
data, many social and ethical values, welfare concerns have to be taken into account while
deciding and difficult to measure these factors just in the units of costs. (Henry 2003)
Critics have also pointed out that distinction between facts and values and exclusion of
values is not a correct way of approaching the problems as values hold an essential part of

32
policy making cycle. Excluding values and limiting the policy making to only factual study
would make the public administration too mundane, routinized, mechanical, and antipublic.
Many critics maintained that efficiency and cost benefit analysis should not be the only
concern of decision making. Satisfaction of all the stakeholders, societal welfare, optimal
utilization of resources are also equally important objectives of decision making which Simon
have ignored in the process.
Then, Simon has also been criticised for considering rationality as the only and most
crucial element of decision making. Whereas in reality, along with rationality, many other
non-rational dimensions play important role in decision making. Simon have failed to
recognise the role of tradition, faith, culture, personality traits, intuition and creativity in
decision making.
In this regard, Chris Argyris criticized Simon for not acknowledging the influential role
traditional values, belief system and intuition or sixth sense play in whole decision making
process. (Bhattacharya and Chakrabarty 2005)
Critics are skeptical that Simon’s idea of ‘satisficing’ might become a ‘justification tool’
or an excuse for those who are not serious about their decisions and taking decision that are
less beneficial.
They also critics that the difference between ‘maximizing’ and ‘satisficing’ is not clear,
rather these are overlapping and relative to each other as under many situations, satisficing
condition can also led to maximization and versa and again in many condition these two can
be poles apart.
Simon model is an attainable model for many critics because it is unattainable and
idealistic to get fit into real public administration and real world. Critics commented that the
concept of bounded rationality and satisficing are oversimplified and too generalistic ideas
and has nothing to guide or to contribute to the real planners.
Despite the criticism, Simon’s contribution and his path breaking work in public
administration cannot be neglected. With the rational decision making model, a new
paradigm emerged in the discipline of public administration with behavioural approach
shifting the traditional approach with a more scientific and logical orientation. Herbert Simon
highlighted the significance of decision making as role of choice can give a better
understanding of the administration and would help to understand the dynamics of
administrative behaviour.
Influenced by Simon’s idea and this path breaking work, several public administration
theorist, management thinkers, economists like Victor Thompson, Anthony Downs, Michel
Crozier, Gordon Tullock, Dwight Waldo, Golembiewski have further researched and
contributed to study of administrative behaviour.

33
Models of Decision Making at a Glance

Image 2. courtesy Lumenlearning.com

Conclusion
As discussed, decision making is one of the most important activity of not only an
organisation but an essential part of everybody’s daily life. The good decision is linked to
efficiency and effectiveness of choices one makes. Whereas the rational model characterizes
decision maker as a rational economic man, later Simon’s rational model of decision making
shows despite the limitations of decision maker, how the administrative man optimizes.
Simon, as opposite to the hard system approach, makes the decision making relatively simple
and clear. In the real world, problems are complex, face many constraints of varying range
and degree, with fast moving economy, ever changing administrative functioning, the
decision making have become more tougher and facing newer challenges.
Along with the manifestation of the problem based on these models, a decision maker or an
administrator, policy maker can improve his/her understanding of the social, economic,
political, cultural and cognitive factors and bring new ways of dealing with the issues and
problems. The main objective is to create more suitable and relevant conditions to make good
choices for the welfare of the society at large.
References
Bhattacharya, M. and Chakrabarty, B. (2005) ‘Introduction: Public Administration: Theory
and Practice’, in Bhattacharya, M. and Chakrabarty, B. (eds.) Public Administration: A
Reader. Delhi: Oxford University Press, pp. 1‐50.

34
Henry, N. (2003) Public Administration and Public Affairs. New Delhi: Prentice Hall, pp.
53‐74.
Simon, H.A. (1947) Administrative behaviour. New York, NY:Macmillan
Simon, H.A. (1955) A behavioural model of rational choice, quarterly Journal of Economics,
59, pp. 99-118
Website Reference
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-management/chapter/rational-and-nonrational-
decision-making/
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-orgbehavior/chapter/11-2-understanding-decision-
making/
Image Reference
Image 1: Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Illustration-of-the-concept-of-
bounded-rationality-Due-to-cognitive-limitations-time_fig1_326439800 [accessed 1 Nov,
2020)
Image 2: Available from https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-orgbehavior/chapter/11-2-
understanding-decision-making/ (accessed 1 Nov, 2020)

35
 Unit-2
(c) Contemporary Theories
i. Ecological Approach (Fred Riggs)
Bijendra Jha

Structure
 Introduction
 Riggs’ Ecological Approach to Administrative System
 ‘Agraria (Fused)’, ‘Industria (Diffracted)’ and ‘Prismatic’ societies
 Sala Model: Administrative subsystem in prismatic society
 Bazaar Canteen: Prismatic Society’s Economic Subsystem
 Conclusion
 References

Introduction
In the field of comparative public administration, F W Riggs (1917-2008) was a pioneer
intellectual in the period of post-world war II. He was chairman of Comparative
Administration Group (CAG) of the American Society for Public Administration. CAG
maintained that in order to enrich the discipline of Comparative Public Administration and
make it more scientific, it has to be more critical, analytical, and cross-cultural. Delivering his
lecture at Indian Institute of Public Administration in New Delhi (1969), Riggs has chosen
his title of talk as ‘The Ecology of Public Administration’. He had selected three models viz.,
United State of America, Thailand and Philippines to illustrate different models of
administration. The contemporary studies in public administration made use of ecological
approach to the public administration developed by F W Riggs in 1950s and 1960s. He
revised and reexamined his study various times and offered cross-cultural analysis of
administration.
He was the first who gave intellectual and organizational leadership to the comparative
public administration (CPA) movement in 1950s and 1960s. His empirical and comparative
studies of the administration popularly known as ecological approach are found in his book
‘The Ecology of Public Administration’ (1961)’, and ‘Administration in Developing
Countries: The theory of Prismatic Society (1964)’. Riggs borrowed from Sutton’s two ideal
model of Agraria and Industria to illustrate relationship between societal structure,
administration and whole culture. He illustrated the typology in comparative public
administration as Agraria and Industria, and claimed that similar category can be developed
by illustrating relationship between administration, society and culture. Later he termed

36
‘Agraria’ as ‘Fused’ model and ‘Industria’ as ‘Diffracted’ model and developed an
intermediary model what Riggs calls ‘Prismatic’ model discussed below in details. His
contribution in the study of administrative structure and their socio-economic environment
(ecology) in developing societies (Third world) is popularly known as ‘Fused-Prismatic-
Diffracted Model’. It is famous as ecological approach to public administration. F W Riggs’
task was to investigate how administration interacts with their social and economic factors in
developing societies.
In the post-World War II period, many nation-states have become free in Asia, Africa
and Latin America. These developing countries, backward as per norms of western model of
development, were ruled by western administrative systems originated in western countries; it
was interesting for scholars to inquire how western originated administrative system does
function in these post-colonial societies. Many western scholars have started to study the
public administrative system in developing societies in a comparative perspective. Riggs was
one of them. His study is unique in the sense he looked at functioning of administration in the
context of socio-economic and cultural factors of the society. In other words, he emphasized
on interaction between administration and its environment such as social, political and
cultural context. He also highlighted that western model of administration is relatively less
relevant in the developing societies where ecology viz., social, economic and cultural
environment is very much different from western society. Unlike western societies, the
administrative system in developing countries are considerably shaped by the social,
economic, and cultural context.
Riggs’ Ecological Approach to Administrative System
Initially ecological approach applied to biology which refers to mutual relation among
organisms, especially between organisms and their environment. In public administration,
ecological approach denotes administration and their environment influences each-other. An
inquiry into the dynamic process of interaction between administration and their larger
ecology is necessary to understand administration. In the study of public administration, this
approach was introduced by J M Gaus, Robert A. Dahl, Robert A Morton but F W Riggs’s
contribution is significant. Developing the concept, he analyzed the relationship between the
administrative system and social, political, cultural, technological and communication factors
in a larger perspective. He studied interaction between administrative systems and their larger
ecology in Thailand and Philippines and showed how environmental conditions (ecology)
influence the functioning of administrative systems. By doing this, he tried to understand the
disparity between the administrative system of developed and developing countries. Each
nation has a different social, economic and cultural setting which shapes the functioning of
administration.
In analyzing administrative systems from an ecological point of view, F. W. Riggs has
applied a structural-functional approach. Talcott Person, Robert A Morton and G Almond
have applied a structural-functional approach in their study. Structural-functional approach
signifies that in every society certain important function are carried out by a number of

37
structures. This approach is a method of analyzing the functions that are carried out in a
society, the structures that are responsible to carry out functions. Riggs insists that in every
society five types of functions are discharged viz., social, economic, communication,
symbolic and political.
‘Agraria (Fused)’, ‘Industria (Diffracted)’ and ‘Prismatic’ Societies
For the purpose of analysis, Riggs has developed models of administrative systems. In the
1950s, he divided societies into two groups: ‘Agraria’ (Fused) and ‘Industria’ (Diffracted).
‘Agraria’ (fused) refers to post-colonial societies dominated by a traditional economic system
like subsistence agricultural economy. No modernization in economy and politics have taken
place so primordial social and cultural systems exist along with traditional subsistence
economies, for example, China, Indonesia and Philippines in the 1950s. In these societies, a
single structure carries out a number of functions. Economics in these societies are based on
the traditional mode of exchange system and barter system. The king or Royal family and
nominated member rules the country with established traditional social laws. The
administrative system in these societies are based on the structure of the King’s/Royal family
and the entire administrative system serves the interest of the Royal family rather than to the
people of the society aimed at development, happiness and good life. Parochial culture
dominates the society at large and ascriptive values matter in everyday life. In these societies,
people have very limited social and political mobility and there is no specialized division of
labour. Old age customs, faith, value, believe, and way of living enabled people to live their
life collectively and control each-other’s behaviour. In these societies, critical thinking or
examination is depicted as a threat to the society. The Royal Family is all in all in the
country’s life and common people live a subjugated life.
In contrast, ‘Industria’ (Diffracted) refers to a developed society like the United States of
America whose economy was majorly industrial along with modern political and bureaucratic
structures. In these societies, modern industries play an important role in shaping a country's
economic structure along with a dynamic system of production and high level of specialized
division of labour. All organizations and structures are created and based on the basis of
modern scientific rationality. Economy is based on free market rationalization. Riggs termed
these societies as free marketized societies. In ‘Industria’ (Diffracted) society, government’s
intervention in the market and market operation is negligible. Social and spatial mobilities are
very high and people enjoy modern technology for their industries and individual’s utility.
In politics, democratic values like individual liberty, equality and justice play an
indispensable role in a country's political structure. Individuals have certain fundamental
rights against excesses of the state. Citizens have the right to participate in elections and get
elected for even the highest political office. Ascriptive values do not matter too much in
public/political life and the government is responsive to the citizens’ development, happiness
and good life. In these societies, there are independent civil society organizations in order to
protect the interest of the common people and government’s response to protection of human
rights is enormous. Citizens’ groups pressurize the government to work in the interest of the

