INTRODUCTION : Public Administration as an academic discipline has come into existence with the important paper of Woodrow Wilson on the Study of Administration. Ever since a number of theories, approaches and concepts in administiation have been developed. In recent years, administration is increasing along with the growing functions. In fact, there has been a change in the very nature of the state which is reflected in increasing functions which the governments are undertaking. Another manifestation in this change is the rapid growth of civil services. F.M. Marx has called the modem state as an administrative state thereby signifying the role the civil seivice or bureaucracy play in the modem state. This expansion in the bureaucracy as well as "increased role in the governance" thrown out several issues. The 'problem of relations' between generalists and specialits, commitment and neutrality of civil services, anonymity, corruption, inefficiancy,representative character of the bureaucracy, etc. are but a few issues.
OBJECTIVE
1. Distinguish between generalists and specialists and identify the problem areas in their relations,
2. Explain the concept of anonymity, and
3. examine the concept of commitment.
1. Distinguish between generalists and specialists and identify the problem areas in their relations,
2. Explain the concept of anonymity, and
3. examine the concept of commitment.
GENERALISTS AND SPECIALISTS
The administrators, particularly higher levels, are classified as generalists and specialists:
The administrators, particularly higher levels, are classified as generalists and specialists:
- Specialists are those who have specialised in terms of their education and experience in administration in specific subjects or disciplines of study. Engineers, medical doctors, statisticians, scientists, chemical technologists, computer programmers are some of the examples of specialists.
- Generalists are not specialised in the course of their education and/or further training. An entrant to the civil service might have graduated in literature or history. A district collector by his education might be a scientist, engineer or historian, linguist or social scientist. His duties are generalist in nature covering functions such as collection of land revenue, maintenance of law and order, etc.
In any administrative institution as we go higher and higher in, the level of responsibility - functions become more and more generalist in nature. Even in technical departments, the heads of the department are engaged in the generalist functions of policy-making, control of the administrative machinery, direction, supervision and control of the employees, coordination within and outside the organization in his charge, and public relations.
The issue of generalists vis-a-vis specialists has come up in recent times for discussion and debate on account of the organization and responsibilities of their cadres or classes in public or civil services.
1. In the first place, they are organized in separate hierarchies i.e., groups having supervisor-subordinate relations between various levels.
2. Secondly, the tasks of policy-making, control of administrative machinery and management at highest levels are assigned largely to the generalists in preference to the specialists, barring few exceptions.
3. Thirdly, generalists are moved from one department to another one type the job to another, a department to a public enterprise or a local government and back without hindrance or obstacle. The specialists, on the other hand, are transferred or promoted within their respective departments.
1. In the first place, they are organized in separate hierarchies i.e., groups having supervisor-subordinate relations between various levels.
2. Secondly, the tasks of policy-making, control of administrative machinery and management at highest levels are assigned largely to the generalists in preference to the specialists, barring few exceptions.
3. Thirdly, generalists are moved from one department to another one type the job to another, a department to a public enterprise or a local government and back without hindrance or obstacle. The specialists, on the other hand, are transferred or promoted within their respective departments.
Posts of secretaries to government departments and even of heads of most executive departments are reserved for the generalists. This privileged position exercised by the generalists has a tendency to offend the self image of the specialists, and in consequence, their morale and confidence.
The idea of the generalist civil service was based on three components:
i. the entrants to the civil service could occupy any post at higher levels of any of the executive (field) departments and the secretariat of the government headquarters with distinction without in service training.
ii. they would advise the government in policy-making, formulating decisions-the basis of government's executive orders-operating the administrative machinery, and putting the executive orders into effect.
iii. the actual expert, technical advice in subjects like agriculture, health and medicine, forestry and so on, would be given by the subject matter technical officers and scientists (the agricultural scientists, doctors, forest officers, engineers, etc.) in the functional departments (agriculture, health and medicine. etc.'). Such expert technical advice could be grasped and absorbed into policy making and decision-making processes by the generalist civil servants.
The idea of the generalist civil service was based on three components:
i. the entrants to the civil service could occupy any post at higher levels of any of the executive (field) departments and the secretariat of the government headquarters with distinction without in service training.
ii. they would advise the government in policy-making, formulating decisions-the basis of government's executive orders-operating the administrative machinery, and putting the executive orders into effect.
iii. the actual expert, technical advice in subjects like agriculture, health and medicine, forestry and so on, would be given by the subject matter technical officers and scientists (the agricultural scientists, doctors, forest officers, engineers, etc.) in the functional departments (agriculture, health and medicine. etc.'). Such expert technical advice could be grasped and absorbed into policy making and decision-making processes by the generalist civil servants.
A. Relations between Generalists and Specialists
The issues relating to the relationship between the generalists and the specialists need to be dealt with in slightly greater detail. Two arguments are advanced with regaled to the generalists being elevated to highest positions of the administration, important from the points of view of rendering advice in policy-making by the ministers and direct control of the executive machinery.
The issues relating to the relationship between the generalists and the specialists need to be dealt with in slightly greater detail. Two arguments are advanced with regaled to the generalists being elevated to highest positions of the administration, important from the points of view of rendering advice in policy-making by the ministers and direct control of the executive machinery.
- First, the liberal education enables the graduates who are selected on merit by an independent and impartial Public Service Commission, to have broad outlook, intelligent mind and flexibility of approach in regard to administrative problems and issues irrespective of their subject matter content.
- The second ground relates to the mobility of the generalist entrants in the civil service. As they move from one department to another and from one position to another, their ability to adjust to and assimilate different experiences-functional, public and political-increases and their qualification to hold higher positions in any department and post is strengthened.
Arguments in favour of the generalists are put in various statements, but they are essentially based on one or the other of the above grounds. The generalists preform the role of a mediator, a referee between the expert and the politician, the people and the government, the pressure groups and the public interest represented by the parliament and the executive, with conflicting points of view. The generalists are close to the "Minister's mind". They act as an antidote to the rule by the technocrats ("the technocracy"). The two roles of the technocrat who has a function or an aspect to plead for, and the generalist who is a mediator, coordinator and integrator can never be fused into one administration or a single hierarchy.
The generalists, due to the absence of the necessary education or post-service entry training, have not developed the essential professionalism nor the adequate knowledge in depth in any one aspect of department's work and "frequently not even in the general area of activity". These deficiencies have led to improper policy-making and has prevented a fundamental evaluation of the policies framed by them. The result is also visible in the ineffective methods adopted to execute policies. The generalists are engaged mostly in planning and are away from execution. This results in unrealistic policy decisions. Staff and line functions can be segregated in Britian, but not so much in India. Generalists have not received post-entry training to make them suitable for specific a functional or positional responsibilities. Generalists "misunderstand (technical) advice or do not obtain it at all".
The specialists are also not sufficiently cost-conscious, they identify too closely with the clientele of their own department. The specialist's case for being placed on an equal footing with the generalist in the matter of appointment to highest positions in administration is advanced on the grounds of default of the generalists who have occupied highest positions in different departments and of the special merit of the specialists for occupying highest positions in their own functional specialties.
The generalists, due to the absence of the necessary education or post-service entry training, have not developed the essential professionalism nor the adequate knowledge in depth in any one aspect of department's work and "frequently not even in the general area of activity". These deficiencies have led to improper policy-making and has prevented a fundamental evaluation of the policies framed by them. The result is also visible in the ineffective methods adopted to execute policies. The generalists are engaged mostly in planning and are away from execution. This results in unrealistic policy decisions. Staff and line functions can be segregated in Britian, but not so much in India. Generalists have not received post-entry training to make them suitable for specific a functional or positional responsibilities. Generalists "misunderstand (technical) advice or do not obtain it at all".
The generalists cannot undertake forward planning because:
a). they are not equipped with necessary knowledge of the developments in particular subjects like engineering, agriculture, education, health, medicine, forestry, industry, etc., and
b). they move from one department to another and at times even out of a department to a public enterprise or to a semi-government institution like university.
a). they are not equipped with necessary knowledge of the developments in particular subjects like engineering, agriculture, education, health, medicine, forestry, industry, etc., and
b). they move from one department to another and at times even out of a department to a public enterprise or to a semi-government institution like university.