38
common people and get their demand fulfilled. There is consensus among citizens about how
to organize collective affairs of the state and basic aspects of social life at large. People pay
attention and give respect to common laws of the nation. They are active regarding
government’s policy. In these societies, there are more or less universal political cultures and
citizens are open minded and critical to the government’s public policy.
Administration in these societies are more or less independent, accountable and
transparent. They serve to rule of law in the interest of common citizens rather than to any
family or group. Entire administrative systems are based on Max Weber’s legal-rational
authority rather than traditional social ascriptive values. The Weberian model of bureaucratic
systems works in these societies. Universalization of rule of law applied to everyone
irrespective of their ascriptive identities. According to Riggs, all societies transform from
‘Agraria’ to ‘Industria’ in due course of time. For him, ‘Agraria’ is functionally diffused
societies also known as ‘fused’ societies (In primordial societies, various social and economic
functions are functionally diffused, that is, there is no specified division of labour), but
industrial societies (Industria) are functionally diffracted as division of labour are highly
specified. These are two but diametrically opposed societies. He has identified structural
features of ‘Agraria’ and ‘Industria’ which are following:
Agraria (Fused) Industria (Diffracted)
1 Ascriptive value Modern value
2 Particularistic or parochial cultural Universal political culture
3 Diffused pattern Specificity
4 Limited social and spatial mobility High social and spatial mobility
5 Simple and stable occupational Well-developed occupational
differences pattern
6 Differential social stratification Existence of egalitarian class
system
Source: Prasad and Prasad (Ch.17, p.215)

Later Riggs developed an equilibrium model named ‘transitia’ which refers to transforming
societies which represent transitional stages from agrarian to industrial economic systems.
These societies are economically, socially and politically between ‘Agraria’ and ‘Industria’
reflect characteristics of ‘Agraria’ as well as ‘Industria’. Riggs called it ‘prismatic’ societies,
an intermediate society between fused and diffracted.
Firstly, it must be noted that ‘prismatic’ societies are the post-colonial societies who
have been freed from colonization of western power in the 1940s and 1950s. Western power
ruled these societies for centuries through their developed administrative system along with
their social, economic, political, technological as well as cultural domination. They imposed a

39
modern bureaucratic system to govern these societies. They have also recruited local people
in their bureaucracy in a limited sense. In the post Second World War, these countries have
gained independence. Secondly, when these western powers left these countries, they left
structures of modern bureaucratic systems, political systems, industrial systems, and
technological systems in these countries continuing with indigenous people. So, these
societies consist of a modern economic, political, and administrative system along with
traditional social, political and cultural structures. Therefore, these societies are intermediate
societies between ‘Agraria’ (Fused) and Industria (Diffracted). Riggs was curious to look into
the relation between western imposed administrative system and their social, cultural
environment in prismatic society.
In ‘prismatic’ societies, one can find that a traditional subsistence agricultural economy
exists along with modern heavy industrialization. Big and modern cities exist along with rural
hinterland and modern political institutions exist along with traditional social, political and
cultural structure. People's behaviour in these societies vary from participation political
culture (citizens aware of their rights and assertiveness for their due) to parochial political
culture (politically unaware citizens who find themselves powerless in front of bureaucratic
structure and state). One can find mix-political cultural structure in these societies. Here,
there are large gaps between rural-urban divide, poor-rich divide along with divide in the
administrative practice in favour of dominant class/caste. Administrative structure functions
within their social, economic, political, technological, and cultural environment.
Riggs’ focus of study was prismatic society where one can find characteristics of modern
industrial societies like heavy industry, technology, modern political structures like
parliament, judiciary, and bureaucracy as well as primordial social, economic and culture
structures like hierarchy based on traditional social stratification, social status, traditional
ascriptive identities dominates in everyday life. Traditional social values have equal or more
importance than modern values like individual’s rights, liberty, and equality. Riggs’ interest
was to inquire about interactions between modern bureaucracy and their social, economic,
cultural structure in developing societies. In other words, Riggs was concerned with social
structure at large of the prismatic society and their interaction with the administrative
subsystem.
Riggs has identified three characteristics of prismatic society: 1) heterogeneity: It refers
to co-existence of modernity along with traditional; simultaneous presence of different kinds
of systems, practice and view point. Riggs finds a high degree of heterogeneity in prismatic
society regarding structure, practice and worldview; 2) formalism: there is a large gap
between envisaged vision of the society in the constitution and actual practice. Discrepancy
exists between descriptive and perspective, between formal power and effective power, and
between aims and objectives stated in the constitution and real practice. Due to formalism
actual behaviour bureaucratic officials vary and result in official corruption; and 3)
overlapping: in prismatic society, modern political, administrative structure has created but
indifferent and traditional structures continue to dominate in the social behaviour system.

40
Thus, newly created highly modern structures are paid only lip-service and overlooked
widely in favour of traditional social structures. This is regarded as overlapping. Western
bureaucratic and political structures have been created for administrative purposes but often
ignored in favour of traditional social structures. Thus, modern structures co-exist with
traditional but traditional structures continue to dominate in actual practice.
Overlapping has several important dimensions like nepotism, favouritism, poly-
communalism (hostile interaction among different groups), poly-normativism (existence of
several norms rational as well as irrational/traditional), existence of clects (interest groups
based on communal identity), poly normativism (various norms for various group depending
on group’s social status, and bargaining capacity) and modern administrative system co-exists
with traditional administrative structures. Riggs calls economic structures in prismatic society
as bazar-canteen and it has characterized a different set of prices for a commodity or service
for different sets of people depending on social status and bargaining capacity.
Sala Model: Administrative Subsystem in Prismatic Society
The prismatic society is characterized by numerous social, economic, political and
administrative sub-systems. Riggs calls the administrative subsystem a ‘sala’ model. In
diffracted (Industria) societies, it is termed as ‘office’ or ‘bureau’, and in Fused (Agraria)
societies, it is termed as chamber. These three administrative structures have different
characteristics of their own. In a prismatic society, nepotism or patronize bestowed or
favouritism based on family relationship and kinship is prevalent. In fact, nepotism or
favouritism plays a very significant role in selection in various administrative offices and
performance of administrative functions. Family lineage, kinship and traditional law
prevailed and universalization of rule of law was lacking in practice or infact disregarded.
The ‘sala’ official gives priority to social structure while dealing with administrative matters.
They prioritize family/kinship and social ascriptive identity of the individual rather than to
common citizens their political equality. They increase personal power, wealth, and
prosperity rather than to social welfare. The ‘sala’ official behaviour and performance are
highly influenced by his socialization and parochial character. As a result, they don’t apply
law universally. They are biased and their action and interactions are guided by his ascriptive
value and parochialism. Few get more benefits from the government programme and rest
remain ignored from government’s general welfare schemes.
Various social groups interact with each-other as communal members rather than
common citizens. In prismatic society, these communal identities and their hostile interaction
is denoted as poly-communalism. Interest groups are formed on the basis of ascriptive
identities and there is constant struggle among these groups to get bureaucratic favours.
These interest groups based on ascriptive/communal identities are known as ‘clects’. In his
study of prismatic society, Riggs has noted that poly-communalism and presence of clects
creates certain administrative problems. Normatively speaking, government officers
implement laws, schemes and programme universally and without any favouritism and
discrimination, but ‘sala’ officials shows greater loyalty towards member of their own

41
community. In the process, a dominant minority community gets high proportion
representation in government recruitment, and gets elected parliament and assembly. Over-
representation of the socially dominant minority creates dissatisfaction among vulnerable
caste/class. To diffuse the situation and to protect the interest of vulnerable groups/class and
minorities, certain mechanisms of ‘quotas’ or reservation system adopted to provide some
sort of proportional representation in administration and government’s institutions. As a
result, such an arrangement creates mutual hostilities in the socially dominant caste/class
against marginal caste/class who get representation through the ‘quota’ system. It creates
tension among various communities which further generates hostilities among sala ‘official’
working in the government.
Family, community and caste plays indispensable roles in society and simultaneously
several groups emerge on the basis of caste/community membership. Riggs termed these
groups as a ‘clects’, a typical group (associational organization) in prismatic society depicting
modern values but retaining traditional social law and values in practice. Administrative
structures in such society deliver functions giving priority to ‘clects’ and sometimes ‘sala’
official or its one of agency develop closer relationship with particular ‘clects’ and start
functioning itself like ‘clects’. Thus, in prismatic society administrative structure continues to
maintain close relationships with particular clects and works for their interests and only pay
lip services to achievement and universalization of norms.
In prismatic society the traditional behaviour co-exists with a modern set of norms. As a
result, there is overlapping of the formal standard and informal set of norms. There is no
consensus on norms of behaviour. The ‘Sala’ official may be appointed on the basis of high
educational qualification and competitive examination, but for promotion and career
development, they largely depend on ascriptive identity, and favour of senior officials. The
‘Sala’ officials claim modern universalization of application of laws but they are indifferent
and inconsistent in their behaviour in day to day administrative function. Riggs finds
administrative structure divided in the de jure (legal) power and de fecto (actual/real) control
in the prismatic society where the de jure authority succumbs to the de fecto control. The
authority of the ‘sala’ officials overlap with traditional social authority and control structure
based on poly communism, clects and poly normativism (various norms for various groups
depending on the group's social status, and bargaining capacity). Various social structures
function differently and sometimes it behaves against the very purpose of the administration
for which it has created. There is overlapping authority of socially dominant class and the
‘sala’ officials.
Riggs depicted polity of the prismatic society as ‘unbalanced polity’ as administrative
bureaucratic officers exercise a dominant role in the decision-making process, despite the
political leaders’ constitutional power. Due to such centralization and concentration of power
in bureaucrats, there is a lack of response to the citizens’ need and welfare. Riggs concluded
that such development of bureaucracy in prismatic society hinders the progress of political

42
development. In such weak political development modern institutional structures like
legislature, political party, voluntary organization, and civil societies become less effective.
Riggs said that the efficiency of the administrative system depends on the skills and
acumen of the politician whether he/she is able/unable to punish the inefficient bureaucrats,
but often bureaucrats escape his/her wrong decision and action, and go unpunished. In such
circumstances talented ‘sala’ officials tend to spend more time in self-aggrandizement and for
the promotion of self-interest. Since the government's output highly depends on the ‘sala’
official, there is a close link between bureaucrats’ behaviour and administrative output. The
most powerful bureaucrat is often a less efficient administrator. As a result, the ‘sala’ official
is characterized by nepotism and favouritism, institutionalized corruption, and inefficiency in
the administrative output. The ‘sala’ officially governed by the motive of self-interest and
personal power and to protect their own interest.
Bazaar Canteen: Prismatic Society’s Economic Subsystem
F W Riggs described the economic subsystem of the prismatic society as a bazaar-canteen
model. In a diffracted society economic system depends on free-market rule of demand and
supply and also on market’s economic consideration. In contrast, the economic system of the
fused society depends on ‘arena factors’ like religious, social and king’s or royal family
consideration. In prismatic society, both market factors as well as ‘arena factors’ play an
important role in shaping the economic system. Economic factors interact with non-economic
factors and influence the economic structure. Under such circumstances it is not possible for
the common price of a commodity or service in prismatic society. Price of a commodity or
service depends on a combination of the market factors as well as arena factors coexisting
together. In prismatic society a small fraction of the people enjoys most of the benefits and
substantially control over economic institutions. As a result, a small fraction of people not
only control over economic institutions, they exploit a large section of the population. These
are a few characteristics of the bazaar-canteen model. Influences of a small section of people
on economic structures and institutions result in slow economic development and progress.
In a diffracted society everyone gets the services on equal basis and without any
discrimination and favouritism. In such society employees get salary and remuneration based
on his/her skills and talents, and on the basis of market price value of labour. In contrast,
people get services in fused society on the basis of Royal family’s or kings’ patronage. In
prismatic society one can witness equality in urban areas while services in rural areas are
based on patronage and favouritism. But in prismatic society the relationship between
bureaucratic (the Sala) officials and their clientele is like buyer-seller. The price of service
depends on the nature of the relationship between the ‘Sala’ official and their clientele. The
price of the commodity or service varies from place to place, time to time and person to
person. It also depends on the family contact, social status, bargaining capacity, individual
relationship and power politics. Services are guaranteed to the socially dominant class/caste
and at lower prices but the marginal caste/class has to pay heavy charges. Thus, the economic
structure and institutions of the prismatic society acts like a ‘subsidized’ canteen to the