It is actively canvassed on behalf of the specialists that, on the one hand the generalists become better qualified to hold higher positions in administration in different departments at all levels because they themselves have fashioned the system in their own favour, and on the other the specialists in spite of they being better equipped are deprived from occupying high, pay highest, positions like secretary ship in their own departments. Scientific training inculcates an objective spirit in the specialists which lessens the alleged functional bias with them. The generalists are neither completely free from (personal) bias in the course of the administration. Similarly, the criticisms of the specialists not being cost-conscious and identifying too closely with the clientele of own department, may be shared by the generalists. Education per se has nothing to do with the administrative ability. A case for broadening the technical and professional courses can be made independently. Such broadening would stand in better stead in the service career of the candidates at the civil services competitive examination qualified in these courses.
The dual hierarchical structures, comprising the generalists and the specialists respectively, not only mal-administrative efficiency but also breed discontent among the specialists. The gains from the abolition of these dual structures would be various. Frustration among the specialists would be avoided. This would result in easier and more effective communication between the two groups-the generalists and the specialists. Better expert advice would come forth from the specialists, Administrative work handled by them would be simplified and speeded up and wastage would be avoided, .
The 'intelligent amateur' theory prevalent in Britain during the nineteenth century does not seem to be applicable to the recent times, particularly After-the Second World War. Beyond drafting, more knowledge and other skills would be called for in the civil servant. The functions and responsibilities of the administrator have not merely increased but also grown in complexity. Progress of science and technology has affected the content as well as methods of Public Administration. The introduction of the computer has changed the nature of administration in respect of not only information storage, retrieval and communication, but also the nature and pace of decision-making and the relations between the citizens and the administration. The individual state is no longer isolated but is a part of wider network of the international community.
Career planning is necessary both for the generalists and the specialists in the interest of the development of both and the greater efficiency and effectiveness of the public administrative system. Both have to be trained in the managerial functions and the managerial techniques such as qualitative methods and economic analysis and common body of knowledge needs to be taught to both in the course of the post-entry training. Communication and cooperation between these two components of Public Administration have to be encouraged and built within the administrative system and in the interstices of the network of administrative relations.
A. Experience in U,K. and India
(ii) Economic Administration (including planning);
(iii) Financial Administration;
(iv) Agricultural Administration;
(v) Industrial Administration;
(vi) Social and Educational Administration;
(vii) Internal Security and Defence; and
(viii) General Administration.
Different countries have approached the problem differently keeping in view the administrative and political environment within which they operate. In the context of the growing public criticism of the inadequacies of the civil service structure in Britain dominated by the generalists at the top, the British government appointed in 1966 an inquiry committee chaired by Lord Fulton. The Fulton Committee proposed that the scientists, engineers, economists, etc., with requisite competence should be absorbed in a senior management group, from which higher positions in the administration should be filled in'.
In lndia the generalist and specialist controversy was dealt with by the Administrative Reforms Commission's study team on Personnel Administration. It recommended eight professional groups viz..
(i) Personnel and Manpower; (ii) Economic Administration (including planning);
(iii) Financial Administration;
(iv) Agricultural Administration;
(v) Industrial Administration;
(vi) Social and Educational Administration;
(vii) Internal Security and Defence; and
(viii) General Administration.
These groups would form the basis for the selection from the different services of the personnel for (cases) 'consideration' as well as 'policy formulation' levels. The implication of the eight-fold classification drawn up by the Administrative Reforms Commission's study team on Personnel Administration was spelled out by the Administrative Reforms Commission. It was that the Indian Administrative Services shall no more be a generalist but shall have purely functional role of Revenue Administration [Administrative Reforms Commission I Report on Personnel Administration (April 1969), page 241. The Administrative Reforms Commission was right in asserting that the constituents of these new professionalized groups would be contributed by different services including the Indian Administrative Services and the specialist services. This professionalism could be developed only through appropriate schemes of recruitment, training and career planning.
ANONYMITY
The rule or norm of anonymity of the civil service is the counterpart or the other side of the coin of ministerial responsibility. The principle of collective responsibility in the United Kingdom ensures the responsibility and accountability of the executive, that is cabinet, to the parliament, to be precise to the House of Commons. The minister's individual responsibility makes sure that for every act or wrong act or oversight in his department a minister has to answer to the parliament. The rule of anonymity requires that for the official's actions or inactions their minister alone has to answer before parliament. The official concerned, who cannot defend himself in parliament, is thus protected from criticism of parliament. This does not mean that the official guilty of criminal acts or excesses under law or abuse of authority and power for personal ends cannot be held guilty under the law.