43
members of the dominant community, clects, privileged groups, and politically influential
people have access to market and its institutions like canteen for the army who serves at the
subsidized rate. Conversely it behaves like a ‘tributary’ canteen to the members of the
marginal communities who have to pay a higher price than the influential political people and
dominant caste/class.
The fluctuation of price in prismatic society creates more problems and it encourages
black marketing, hoarding, adulteration, and ultimately leads to high inflation in the
economy. It has a direct impact on common people. In such a situation, the ‘sala’ official in
prismatic society tries to develop contacts with business groups, foreign business clubs and
institutions, and misuse foreign exchange for private purposes. It would often lead to large
corruption, exploitation of the common people, poverty and decline of life standard of
common people in prismatic society. In prismatic society wage depends on political
influence. There is a great divide between higher wage and lower wage in the economy and
that results in high economic inequality and social injustice. Thus, exploitation, poverty, and
social injustice become the major features of the bazaar canteen model.
Conclusion
F W Riggs’ ecological approach has been criticized for being too pessimistic about the post-
colonial society and neglecting social change. It is too much theoretical without adequate
empirical evidence and too static about the external factors and overgeneralization. Riggs
himself examined and re-examined his own model of public administration in developing
society. His model is too broad and overgeneralization of the post-colonial society. Great
scholar of the public administration Ramesh Arora has identified the negative character of the
prismatic/ecological model of the public administration. He argues that Riggs’ ecological
model has western bias towards post-colonial society and the model has portrayed a negative
picture of the prismatic society. Actually, study was conducted with parameters of western
society and it has painted a bad picture. It is not that administration in the prismatic society
has all bad characteristics, there are many good that Riggs’ ignored in his study like nation-
building institutions. It is not that the administrative office ‘bureau’ is not corrupt and biased
in western society but Riggs has painted them as transparent and clean.
Riggs in his study of post-colonial societies, he left many variables that are very
important to understand the bureaucracy like population, territorial size, the role of the
military, and especially the role of national leaders/freedom fighters who have played
important role in creating the entire structure of the post-colonial state. Most importantly, the
unique social context of each country influences the administrative behaviour that Riggs
seldom debated in his entire explanation of the ‘sala’ official as well as the bazaar canteen
economy.

References
Chakarvarty, Bidyut and Prakash Chand. 2017. Public Administration: From Government to
Governance. New Delhi: Orient BlackSwan.

44
Haque, Shamsul.2010. ‘Rethinking Development Administration and Remembering Fred W
Riggs’, International Review of Administrative Sciences, Sage publications.
Jreisat, Jamil. 2011. Globalism and Comparative Public Administration. London: CRC Press.
Prasad, Ravinder et al. 1989. Administrative Thinkers. New Delhi: Sterling Publication.
Rathod, P. B. 2007. Comparative Public Administration. New Delhi: ABD Publisher.
Riggs, F W. 2001. ‘Bureaucratic Links between Administration and Politics’ in Ali
Farazmand (ed) Handbook of Comparative and Development Public Administration. Second
edition. Public Administration and Public Policy 94, United State of America.

45
 Unit-2
(c) Contemporary Theories

ii. Innovation and Entreperneurship (Peter Drucker)

Dr. Vaishali Narula

Structure
● Introduction
● Biographical Sketch
● Major Contributions of Peter Drucker
● Drucker’s Management Theory
● Drucker’s Theory of Management: An Appraisal
● Conclusion
● References

Introduction
Peter Drucker is well acknowledged thinker in the field of management for his contribution to
management theory. His contribution to the field of administration is acknowledged all over
the world. Peter F. Drucker is known for his contribution to management theory and practice.
He examined the working of organization in the wake of privatization, advent towards
decentralization, change in power contours of the world, rise in importance of market and
development of informed societies. In the wake of these changes the management theory of
Drucker led to understanding of administration with a new perspective towards theory and
concepts of management. His contribution is widely recognized and has gained approval in
the field of administration and management both in the public and private sector. This
chapter will focus on understanding the basic principles of Peter Drucker in relation to the
idea of modern management and their relevance in the contemporary times.
Biographical Sketch
Peter Drucker is known as the father of modern Management. He contributed immensely
towards understanding the management and functioning of organization. Born in Vienna,
Austria on November 19, 1909, Drucker was born in a family which had active intellectual
environment. His parents were actively involved in discussions on economics, politics,
science, literature and more. This helped him develop a broader perspective towards
understanding the various aspects in an interdisciplinary manner. For his higher education
Drucker moved from Austria to Germany to study Admirality Law at Hamburg University
and then he moved to Frankfurt University to pursue his study of law.
Drucker was influenced by the writings of Aristotle, John Maynard Keynes, Schumpeter
and various other thinkers. Drucker worked with several British newspapers like the financial

46
times. Subsequently, he became editor-in-charge of foreign affairs and business at Frankfurt’s
largest daily newspaper Frankfuter General – Anzeiger.
Drucker obtained his Ph.D. in International Law in 1932 from Frankfurt University.
John Maynard Keynes had a major influence on Drucker. It is often said that Keynes lecture
made him realize that people largely focus on behaviour of commodities, however he is keen
on understanding behaviour of individuals. Drucker started teaching as a part time faculty in
Sarah Lawrence College, New York. He also got an opportunity to examine the working of
General Motors and subsequently came out with his work Concept of Corporation (1946).
Subsequently, Drucker became a professor of politics and philosophy at Bennigton College
and was given the highest of Presidential Citation at NYU. Another landmark work The
Effective Executive was published in 1966.
Drucker himself acknowledges to be influenced by Plato, Aristotle, Henri Bergson, Max
Weber and Emile Durkheime, Schumpter and many more. Drucker utilized inter-disciplinary
approach to understand the working of organization and the various relationships that govern
them. In his writings Drucker drew a path not only for structure of organization but also for
conceptualization of moral system for maintaining the individuality while achieving the
larger purpose of the organization.
In 1973 Drucker made a significant contribution through his work titled Management:
Tasks, Responsibilities & Practices. It became popular amongst the executives and leaders. In
this work Drucker tried to equip the managers with understanding, thinking and skills for
management of organization. In 1987 the Claremont Graduate centre of Management was
renamed as Peter F. Drucker centre. In this decade he came out with some prolific work
including The Non- Profit Drucker (1989). In 1990 Drucker laid the foundation for non-profit
Management which is now known as Frances Hesselbein Leadership Institute. In 1997 the
Drucker centre was renamed as the Peter F. Drucker school of management. His key works
also include Innovation and Entrepreneurship (1999), The Practice of Management (2005)
and many more.
Drucker identified concerns in the functioning of government which had been serving as
an obstruction in the achievement of its larger purpose. He identified the government with its
bureaucratic scope due to which it is unable to abandon policies and programmes which are
inefficient or redundant. He identified that encouragement of participation of local levels was
missing. There was a need to prioritize the programmes and policies and make them work
towards effective initiatives.
As a contemporary management thinker, Peter Drucker is recognized for his contribution
to the theory of management and functioning of organization. With his varied experience and
background with psychology, sociology, law, and journalism he aimed to develop solutions
to number of managerial problems. Therefore, his contributions cover various approaches of
management. He has written many books and papers.

47
 The more important works are; Practice of Management (1954), Managing by Results
(1964), The Effective Executive (1967), The Age of Discontinuity (1969), Management:
Tasks, Responsibilities and Practices (1974), and Management Challenges for 20th Century
(1999).
Major Contributions of Peter Drucker
Peter Drucker examined the bureaucratic structure of the organizations and devised
innovative methods for management of practices in the organization. He has been critical of
the classical thinkers for their principles of organization such as unity of command, hierarchy
and more. He criticized the bureaucratic principles for its absence of accountability and
prescriptive methods. He describes the concept of management to be different from
administration and is generic in nature. The key concepts which contributed towards
management practices and entrepreneurship as follows
● Nature of Management
Drucker describes management as the means of introducing innovation and creative
characteristics. Innovation is an important component of an organization as it looks at
a combining new and old ideas, building new ideas and incorporating ideas from
across discipline which encourages new ideas. Drucker describes management as a
practice towards building skills, tools and techniques in the working of an
organization. He also emphasise that management along with skills and techniques
requires right perspective as per the socio-economic and cultural needs of a system.
● Management Functions
Drucker describes Management as a mode of accomplishing tasks. These tasks are
carried out by managers. Manager helps the organization to accomplish specific
objectives e.g. a university has specific purpose and mission which aims to
accomplish. Managers direct the workers towards achievement orientation and
making it more productive. They also play an important role in managing the
organization towards its social responsibilities.
Manager has a key role to play in the conduct of activities. Manager acts as an
administrator as well as an executor where he/she focuses on redirecting the various
resources and utilizing them in an innovative manner. Manager directs and redirects
resources by setting up objectives and defining functions to achieve those objectives.
Drucker further emphasise that innovation, productivity, profitability, financial
resources, development, performance and responsibility towards people is important.
● Restructuring Government
Drucker focused on innovation techniques towards management of organization. He
emphasised on the need to reform the bureaucratic structure of organization with its
dysfunctional methods. In his view towards working towards effective organization

48
 he emphasises on certain characteristics such as performance, reducing the number of
managerial levels and training of young managers.
While focusing on structuring effective organization Drucker identifies three aspects
for organizing Activity Analysis, Decision Analysis and Relation Analysis. Activity
Analysis focuses on work to be put together, work to be performed and work to be
emphasised upon. The notion of Decision Analysis focuses on factors that contribute
towards a decision and the impact of these factors on decision. Drucker states that
relation amongst these factors helps in defining the structure of the organization and
in pursuance towards various objectives.
● Federalism
Drucker while advocating the concept of federalism creating decentralized structures
in the organization with not just to the idea of creating levels of participation but by
creating new autonomous units for decision. Federal organization should encourage
participation at local levels and also set independent decision units.
Drucker emphasise that federalism helps to build positive values in various methods
of organizing the working.
● It defines the functioning and responsibilities of operating level
● This helps top management to focus on its functions
● Defines parameters to measure success and effectiveness of various jobs
● Management by objectives
This is one of the key concepts of Peter Drucker towards the management of organization. He
introduced this concept in 1954 in his book The Practice of Management. This is a strategy
management model which works towards improving the performance of organization. This
redefines the objectives in coordination with the management and the employees. It works
towards defining objectives and at the same time acquiring a feedback towards them. This
helps to set challenges towards attainable objectives and work towards those which would
help in increasing performance.
● Management Business Organization (MBO)
This refers to setting up of organizational goals and targets. It includes defining of the
objectives of the organization with the lower level, middle level and top management level.
MBO includes planning, setting standards, focusing on performance, performance appraisal
and motivation. He describes MBO as a philosophy of management. It does not describe the
process of management as a way of exercising control instead it is a way towards self-
control. It links the various level of the organization i.e. bottom up as well as top down in the
functioning of organization. While linking various levels it focuses on performance
objectives. These are defined by goal specificity, participation, time period and performance
feedback. These help to work towards objectives of management.