The rule or norm of anonymity of the civil service is the counterpart or the other side of the coin of ministerial responsibility. The principle of collective responsibility in the United Kingdom ensures the responsibility and accountability of the executive, that is cabinet, to the parliament, to be precise to the House of Commons. The minister's individual responsibility makes sure that for every act or wrong act or oversight in his department a minister has to answer to the parliament. The rule of anonymity requires that for the official's actions or inactions their minister alone has to answer before parliament. The official concerned, who cannot defend himself in parliament, is thus protected from criticism of parliament. This does not mean that the official guilty of criminal acts or excesses under law or abuse of authority and power for personal ends cannot be held guilty under the law.
The following are different situations calling for different actions by the minister in relation to the official:
1) A minister is to protect a civil servant who has executed his definite order.
2) A minister has to support a civil servant who has acted correctly in keeping with the policy of the minister.
3) The minister accepts the responsibility for an action or delay of the official when the issue is not an important matter of policy and in which individual rights are not involved. The minister in these situations offers to take corrective action in his department.
4) A civil servant's action is disapproved by the minister who does not know about it, the action being worthy of blame.
1) A minister is to protect a civil servant who has executed his definite order.
2) A minister has to support a civil servant who has acted correctly in keeping with the policy of the minister.
3) The minister accepts the responsibility for an action or delay of the official when the issue is not an important matter of policy and in which individual rights are not involved. The minister in these situations offers to take corrective action in his department.
4) A civil servant's action is disapproved by the minister who does not know about it, the action being worthy of blame.
The minister in such case does not support the wrong action of the official or defend the official's error. The minister in this case is responsible to parliament for the wrong action of the official. The minister, however, retains his power to control and discipline his civil servants. The above situations explain the principle of ministerial responsibility or the norm of anonymity of the civil servant. The ministers are not in a position to excuse the failure of their policies by pointing to experts or civil servants who have given the advice or to the officials they have employed.
The principle of anonymity is to be distinguished from the rule of neutrality and that of impersonality. The rule of neutrality expects the civil servant to be politically neutral. He has to give loyalty to the minister irrespective of the political party to which his government belongs. The doctrine of impersonality expects the civil servant to follow the prescribed laws, rules and regulations irrespective of this own person in case he has taken up the charge of his particular post from another civil servant or irrespective of the person to whom the case pertains. The rule of anonymity operates in the case of legal and proper acts of the civil servants. They are not required to come out in public or face parliament in case of such acts; it is the minister who then faces the people of the parliament. For illegal personal acts both the civil servants and the ministers can be held guilty.
The civil servants in Britain are often given the simile of the fountains in the Trafalgar Square (London) who are silent observers of the political events in the cabinet and the parliament whose sites are located nearby. Similar norms are applicable to the relationship in India between the ministers and the civil servants. The Indian Constitution does not spell out the terms and conditions of this relationship, this is left to the conventions to be evolved since the inauguration of the Constitution. The Indian Constitution gives security of tenure to the service of the members of the Indian Administrative Service, other All-India and Central and State Civil Services and those holding civil posts under the union or a state, except for reasons of criminal charge, reasonable practicability or security of the state (Article 311). The relevant rules issued by the executive define the terms 'civil servant' and 'civil post' in terms of the master-servant relationship marked by the method of employment and the mode of removal from service. The normal relationship between the minister and a civil servant is based on mutual satisfaction of obligations to each other. Civil servants are to render advice to the minister in respect of policies, plans and programmes as well as laws and rules to put these into action on the basis of their expertise. They are not to act in these respects to suit their advice to the personal or partisan ends of the minister. Once the advice is given, the civil servant's function in this behalf is over, He has then to implement the policies and programmes and the laws and rules as framed by the executive whether his advice has been accepted by it or not. The minister in turn is not expected in interfere in the execution of the government's policies, plans, programmes, laws and rules. The All India Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968 prescribe that the civil servants have to avoid occasions of self-publicity, entertainment, association with a political party-or its activities, etc., so that their anonymity is preserved.