49
To work towards these, it is important that the organization must meet certain criteria such as
▪ Categorizing the objective from most important to the least relevant ones.
▪ Quantification of objectives
▪ Specify the goals
▪ Consistency of goals
Therefore, the concept of Management Business objectives has redefined the practices
and objectives of organization. Under this he also identifies some important task of
the manager. He emphasised that he/she should be able to integrate the team towards
the defined objectives, devise strategies towards it. They should be able to
communicate information and motivate employees to gain commitment and
motivation. The manager should be able to have a holistic approach in the functioning
of the organization. He emphasised on the need to integrate the functioning of the
whole organization by taking into account the product and the total environment in
the context of social, economic and political changes and developments.
● Organizational Changes
In view of the various changes happening in the social and the economic framework
there has been changes guided towards philosophy which defines the structuring and
functioning of the organization. These changes have made organizations dynamic.
While examining the organizational structures and their development in the
production he criticises the perception that workers are an appendage to machine. In
the move towards strengthening of capitalism he emphasised that workers should be
given an opportunity to participate in the management of production process. He
describes it as essential that workers should be given an opportunity to participate in
the production and management activities.
● Rethinking and Abandonment
In this concept Drucker focuses on the restructuring of organization in which he
focuses on the notion of downsizing organizations. He outlined that instead of
focusing on downsizing of organizations there should be a focus on expanding and
promoting activities. The organizational based activities can be restructured. There is
a need to make organizations more flexible, collaborative with delegation. Along with
the management the workers should be given an opportunity to take risks. The
management and the subordinates should work in a collaborative manner and take
risks together.
Drucker’s Management Theory
Drucker’s theory of management has evolved in the context of social transformations
pertaining to high levels of corruption, along with a shift from owner capitalism to manager
capitalism focusing on social, technological and ethical changes with new management

50
approach. Drucker’s (1985) analysis of capitalism led to construct of hypothesize and link
between changes in technology and understanding the responses of management to new
social trends. This transformation has led us towards new management approach. Drucker’s
management approach represents various concepts towards management approach. These are
as below:
Decentralization
Drucker focused on decentralizing the conduct of activities at workplace. He believed and
emphasised on the participation of subordinates and assigning tasks to them. He wanted
that there should be a relationship between workers and supervisors and they should
together work towards accomplishment of goals. Through this relationship he wanted to
strengthen the working of organization and make the workers feel empowered.
Knowledge Work
In an organization knowledge worker are the actors who generate knowledge. Their key
function is to generate knowledge. This Knowledge includes technical knowledge, data
handling and information. This helps in innovation and creativity. It is the leading
dimension towards productive process and helps to create a culture of bringing in insight
and ideas. They play an important role in expansion, and are the key driver of
competitive advantages within and among societies. Knowledge implies the capacity for
action in social life. Realization of knowledge depends upon the social, economic, and
intellectual context (Stehr, 1996). These knowledge workers have helped to create
knowledge societies. The knowledge workers will demand new rules in management and
will build innovation and change.
Management by Objectives
Peter Drucker is the father of Modern Management and has worked towards social
change. Drucker emphasised that management by objective is a strategic way to enhance
the performance of the organization. This is the process by the organization that conveys
its desire towards the achievement of various objectives to the members of the
organization. All the members of the organization i.e. workers at various levels work
together to achieve the common objectives. The workers also express their opinion and
can give inputs. The key steps towards MBO are:
1. Defining organizational objectives
2. Defining objectives of the employee
3. Monitor the progress of performance
4. Evaluate performance
5. Reward the performance

51
Peter Drucker in his initiative towards strengthening the functioning of organization,
mentioned that knowledge of work with decentralization work towards specific and
measurable tasks. This helped towards setting objectives and monitor progress of the
organization with the insight and capabilities of workers. This helps to encourage
flexibility and collaborative approach in the organization. This would help the
organization in achieving performances in a time bound manner. This increases the
efficiency of the organization. In order to uphold these objectives and work in this
manner he outlined certain dimensions that organizations should follow:
▪ Delegate Equal Work
All the workers in the organization should be treated at power and given an
opportunity to share their inputs and ideas. The participation of workers and
opportunities given to them to share inputs motivates the workers to collaborate
with the managers and help achieve the objectives of the organization. The workers
and the managers should collaborate with each other, help enhance each other’s
capability. The role of the workers through participation would help them realize
their role in organization and its relevance.
▪ Encourage Collaboration
Collaboration is a way that facilitates coordinating activities and exchanging
information. It is a resource leveraging strategic behaviour that necessitates
coordinating activities and exchanging information for mutual benefit.
Collaboration builds trust, transparency, and respect amongst the various members
of the organization. It helps to build proficiency in skills. It is a comprehensive way
of thinking and acting that takes proficiency in multiple skills and developing the
necessary capability. Drucker describes capability as an imperative component to
evolve the leadership system and encourage collaboration.
▪ Increase Efficiency
Drucker, while outlining his concept of MBO, insists on collaboration of workers of
all levels as he believed that this helped to achieve the common goals of the
organization in a more efficient manner. Drucker outlines that these goals should be
SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Reliable and Time Oriented). The
various members of the organization working towards various objectives should
work towards these goals in a collaborative and cooperative manner would help
increase efficiency.
▪ Encourage Innovation
While emphasising on objective of participation and delegation amongst workers in
his concept of knowledge workers he emphasises on innovation. Drucker, focuses
on innovation in organization. This helps to understand the initiatives and the
shortcomings of the organization. The organization should work towards fulfilling

52
 the needs of all employees. Innovation and creativity should be encouraged amongst
all members as this would help to achieve efficiency and effectiveness in the
organization.
Drucker’s Theory of Management: An Appraisal
Peter Drucker is assessed and evaluated for his contribution towards understanding the
conduct of management and functioning of organization. His people-centric approach to
business management became the foundation of both his writing and subsequently his
principles of professional management. Drucker highlighted that management has an
obligation to people that goes far beyond just meeting the objectives. Peter Drucker
underlined that professionally managed organizations should work towards building
intellectual and moral capacities of employees.
Drucker focuses on the principle of manner as against matter which emerges as a
consequence of traditions, culture and the values in which they participate. Drucker in this
theory towards management has focused on various ideologies and how one ideology derives
strength from the other. He focuses on understanding the behaviour and working of
organization in the context of socio-economic changes and how humans have adapted to
these changes.
Drucker’s theory of management rests on his understanding of societal changes which
subsequently lead to changes in political institutions and the conduct of economy. He
emphasises that the shift from agrarian framework to industrialization which led to the advent
of capitalism was accompanied by revolution and innovations which led to shaping up of
human values and human control. Drucker describes the profession of management as a
discipline which helps us to identify significant features and characteristic by focusing on
data and information which otherwise gets neglected.
Drucker’s theory of management has focused on initiatives and participation with self-
control and responsibility on the conduct of activities. The institutions of business should
work towards cumulative objectives of all members of the organization i.e. in the field of
economics, societal and political. His concept of Management by objective encourage
participation at all levels and that initiatives to be taken at all levels. But Drucker’s notion of
Management of objectives is often criticized for not being able to achieve the objectives due
to failure in procedure or maybe implementation. Nonetheless, Peter Drucker has made a
significant contribution to the field of administration and has developed some key principles
towards the working of management.
Drucker has emphasized the need of conducting the business in enterprises with virtue
ethic which critics generally failed to recognize. Kurzynski (2009) compares Drucker
management philosophy with Aristotle’s moral philosophy as Drucker believed that business
and managers have a purpose that surpasses the individual ethic of self-interest and profit
maximization. He describes business organization as a human and social organization where
workers find a purpose and strive to achieve their objectives. However, Drucker’s writings

53
are criticized for being journalistic and generalist in nature. Nonetheless, his views towards
business organization and management are recognized in both public and private sectors for
the conduct of activities.
Conclusion
Drucker with his interdisciplinary approach focused on dealing with business problems and
concerns of management in the second half of the 20th century. He contributed towards
immensely body of knowledge in the field of management, economics, public administration
and public policy. He integrated perspectives from various disciplines worked towards
developing theories and concept for efficient organizations. He emphasised on
entrepreneurship and innovation for the conduct of activities in an organization with inputs
from all levels. He extended his consultancy services to all kinds of organizations that helped
organizations to develop a holistic view on management. Drucker’s first book titled ‘The
End of Economic Man' published (1939) outlined his faith in modern society which focus on
economic equality and at the same time focused on freedom to all levels. He looked at
organization in a holistic way with a focus on goals to build efficiency and effectiveness in
organization. Peter Drucker has made a significant contribution to the field of Public
Administration and are relevant for both public and private organization.
References
● Carmella S. (2018). “The Management Theory of Peter Drucker”. Retrieved from
http//www.business.com/ article/management-theory-of-peter-drucker
● Drucker, P.F. (1954) The Practice of Management, USA, Harper Business:62-63
● Kanter, R.M. (1985), "Drucker: the unsolved Economic puzzle", New Management,
Vol. 2 No.1, pp.10-13.
● Kurzynski, M. (2009). Peter Drucker: Modern day Aristotle for the business
community. Journal of Management History, 15 (4), pp 357-374.
● Stehr, N. (1996). Knowledge as a capacity for action, Peter Wall Institute for
Advanced Studies. Vancouver, Canada: The University of British Columbia.
● http://www.bl.uk/people/peter-drucker
● http://hbr.org/2009/11/product/why-read-peter-drucker
● http://www.drucker.institute/perspective/about-peter-drucker

54
 Unit-3 : Public Policy

(a) Concept, Relevance and Approaches

Dr. Devarati Roy Chowdhury

Structure
 Introduction
 Understanding public policy
 Characteristics of public policy
 Types of public policy
 Significance of policy analysis
 Levels of policy analysis
 Different forms of policy study
 Models of policy making
 Relevance of public policy
 References

Introduction
A better understanding of public policy is very crucial for understanding the relationship
between the state and its people. The presence and relevance of the state is evident in all
aspects of lives and with the rapid geo-political and economic changes, the mutual
relationship between public and state has also become very significant. In this regard, the role
of public policy has enhanced tremendously.
Simply put, public policy is a like a strategical framework which the government within
a state uses to fulfill its functions. And, in this regard, public policies become very significant
as it holds the power to change and reshape the lives of the public in their given political
system.
The presence of public policy can be seen in every socio-economic aspect of public.
States are enacting policies to bring economic development and promote social justice and
empowerment of all sections of the society. So, not only the economic but the social
relationships are also getting transformed due to the sound public policy. In this way, it
become essentially important to understand the public policy so as to know the state and
society and their relationship better.
Understanding Public Policy
One important point which is necessary to highlight here is that as countries are different in
all aspects, the public policy also differs. The nature, process, policy priority and impact of

55
policy significantly vary from country to country depending on social, political, economic
aspect, priorities, available resources, stakeholders involvement etc. In India, the policies are
made keeping in mind the problems of poverty, illiteracy, rampant unemployment, food
insecurity, priorities like social and gender justice, empowerment of the weaker section of the
society, development of agriculture and industries, sound economic growth, for better human
security indicators, environmental sustainability, and national security broadly. One can
realize the comprehensiveness and complexities of public policy as it is highly interconnected
to different aspects.
Therefore, it has also become difficult to give a defined public policy. This means that on
the basis of semantics, simply put, linguistically it is difficult to define public policy because
of the comprehensiveness of the very nature of public policy. Public policy has been defined
by different scholars in different ways focusing on different aspects of the policy and policy
process. Different definitions give different perspectives and dimensions to understand policy
making.
Thomas R. Dye says that “public policy is whatever government choose to do or not to
do”. (Dye 2008).
David Easton defined public policy “as the authoritative allocation of values for the
whole society”.
According to William Jenkins “public policy is a set of interrelated decisions taken by a
political actor or group of actors concerning the selection of goals and the means of achieving
them within a specified situation where those decisions should, in principle, be within the
power of those actors to achieve”.
Harold Lasswell and Abraham Kaplan define public policy as “a projected program of
goals, values, and practices”.
According to Cochran et al, “the actions of government and the intentions that determine
those actions”.
Robert EyeStone mentions public policy as “the relationship of government units to its
environments”.
Richard Rose says that “public policy is not a decision, it is a course or pattern of
activity”.
In the words of Carl J. Friedrich’s word, “public policy is a proposed course of action of
a person, group or government within a given environment providing opportunities and
obstacles which the policy was proposed to utilize and overcome in an effort to reach a goal,
an objective or purpose”.
From the above definitions, it becomes very evident that public policies are decisions
taken by government to achieve pre-conceived goals which involves proper planning, and a
well planned course of action. Definitions also make clear the public policy is a product of
well coordinated relation and meaningful interaction between various stakeholders like
government agencies as executive, legislature, judiciary, bureaucracy, various associations,

56
pressure groups, civil society, and private and international organizations etc. (Krafts and
Furlong 2004)
However, where such definitions as feasible to understand public policy in ordinary
circumstances, but these are not sufficient indicators of a systematic study of public policy.
As Adam A. Anyebe (2008) mentioned that “these definitions make public policy look like
mere decisions, as expression of interests. It is true that these definitions work as a reference
point for starting with the discourse of public policy but a more precise definition is needed to
structure our thinking and to facilitate effective communication with one another. Public
policy also means patterns of resource allocation presented by projects and programmes
designed to respond to perceive public demands”. In this regard, Political Scientist James E.
Anderson (1997) defined policy as “a relatively stable, purposive course of action followed
by an actor or set of actors in dealing with a problem or matter of concern.” This approach
helps us to understand what actually has been done rather what has been proposed for doing
in a complex environment with multiple challenges.
The characteristics, types, policy analysis, approaches and policy cycle can help make
meaningful understanding of public policy. Policy analysis helps to understand the policy as a
whole, the linkages with political and social system and develops a scientific investigation of
the factors which influence public policy and its outcome. According to Thomas Dye “policy
analysis is a perquisite to prescription, advocacy and activism”. (Dye 2008)
The policy process or policy cycle presents a very basic, most fundamental framework of
understanding a policy which includes formulation, implementation and evaluation stages.
Characteristics of Public Policy
1. Public Policy is a goal oriented purposive action. The basic objective of a public
policy is to achieve predetermined goals on the basis planned course of action by
utilizing the available resources and infrastructure.
2. Public policy is the result of ‘doing, it is ‘action oriented’ and it is not about what the
government obligated or intended to do. Government forms public policy on the basis
of number of parameters. The availability of resources, financial commitments,
priority groups, complexity of the problem, data availability, engagement of various
stakeholders in a political environment within in a specific administrative system.
3. Public policy is the result of collective action of government decisions. It shows the
action pattern of the government officials and reflects their concerns and
commitments towards the citizens.
4. Public policy is a well planned, well researched course of action. And, it gets
implemented with a sanction of law and authority to it.
Types of Public Policy
1. Distributive policy involves allocation of benefits and services for a specific section
of the society. Through these policies government try to reach out to all sections of

57
 the society benefitting specially the vulnerable sections of the society. These policies
allocate resources and use of public funds to assist vulnerable communities, groups
and industries. Example of these policies are education policy, poverty alleviation
policy, health policy etc. These are for specific sections of the society.
2. Redistributive policy involves deliberate actions of the government to
allocate/redistribute the rights, income, property among all sections of the society.
These are basically concerned with social economic changes and rearrange policies to
achieve welfare of the society in general. These policies are difficult to design as it
involves allocation of huge finances, proper use of power and rights. These policies
are managing the economy of the country. The techniques involved here manage the
fiscal (tax) and monetary (flow of money) policy in the country. Redistributive
policies tend to benefit one group (vulnerable section, lower income group) by
reallocating wealth of the another group (higher income group). Examples of
redistributive policies are taxation policy, fiscal policy, social welfare policy etc.
3. Another typology of the public policy is regulatory policies. These policies allow the
administrative state to authoritatively control or simply put imposition of restriction or
limitation on the behaviour of individuals the citizens for some activities. The
examples are regulative control for the consumption of alcohol and tobacco,
environmental protection policies, environmental pollution control polices, health and
safety policy etc. These policies focus on those sectors which need to be regulated
keeping in mind public interests.
4. Procedural/Substantive policies are related to those governmental actions to deal with
problems like roads, highways, dams construction, maintenance of the public
property, irrigation polices, environmental protection etc. Basically, while making
such procedural policy, the main focus is how the policy is designed and who are the
actors, what are their functions. All administrative procedure are taken into
consideration in this type. These policies are concerned with welfare and overall
growth of the society and all are not related to any particular segment of the society.
5. These are the types of policies on the basis of governmental functions. Apart from
these types, on the basis of various administrative business, activities, there are
several other policies like patronage/promotional policies which are further divided
into sub-policies as: contract, license and subsidy. One type is capitalization policy,
another is constituent policy.
6. Other types are symbolic or material policies, private goods policies, collective
policies.
Significance of Policy Analysis
According to Thomas Dye, “Policy analysis is finding out what government do, what they do
it, and what difference, if any, it makes”.
Similarly, Chochran and Malone explained that “policy analysis describes investigations
that produce accurate and useful information for decision makers”.

58
 On a more elaborative note, Jenkins Smith mentioned “policy analysis is a set of
techniques and criteria with which to evaluate public policy options and select among
them……to rationalize the development and implementation of public policy…….and as the
means to greater efficiency and equity in allocation of public resources”.
According to Charles Jones, “policy analysis is a good way to understand public policy”.
He mentioned few observations stating the relevance of policy analysis in policy making in
his book ‘An introduction to the study of Public Policy’. These are:
1. The society we live in and state which we have made to govern the society has
changed over a period of time and many people have interpreted these differently in
different ways. Policy analysis helps to understand the context more efficiently. And,
that is why policy analysis is relevant beginning to understand public policy as a
whole.
2. Many problem has same vantage point. They are result of the same event or
interrelated to each other. For example, poverty, illiteracy and unemployment are not
separate problems, they are interrelated and in order to understand and tackle either of
the issue, one needs to have a more broad and multi-dimensional view of the problem.
3. It is not necessary at all that government would act to all problems. It all depends on
government ability and desire to do something, the biggest question is ‘how to do’,
the agenda needs to be very clear and should be relevant for the society. The
government has to consider resource sustainability and financial obligations policy
making.
4. The problems of society are complex and they have not been solved by the
government alone. Policy making is a product of multi stakeholder partnership in
which not only the government agencies but also international organizations, private
institutions, think tanks, policy study groups, civil society media get involved in every
step of policy making.
5. The issues and problems in the society and the demands towards the administration is
active and continuously changing and posing new challenges to the government,
which in turn, also making the government to keep experimenting with policy
making, as the policy which couple of years back was yielding result might have not
remain relevant in contemporary time. In this regard, it becomes highly essential that
each problem and complete policy process should be analyzed to reach conclusive
decision.
6. Policy system has its own biases. There are resource and financial constraints,
multiple stakeholders have their own preferences, political and economic preferences,
organizational pressure, and so many other limitations. All these get reflected in the
policy and that is why it is very necessary to have a very objective policy analysis to
understand the policy process from all angles and make it useful. (Kingdon 2003)
Thomas Dye mentions three important lessons which one can learn through policy analysis
are:

59
 1. Description: policy analysis helps to describe the public policy. It helps to understand
the functioning of the government better and what government is doing and what not
doing.
2. Causes: through policy analysis we can investigate the causes, analyze determinants,
the effects of various institutions, behaviours and policy processes on policies. Policy
is ‘dependent variable’ and several factors like social political, cultural, economic
factors which are determining policies become ‘independent variables’.
3. Consequences: this is very important part as it helps to understand the result of the
polices implemented. This is known as ‘policy evaluation’ where it is evaluated that
whether the specific policy which is implemented brought any significant change in
the lives of the people? In this, the effects of public policies are learnt and used for
future policy design. (Dye 2008)
Policy analysis understands the relationship between public policy, political system and
social system.

Image source: Dye 2008

H. Lasswell (1917) explained the characteristics of public policy analysis. These are as
follows:
1. Public policy analysis is multidisciplinary in nature.

60
 2. Public policy analysis is an engagement with understating the linkages between policy
options, policy process and policy outcome.
3. Because of its diverse nature, it uses on multifold methodology.
4. Analysis have a direct impact on government actions, public choices and market.
Levels of Policy Analysis
1. Meta analysis is related with the understanding of the idea that public policy analysis
works by using metaphors. This analysis in order to describe something, would use
something else. Models of policy analysis based on this approach are elitist, pluralist,
neo Marxist.
2. Meso analysis is a middle level approach which focuses on the links between
definitions, agendas, and decision making process in policy design.
3. Decision analysis: the major question which this approach investigates is that ‘who
get what and how’ in the approach. Policy making is understood not just for
understanding the design purpose rather main focus is to analyze it to understand who
is taking the decisions, for whom decision is taken and how much everyone got out of
the decision? Models like Marxism, elitism, technocracy, pluralism, corporatism
come under this approach.
4. Delivery analysis understands the outcomes of the policy in terms on execution of the
policy, evaluation, impact and change level. (Kingdon 2003)
Different Forms of Policy Study
There are three different forms of policy study.
1. Descriptive form of policy study is concerned with describing the issues, the various
factors which are detrimental to policy study, role of various stakeholders involved,
and methods, techniques used by policy makers. This form is also concerned with
description of the policy outcome.
2. Prescriptive form of policy study suggests ways to improve policy design and how a
policy can be made relevant to the society at general. Suggestions are also prescribed
to improve the whole policy process by making it more inclusive, participatory and
change oriented.
3. Comparative form of policy study basically studies different policies, their structures,
traditions, priorities, different agencies, actors, policy outcomes etc so that ample
information can be collected to make the policy more effective and efficient.
Models of Policy Making
Policy scientists have developed various models to understand the whole policy making
process.
According to Thomas Dye, “models of public policy try to:
 Simplify and clarify our thinking about politics and public policy.
 Identify important aspects of policy problems

61
  Help us to communicate with each other by focusing on essential features of political
life.
 Direct our efforts to understand public policy better by suggesting what is important
and what is unimportant.
 Suggest explanation for public policy and predict its consequences”.

Thomas Dye in his book has talked about the ‘policy model’ in great length, and following
the same conceptual scheme, the main models of public policy are as follows.
Process model Institutional model Rational model
Elite model Incremental model Group model
Public choice model System model Game theory

One important point which needs to be highlighted here that each model is understanding the
public policy from a specific point of view and give a different understanding of public
policy making. However, the policies are the product of public choice, elite preference,
political process, system process, rational planning, incrementalism, group activity and game
function.
1. Process Model
In this model, the pattern of political activities that is ‘process’ of policy making is examined.
The various stages of process model are:
 Problem identification: policy problem is identified by analyzing the demands which
the various groups within society or society as a whole present to the government for
action.
 Agenda setting: different stakeholders like administrative officials, media focus the
attention to the specific demands and decision is taken on what should be decided as a
course of action
 Policy formulation: policy proposals is developed by various stakeholders involved.
 Policy legitimation: a specific course of action is selected to tackle the problem and
enactment is through legislature, executive and administrative system.
 Policy implementation: the policy is now get executed through public officials and
government institution.
 Policy evaluation: the outcome and further implications are analyzed. Government
agencies themselves, and various other actors like media, think tanks, private
consultancies, and civil society, general public evaluate the policy outcome.
This model is beneficial to understand the various activities of the policy making in a
structured way.
2. Institutional Model
Public policy and political institutions are intricately related to each other. All political
activities are performed by political institutions like president, executive, legislature,

62
judiciary, bureaucracy, urban and rural government institutions and public policies are also
designed, executed by the government institutions.
Thomas Dye mentioned that “the relationship between public policy and government
institutions is very close. A policy does not become a public policy until is adopted,
implemented and enforced by government institutions”. (Dye 2008)
Government institutions give three distinctive characteristics to public policy.
1. Legitimacy: It gives legitimacy to the policies. Government policies become legal
obligations and seek compliance of the citizens for the same. The legal legitimacy
is sanctioned through the government institutional activities.
2. Universality: The government institutions are the only and legal institutions
through which government policies are extended to all people in a society.
3. Coercion: Government can use authoritative force against the people who are not
complying to the policies and government regulations. Only government has the
legitimate authority to use force against the violators.

3. Rational Model of Public Policy Making

Thomas Dye mentioned that “a rational policy is one that achieves "maximum social gain";
that is, governments should choose policies resulting in gains to society that exceed costs by
the greatest amount, and governments should refrain from policies if costs exceed gains”.

Image source: Dye 2008

The two important pre requisite to maximize social gain are:

 Policy should not be adopted if it’s input costs are exceeding its output benefits or
returns.
 While selecting policy as the final course of cation, decision maker should choose that
policy which gives maximum benefit in comparison to input costs.
In this way, a rational policy is that policy which gives maximum returns over cost. In words
of Thomas Dye, “a policy is rational when the difference between the values it achieves and
the values it sacrifices is positive and greater than any other policy alternative.”

63
This model works on certain principles which policy maker must possess:
 Policy maker should have the perfect knowledge of societal values, preferences,
 Policy maker should know all the possible alternatives of solving specific problem,
 Policy maker should envision the outcomes of each possible course of action,
 Policy maker should know the cost benefit analysis of each policy alternative,
 Policy maker should be rational, knows the value preference and society demands and
select the most effective and efficient alternative.
This must possess characteristics make it clear that policy making is a rational process which
includes all perfect information about possible policy alternatives, cognitive and
computational ability to process the information and weigh cost benefit analysis and can
facilitate rationality in policy design.
4. Elite Model
According to this model, public policy is the result of preferences and values of elite. It
reflects the interests of the elites and achieving their ends through the policies. Thomas Dye
explains that “elite model suggests that the people are apathetic and ill-informed about public
policy, that elites actually shape mass opinion on policy questions more than masses shape
elite opinion. Thus, the public policy really turns out to be the preferences of elites. Public
officials and administrators merely carry out the policies decided on by the elite. Policies
flow downward from elite to masses and they do not arise from mass demands”. (Dye 2008)
In this model, public policy making has been studied from the point of elitist theory.
Elite theory postulates that the decision making power is in the hands of powerful groups in
the society. Mosca, Pareto, Michels are the thinkers who have developed the elitist model of
political theory. In public policy, this idea of elitism have been developed to show the
domination of elites in decision making mechanism. According to Dye, “public policy
reflects elite values, serves elite ends, and is a product of the elite”. (Dye 2008)

Image source: Dye 2008

64
Thomas Dye summarized the elitist theory as:
1. “Society is divided into the few who have power and the many who do not. Only a
small number; of persons allocate values for society; the masses do not decide policy.
2. The few who govern are not typical of the masses who are governed. Elites are drawn
disproportionately from the upper socio-economic strata of society.
3. The movement of non-elites to elite positions must be slow and continuous to
maintain stability and avoid revolution. Only non-elites who have accepted the basic
elite consensus can be admitted to governing circles.
4. Elites share a consensus on the basic values of the social system and the preservation
of the system.
5. Public policies does not reflect demands of the masses but rather the prevailing values
of the elite. Changes in public policy will be incremental rather than revolutionary.
6. Active elites are subject to relatively little direct influence from apathetic masses.
Elites influence masses more than masses influence elites”.
Elitist theory, however, does not mean that elitists make the public policy completely hostile
to common people but highlights the responsibility of elitists towards the society as a whole.
5. Incremental Model
This model is associated with the works of political scientists David Braybrook and Charles
Lindbloom. They first developed this model as a critique of rational model of decision
making. They argued that policy makers face many constraints like complex societal
demands, time constraints, infrastructural limitations, financial constraints, while deciding
about existing and proposed polices in an administrative system. (Anyebe 2017)
The incremental model recognizes the limitations and realistic barriers of a perfect
rational decisions making process and helps the policy makers to adopt a more broader and
practical approach to decision making.
In this model, the focus is given to small incremental change which a policy creates and
also to the changes in the cost benefit analysis in policy and expenditure aspect.
6. Group Model
According to this model, public policy is a result of group struggle. According to Anderson
(1997), “What may be called group public policy is the equilibrium reached in this group
struggle at any given moment, and it represents a balance which the contending factions or
groups constantly strive to win in their favour. Public polices do reflect the activities of
groups and this model highlights that how each of the various groups in a society tries to
influence public policy to its advantage at the policy formulation level”.
Groups are made on common interests and they form different interests groups on the
basis of that. According to David Truman, “an interests group is a shared attitude group that
makes certain claims upon other groups in the society; such a group become political if and
when it makes a claim through or upon any of the institutions of government”. Individuals as

65
part of group, act as important actor in politics. Group is link between individual and
government. And, the political system manages the groups, their conflicting interest by
managing the groups, making accommodative policies to balance all the group conflict,
formulate and implement policies. (Kingdon 2003)
Thomas Dye mentions that “according to group theorists, public policy at any given time
is the equilibrium reached in the group struggle. This equilibrium is determined by the
relative influence of various interests groups. Changes in the relative influence of any interest
group can be expected to result in changes in

Image source: Dye 2008

public policy; policy will move in direction desired by the groups gaining influence and away
from the desires of groups losing influence. The influence of groups is determined by their
numbers, wealth, organizational strength, leadership, access to decision makers and internal
cohesion”.
7. Public Choice Model
It is an economic study of public policy making. It postulates that in ‘politics’ and in ‘market
place’, all individual actors in different role as voters, tax payers, government officials,
private owners, political parties, interest groups, behave in the same manner and take their
choices on the basis of the principle of ‘maximization of the personal benefits in politics as
well as in the marketplace.
This theory maintains that individual doesn’t behave differently which means when it
comes to political choices, individual will think differently and in market place differently.
Similar to market place, in politics too individuals come together for their mutual benefit.
And, by coming together, they influence the policy decisions and thus enhance their own well
being also. (Kraft and Furlong 2004)

66
 Thomas Dye aptly concludes that “people pursue their self interest in both politics and
the marketplace, but even with selfish motives they can mutually benefit through collective
decision making”.
8. System Model
David Easton has developed this approach and widely used in public policy discourse too.
The public policy is considered as a political system which responds to demand coming
from the environment. Environment consists of social, economic phenomenon, and settings
that are external to political system. The political system consists of interrelated systems of
administrative machinery and activities as the authoritative allocation of values that are
getting implemented on the society. There are demands and support in political environment.
Demands basically are the claims for decisions that people seek to satisfy their personal or
group interest and societal values. Support is given by the citizens to the political system as
taxpayer, casting vote, abiding by the law.

Image source: Kingdon 2003

The feedback loop is the subsequent impact that alters environment and converts into demand
once outcome of the policy is visible. Policy output leads to fresh demand and it’s a cyclical
process.
9. Game Theory
Game theory of public policy making is about analyzing rational decisions in the conditions
where two or more than two participants have to take decisions and outcome of that decisions
depends on the choices that they have made.
Game theory is not about how people are making their choices rather it informs that how
the people should make their decisions knowing their selected course of action is going to

67
bring specific outcome and as a rational man, people know that outcome depends on their
selected choices.
Each model is relevant and crucial to understand the public policy making from different
dimensions. Each model has its advantages and disadvantages. Some model can be more
suitable to understand some situation or events in comparison to others. A good policy model
is based on objective analysis of the political behaviour without validity one preferred
theoretical biases. (Kraft and Furlong 2004) The goal of inquiry into public policy discourse
should be flexible and inclusive and should contribute for the better understanding of the
problems and solving the issues.
Relevance of Public Policy
Public policy is purposeful, meaningful and action oriented. It is outcome of a well planned
coordinated policy design to determine a course of action to achieve a set of goals. It has a
defined course of structure starting with policy formulation, policy implementation, and
policy evaluation. As policies are made for public, society at large and through policies, state
can overcome several challenges and fulfill basic demands of the citizens. Good policies
promote positive change and growth of the nation. As the time is growing, each country is
facing more and more challenges on every front. These problems are complex and more
severe. Along with national and security challenges, today we have more human security
threats too like population, food insecurity, water insecurity, health security, unemployment,
poverty, illiteracy etc. In such case the relevance of public policy becomes more crucial and
ever expanding.
Public policy helps to understand the society better and it brings a combination of
scientific understanding and value normativity to the discourse of policy science. It is
multidisciplinary in nature and develop linkages between social, economic, political aspects.
It equips the citizens to analyze the policy outcome, evaluate the performance of the
government and also highlights the significant role of the individual, group in public policy
making.
In India, there is a proper well coordinated administrative machinery including president,
prime minister, cabinet, executive, legislature, state government, Neeti Aayog (erstwhile
Planning Commission), bureaucracy, local urban and rural governing institutions etc. along
with thin tank, policy planners, academicians from different discipline address, media,
people, interest groups, civil society, international organization engage, debate and design
policies which then government implements.
The most important objective of public policy in India is socio-economic development.
Many agricultural, industrial policies, health, education, employment policies have been
implemented since independence. The main aim is to achieve socio-economic development
with social justice and national integrity.

68
 Understanding of public policy help us to know our country better, it helps us to
understand our problems more closely and equips us with more dynamic and realistic
approach to explore public policy.
References
Anyebe Adam A (2017) An Overview of Approaches to the Study of Public Policy.
International Journal of Political Science (IJPS) Volume 4, Issue 1, January 2017, PP 08-17.
Anderson, J.E.(1997). Public Policy-Making: An Introduction 3rd ed. Boston: Houghton
Miffilin Company.
Dye, T. R. (2008). Understanding Public Policy, 12th Edition, Upper Saddle River New
Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Kingdon, J. W. (2003). Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies, 2nd Edition, New York:
Longman.
Kraft, E. M., and Furlong, S. R. (2004). Public Policy: Politics, Analysis and Alternatives,
Washington D.C.: CQ Press.

69
 Unit-3

(b) Public Policy: Formulation, Implementation and Evaluation

Dr. Devarati Roy Chowdhury

Structure
● Introduction
● Meaning of Public Policy
● Characteristics of Public Policy
● What is Policy Cycle
● Understanding Policy Formulation
● Policy Implementation
● Policy Evaluation
● Features of Good Policy
● Challenges Faced by Policy Cycle
● Significance of Public Policy
● Conclusion
● References
Introduction
The significance and relevance of public policy lie in the fact that its presence and scope
relate to all aspect of a society. In simple definition, a policy is described as a set of principle
or set of rules which guide decisions and achieve rational objectives. It is a course of action
which is goal oriented, the goals here are defined in terms of demands based on societal and
economic needs, societal values, preferences. Policy is based on preconceived outcomes and
course of action is planned to achieve the objectives.
Meaning of Public Policy
According to Harold Koontz, “as a course of action, public policy can be understood as
political management, financial and administrative mechanisms arranged to reach explicit
goals. Policy is a means of encouraging discretion and initiative within units.
According to Richard Rose says that “public policy is not a decision in itself, it is a
course or pattern of activity”.
Robert Eyestone terms public policy as the “relationship of government units to its
environment”.

70
Characteristics of Public Policy
● Public policy is goal oriented.
Public policy is purposive. It is designed to achieve objectives based on societal and
economic demands.
● Public policy is a course of action not merely a decision.
Public Policy is just not a decision rather it is course of action which is designed,
implemented based on combination of decisions.
● Public policy is outcome of a strategic and ethical process.
Public policy is designed and implemented to meet societal and economic requirements. In
public policy, decisions are taken based on scientific understanding and also keeping a
balance with the societal values and norms. It upholds the state’s commitments to social
justice, welfare of all and sustainable growth.
● Public policy is highly dynamic.
It is a continuous activity which takes place within a structure of political system and external
environment work as social and political system. It is dynamic because public policy is not
static and changes with changing issues. As environment is changing drastically, it is posing
more challenges to the public policy than ever and public policy is also getting more
comprehensive and dynamic in the process.
● Public policy is a complex process.
Multiple issues with demands, societal preferences are influencing public policy designing
and these aspirations, needs are coming in form of demands. It becomes very challenging for
the government to accommodate each demand into consideration. There are several aspects
which government must keep while designing policies. There are social, economic relevance,
national integrity and security, financial constraints, budget, infrastructure availability,
validity of the information and data and so on which makes the public policy highly complex
in nature.
● Public policy includes different components.
Public policy is made of various structures environment, system, and feedback mechanism. It
comprises of environment which provides demands and support to the system. This
environment is basically social and economic environment. The system is political system.
Demands are individuals’ and group’s requirements, their needs which they provide to the
government present in political system and supports are in form votes, supporting the
ideology and political party etc.
Political system is the system in which demands are processed and converted into policies
and then get implemented on the environment itself.

71
The feedback loop sends the evaluated reviews to the environment which affects the policy
outcome, people’s perceptions and generate new demands.
● Public policy is a product of well coordinated relationship between various stake holders.
Multiple stakeholders participate starting with executive, legislature, judiciary, bureaucracy,
think tanks, civil society, people, media, all formal and informal structures etc. Every agency,
actor has an important role to play in the making of public policy.
● Public policy is based on guidelines.
It lays down major policy guidelines based on that policy is implemented. Policy guidelines
inform about the principles of policy making and functioning of policy.
● Public policy is directed towards future.
Public Policy is based on objectives. It is based on public interest. These objectives strive to
achieve social justice, sustainable growth and economic development which makes the nation
ahead. Policies make the future of a nation. More sound and holistic the polices are, better it
will be for the nation.
Policy making is also flexible as future holds lots of uncertainties, policy making change its
tone and course as the future requirements.
● Public policy uses the best available methods.
Public policy uses both quantitative data and qualitative data for designing the public policy.
Scientific data and normative values are considered and available infrastructure are used in
best possible manner to make the policy effective and efficient.

What is a Policy Cycle?

The policy cycle suggests that the policy making is a continuous process and comprises of
multiple stages. Thomas Dye mentioned that “policymaking is a continuous process rather
than a single event; different actors are influential at different stages and previous decisions
set the agenda for future decisions”. (Dye 2008)
Public policy is model in two ways:
a) As a prescriptive model postulates how policymaker should ideally operate in a
planned and systematic way. It is based on the idea of what a public policy should be
‘what ought to be’.
b) Descriptive model explains how a public policy is operating, how decisions are taken
in the policy making process. It is based on the idea of ‘what it is’.

72
The Generic Policy Cycle

1. Issue identification and agenda setting

It implies identifying the problems that requires governmental support and policy attention, it
also defines the nature of the problem and prioritizing the issues.
2. Policy formulation
This is the formal stage of policy formulation. It involves setting of the objectives,
identification of the input cost, exploring different possible course of action, selecting policy
instruments, projecting the outcomes, and selecting the suitable alternative as decision.
3. Policy legitimation
This involves ensuring that the decision which has been taken as suitable alternative should
have support and legal approval. The support included legislative support, support of
complete administration and consent of interest groups too.
4. Policy implementation
This is the very important stage of policy cycle which includes discharging duties to various
administrative units, making proper infrastructural arrangements for the smooth enactment of
the policies, and carrying out the decisions.
5. Policy evaluation
The final and one of the most important stage of overall policy cycle is policy evaluation in
which the results of the policy are evaluated, assessments are made about the success of
policy, achievement of the desired results and effects of the policy.

73
6. Policy maintenance, succession, or termination
The cycle is followed depending on the political setup, societal needs, budget commitments,
etc. and on the basis of these things, new polices are launched, many of the ongoing policies
are continued, discontinued or modified according to the present requirements.
Understanding Policy Formulation
According to Kingdon, “Formulation of policy consists of policymakers discussing and
suggesting approaches to correcting problems that have been raised as part of the agenda.
Effective policy formulation consists of analysis that identifies the most effective policies and
political authorizations”.
Policy formulation involves developing a plan, a method for achieving societal needs.
It involves:
● Research involves gathering and processing information,
● Review means exploring possible alternatives,
● Projection determines feasibility of each alternative and possible outcomes,
● Selection involves refining and selecting suitable alternative as possible course of action.
There are two types of formulation model.
1. Model based on rational planning which is systematic and well structured.
2. Model based reacting which is more spontaneous and unplanned. (Knoepfel et al
2007)
Actors involved in policy formulation
There are multiple actors involved in stage of policy formulation. Inside government, there is
executive which is identifying the problems, goals, prioritizing and making policy
alternatives.
Bureaucracy develop plan and proposal at this stage.
Legislature discusses the policy and seek answer and clarification concerning the policy
matter and after debate, discussion, policies are put for vote in houses and for President’s
final approval. The whole idea is to make the proposed policy relevant for the society.
Outside government, there are think tanks, policy networks, interest groups, civil society,
citizen organizations, private organization, international organization which influence the
policy formulation.
Various actors and their specific roles
Actor Role
Politician Power
Bureaucrat Institution

74
 Interest group Representation
Technocrat Knowledge
Donors Influence

Source: Walt and Gilson 1994

Formulation guideline:
● Formulation requires active participation of multiple actors and agencies.
● Formulation should be based on clear definition of problem and attached agendas.
● Formulation and reformulation happen before selecting a final policy proposal draft.
● The process of formulation itself never has any neutral impact.
● Efforts are made to formulate a more comprehensive and holistic policy proposal for
treating number of intertwined complex problems.
● Estimation of cost benefit analysis is done for a more pragmatic and realistic policy
proposal. However, welfare of all is the first priority with fulfilling financial
commitments.
Different ways of policy formulation:
● Routine formulation means formulating similar policy proposals.
● Creative formulation involves approaching the problem with a new insight, with an
unprecedented way.
● Analogous formulation uses past experiences and policy results, past problems for
treating the current, new problem.
● Policy maker should think of achieving legitimation. (Howlett and Ramesh 1995)
It is important to highlight here that each policy formulation involve these different ways.
In a democratic country like India, there are certain ways through which administration
can be made aware of the societal needs and problems. The elected peoples’ representatives
as Member of Parliament (MP) and Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) in Parliament
and in their respective state assemblies raise problems, issues and want action for those.
These issues vary ranging from government’s failure or inadequate policy or any new issue
etc. Then, several interest groups, pressure groups also influence government decision
making. Civil society organization, media, research groups are also active participants in the
process and influence or draw government’s attention to problems and area of concern.
Government itself also pays attention to the societal needs and take actions accordingly.
After this, once the problem is identified, then setting of agendas are done. Here three
important factors influence the whole process.

75
● The goals and objectives should be arranged in such a way that these should generate
holistic set of policy. For example, for eliminating illiteracy, it is necessary to understand
what all should be done to eliminate illiteracy, what are the main causes? On the basis of
that one broad policy should be formulated to tackle problem of illiteracy and has to be
made linked to other policies too like poverty alleviation and Midday meal schemes. This
is done because illiteracy is not a single problem rather it is linked to poverty,
unemployment, school dropout ratio, girl child enrolment to school, health parameters
etc. Proposals should also be based on long term and short term projections.
● Second factor is related to developing alternative possible strategies needed to enact the
policy. Like, direct benefit transfer or subsidy, deciding about the various ways of
providing goods and services to the beneficiaries. A strategy also is developed for
correctly identifying the beneficiary and gathering correct information of the
beneficiaries. Correct data helps the policy proposal to be more realistic and achievable.
● The third factor involves selecting the way through which policy would be implemented.
For example, setting up new institutional setting or working with existing setup. Like
Integrated Rural Development Programme (IRDP) was established for helping the poor
people for income generation, Anganwadi setup under Integrated Child Development
Scheme (ICDS) for providing pregnancy and maternity facilities, healthy food, primary
health care, immunization, primary education etc. to children under 6 years to poor and
malnourished beneficiaries. All the roles and functions of each and every administrative
units are clearly calked out in this stage itself.
The policy formulation clearly spells out the objectives, strategies, and mechanisms of
instruments. It is the significant stage as it leads the basic foundational structure and support
to whole policy, through this stage a coherent and realistic policy gets the needed base, it is
the stage which leads to better coordination between all agencies in an integrated manner. A
policy formulating needs expert knowledge and skill for which the government works with
non-governmental agencies also. For a better choice of strategy and enactment, multiple
partnership between different avenues are done to make the stage more impactful and
dynamic.
Policy Implementation
According to Thomas Dye, “policy implementation is a process of interaction between the
settings of goals and actions geared to achieve them. It is a dynamic conversion process of
policies and plans into specific programmes and projects”.
Approaches to policy implementation
● Procedural/managerial approach
This approach establishes appropriate processes, techniques for the management and
implementation of the policies.

76
● Structural approach
It involves selecting the most appropriate administrative form for achieving the outcome.
● Political approach
Political approach understands the challenges which a policy could face in environment or
within political system and look for its solution.
● Behavioural approach
This approach creates consensus and raises acceptability by eliminating the conflictual
interests between multiple stakeholders through stakeholder analysis, organizational
development method etc. (Howlett and Ramesh 1995)
This is a very significant stage in whole policy design. The relevance of policy
implementation stage are as follows:
● Information: it makes the citizen aware about the policy
● Inducement: help people and government both to adopt new approach
● Enforcement: seek compliance of the people under legal sanctity
● Benefaction: provides benefits to those who change their political behaviour and allow
the policy to be implemented and offer their compliance to the policy. (Anderson 1997)
It needs to be ensured that policies get proper flexibility and sufficient autonomy to be
implemented properly, implementation too needs sufficient power for its validation. The
effectiveness and efficiency of implantation hugely depend on proper policy design.
However, many a times policies, which are implemented, did not achieve required results.
There are many reasons for which an implemented policy might be unsuccessful.
● Policy failure
Policy failure is basically an implantation gap which forms between policy and
implementation.
There are two types of policy failure.
a) Non-implementation policy failure is the one the policy is not enacted as it was
described due to some reasons.
b) Unsuccessful implementation happens when a policy is enacted properly but
external factors are not complying to the policy.
● Complexity of technical features
The ground realities are completely different dominated by human behaviour, action, values,
traditions, and complex technical features make the policy too technocratic in its orientation
and thus it becomes extremely difficult to implement such policy in society.

77
● Multiple goal objective
As policies are solving complex problems, often these policies are multiple goal oriented. But
this strength can become the obstacle as the multiplicity of goals make the policy hard to
understand and non-achievable.
● Ambiguity and unclear policy design
Similar to above-mentioned point, the complex intertwining of problems and their related
goals can make the policy highly ambiguous and direction less.
● Unmatched preferences
The goods and services offered through policy does not match the local preferences.
● Disagreement to policy design and objectives
When the policy is implemented, many a times, it has been seen that implementation is not
going at par with policy objectives.
● Lack of proper infrastructure, wrong data, financial constraints, lack of expertise, time
limitations etc. serve as administrative obstacles to a successful implementation of policy.
The success of policy implementation depends on a sound setting of goals, proper allocation
and optimal utilization of the resources and achieving legislative legitimacy and people’s
approval to the policy.
Policy Evaluation
Thomas Dye mentions “Policy Evaluation is conducted for checking the effects of the policy.
The Policy Evaluation provides us direction for the evaluation programs, projects, and
strategies”. (Dye 2008)
As per the CDC guidelines, “Policy evaluation applies evaluation principles and methods
to examine the content, implementation or impact of a policy. It uses a range of research
methods to systematically investigate the effectiveness of policy interventions,
implementation, and processes, so that a sound policy can be achieved by improving the
social and economic conditions of different stakeholders”. (CDC policy briefing)
It is an activity which helps to understand three aspects of policy. These are:
● merit,
● worth, and
● utility
● According to Brownson et al (2009) “evaluation is an integral part of each step in the
policy process. Internally, evaluation happens at three stages in which each stage focuses
on a different phase of the policy process. Each type of evaluation can provide valuable
information for the planning and interpretation of the other types of evaluation (content,
implementation, and impact)”. These stages are:
78
● Evaluating Policy Content: focuses on articulation of goals and the framework it designed
for its implementation. Evaluation is done to understand the context of the policy design,
the very basic issues it is dealing with, the relevance, clarity of the content, and
implementation framework.

Image source: Brownson et al 2009

● Evaluating Policy Implementation: focus is on evaluating the policy implementation as it

was designed. This is crucial to understand the strength and weakness of the policy, the
obstacles policy faced and helps to compare policies and different alternatives and their
components.
● Evaluating Policy Impact: most important stage where policy as a whole and its impact is
evaluated to see that it has achieved what it is intended or not. It helps to realize the
perception of people and other agencies. It also helps to draw inferences about the
performance of each actor. Policy impact evaluation helps compare the various policy
results and helps the policy maker for future decisions.
Simply, policy evaluation is considered as a whole at the last stage of policy cycle to avoid
complexity. But, it remained the most crucial stage of policy cycle and without the policy
evaluation, the whole policy cycle remains incomplete and ineffective.
Daniel Lerner has summed up the evaluation stage as threefold process.
a) Process evaluation: policy is implemented on the basis of policy guidelines or not. It
takes into consideration two parameters: the target area and specific target groups.
The outcome of the policy is also analyzed.
b) Impact evaluation: both positive and negative impacts are evaluated. Changes which
happened after the execution are also considered for investigation.
c) Comprehensive evaluation: it is a mix of process model and impact evaluation
model. Both are combined to understand the positive points, the drawbacks, and
improvements can be implemented. (Brownson et al 2009)
From an overall public policy point of view, as mentioned above also, policy evaluation is
considered in totality and comprehensive evaluation is considered most for the practice and
thus useful.

79
Different agencies and their role in policy evaluation
● Administrative: concerned with evaluating administrative performance and budgeting
system.
● Judicial: involves judicial review and judicial discretion
● Political: comprises of creating consensus and consultation along with policy subsystem
and creating support base within public
Following reasons explain the usefulness of policy evaluation.
● Documenting the whole process of policy development
● Clearly reflects the outcome of a policy implemented
● Makes the citizen aware about the policy result and also keep the government informed.
● Helps and allow the citizens, government, and other participants to decide pragmatically.
● Through the documentation process, it helps to make a more informed choices regarding
policy making
● Creates compliance with running policies and serve as a support
● Helps for future policies
● Makes all the stakeholder accountable for their duty.
● Helps to evaluate specific performance and thus offers opportunity to learn and improve.
● Sets a direction for future policy making process
● The expected results and unexpected data, drawbacks are analyzed to make the policy are
effective.
● Help to understand the strength and weaknesses of the policy and creates room for
improvement.
There are some challenges to policy evaluation.
● Financial and other infrastructure limitation can hamper policy evaluation
● Scarcity of strong evidence to support policy evaluation
● Lack of policy evaluation methods
● Pressure of organizational, and external factors on policy evaluation process
● Lack of “control” over policy implementation
● Data constraints and lack of proper expertise to evaluation
● Lack of appropriate measures
Policy evaluation is a process in itself. It facilitates efficiency to the formulation and
implementation stages. Starting from planning to analysis of the effective ness of the policy,
80
evaluation plays a very critical role and sound policy depends on sound policy evaluation
along with effective use of rest two stages within policy cycle design.
Features of Good Policy
● The process of public policy is a complementary and interrelated process. All the stages
within the process are not separate event, these stages are leading to each other and
successful completion of one stage marks successful start of next stage and also ensures a
proper successful overall course of action.
● A good policy is knowledge based policy which is based on scientific evidence. This
means that policy design should be on correct and fact based information, the policy
decision should be designed keeping in mind the societal demands, financial
commitments and not on political biases, personal beliefs and faith etc.
● A policy is a good policy which is highly participatory, inclusive and involves people.
More the policy involves discussion, brainstorming, more participation of different
stakeholders, people, more the policy design would be able to understand the problem and
see possible alternatives. Also, inclusivity and more local participation makes the public
policy more effective and efficient.
● A good policy shows a strong and committed leadership towards the society. A good
policy reflects the aspirations and needs of the citizens getting transformed into policies.
● Gradual and incremental change are the good indicators of a good healthy policy.
● Democratic nature of the policy, proper consultation during policy making, transparency,
openness as information concerning policy is shared with people and other stakeholders
are the key ingredients of a good policy.
● A good policy must be consistent with the constitution and societal cultural settings.
● Policies must be inclusive. It should bring all the viewpoints, different knowledge system
of addressing the problem and solutions, the local people must be a part of whole policy
making process.
● A policy is good if it can be understood by everyone. It should be clear and based on
social and economic needs. It should be beneficial for society at large, for the welfare of
all.
● Policy should be stable without doing frequent changes in the nature of policy. That is
why careful study should be done while formulating and implementing policy.
● There should be sincere approach to policy design. It should adhere to ethics,
philosophical values of the nation and should keep intact the nation’s integrity and safety.
● A good policy is the one which is achievable. Realistic goals are important for a policy.
The objective should not be just ideal statements which can never be achieved. Rather
visioning a more realistic goals based policy is good for society.

81
● Policies should be future and purposive oriented. And should be interlinked around
shared goals and values.
Challenges Faced by Policy Cycle
● Because of the complexity of the problems and inherent tensions in the social and
economic front, policy cycle may face difficulty in addressing the problem,
● The inherent multidimensional can lead to overlapping and contradictions in the policy
cycle.
● The support and consensus on nature and strategies to achieve social goals can be
contested.
● The value preferences, political and social interests are affecting the various stakeholders
and decision makers which can often lead to more conflicts.
● The very definition of problem cannot be solely based on scientific analysis or socially
constructed. It should be balance of both. However, it becomes difficult to strike a
balance in real world administrative setup with conflicting interests.
● The objective and subjective dichotomy in one important challenge. There is sense of
objectivity in terms of classification, explanation attached to the problem whereas the
same problems can be interpreted differently based on value judgement and preferences.
● The policy problem can affect multiple entities as policies are interdependent.
● There can be multiple ways to solve a problem. However, this aggravates the problem
more as problem are not solved due to flux between problem and multiple solutions.
Significance of Public Policy
● Public policy is a specialized study which makes public administration more effective.
● Public policy is a basis of government. Understanding public policy helps us to
understand our government and their duties, responsibilities, and their challenges better.
● Public policy is a mechanism to provide services and bring social justice, protects weaker
section of the society, and achieve welfare for the society.
● Public policy helps in the making of a sound and well informed public opinion.
● Public policy is an instrument of economic development, sustainable growth, and social
change.
● Public policy serves as a stabilizing force within society as it creates an environment of
accommodation and co-option. It brings stability and order to the society.
Conclusion
In nutshell, for a democratic country like India, development of rational, goal oriented public
policy is extremely important. The whole policy cycle with proper coordination and

82
communication works to achieve the stated objectives. However, there are numerous
obstacles which it faces on its course. The challenge is to overcome those hindrances and
create effective and positive policy for the betterment of the society. Public policy helps the
government to aim for development and social and economic upliftment of the society. It
ensures the equity, effectiveness, and responsiveness of the government toward its own
citizens.
References
Anderson, J.E. (1997). Public Policy-Making: An Introduction 3rd ed. Boston: Houghton
Miffilin Company.
Brownson, R. C., Royer, C., Chriqui, J. F., & Stamatakis, K. A. (2009). Understanding
evidence-based public health policy. American Journal of Public Health, 99, 1576–1583.
Dye, T. R. (2008). Understanding Public Policy, 12th Edition, Upper Saddle River, New
Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Howlett, M., and Ramesh, M. (1995). Policy Cycles and Policy Subsystems, Canada: Oxford
University Press.
Kingdon, J. W. (2003). Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies, 2nd Edition, New York:
Longman.
Knoepfel, P., Larrue, C., Varone, F., and Hill, M. (2007). Public Policy Analysis, Bristol: The
Policy Press.

83