COMMITMENT
What does 'commitment' mean? It means engagement on the part of a human being that restricts his freedom of action. If I, for example, engage to be honest, then such an engagement would restrict my freedom to be dishonest, 'Commitment' when so defined might appear as an individual phenomenon. However, commitment on the part of an individual is a product of the value system of a given society in time and place. Of course, no society is so uniform and so homogeneous as to be informed and motivated by a single and unique value system. But there is always a dominant value system. Some sections of a society might wish to conform or agree with it; others might revolt against it.
What does 'commitment' mean? It means engagement on the part of a human being that restricts his freedom of action. If I, for example, engage to be honest, then such an engagement would restrict my freedom to be dishonest, 'Commitment' when so defined might appear as an individual phenomenon. However, commitment on the part of an individual is a product of the value system of a given society in time and place. Of course, no society is so uniform and so homogeneous as to be informed and motivated by a single and unique value system. But there is always a dominant value system. Some sections of a society might wish to conform or agree with it; others might revolt against it.
Another fact about the value system and the commitment related to it might be noted. At no stage of the evolution of human society from the most simple and primitive to the most complex, would one find its members free from the constraint of a value system and its concomitant commitments whether accepted because of social compulsions or because of attainment of higher consciousness of rights, obligations, prohibitions and inhibitions. While commitment is thus inextricably bound up with the value system in a society, the origin of a value system itself and changes within it are intimately connected with the socio-economic and political structure of that society.
The question is whether civil services ought to be committed or not? The answer to the question is that the civil services are in fact committed. They are committed, first of all, to themselves and their nuclear family. It is the nature of their commitment which requires examination both in its origins and in its evolution.
These concepts need to be examined in a larger perspective of the provisions of the Constitution, the framework of the political system contained in the Constitution, and the long term effects on the morale and efficiency of the elements involved, in this case the civil servants and the judges. We are here concerned with 'committed bureaucracy'.
The Indian Constitution embodies the values of democracy, secularism and socialism which are to be realized keeping intact the fabric of national integrity. The ideals of liberty, equality and brotherhood have also to be given actual shape in the lives of the people.
The Preamble, the Directive Principles of State Policy and the Fundamental Rights, in the Constitution, have to be kept in view in understanding the meaning, connotation of the term 'committed bureaucracy'. Moreover, the frame of parliamentary democracy and the federal structure of the country provide the mechanism in which the concept is to be realised.
'Committed bureaucracy', obviously, is not a bureaucracy loyal to a particular political party. The Constitution envisages free and fair periodic elections to the Lok Sabha and the State Legislative Assemblies. At the union and in the states under the democratic regime since the making of the constitution different political parties have come to power; in the past three and half decades. The federal structure laid down by the Constitution provides for a contingency of political parties of different colours with different political ideologies and programmes coming to power at union and in states. In different states, different political parties-national and regional-or their coalitions, may be installed in power. The bureaucracy has therefore to serve under varying political parties regime. Their loyalty cannot be to a specific political party.
'Committed bureaucracy' also would not connote civil servants owing loyalty to particular individual political person or leader. The frame of parliamentary democracy prescribed by the Constitution involves the possibility of election of different persons as Prime Minister at the centre and as Chief Ministers during a term of the Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies and also from one term to another. 'Committed bureaucracy' therefore would not imply its loyalty to particular persons, but to whosoever is elected as the leader of Lok Sabha or Vidan Sabha.
The civil servants have to give advice to ministers as secretaries in making policies, and execute these policies in the field. Sir Warren Fisher, a noted civil servant in Britain, delineated the minister civil service relationship, in the following words. "Determination of policy is the function of ministers and once a policy is determined it is the unquestioned and unquestionable business of the civil servant to strive to carry out that policy with precisely the same energy and precisely the same good will whether he agrees with it or not. That is axiomatic and will never be in dispute. At the same time it is the traditional duty of civil servants while decision are being formulated to make available to their political chief all, the information and experience at their-disposal and to do this without fear or favour, irrespective of whether the advice thus tendered may accord or not with the minister's initial view. The preservation of integrity, fearlessness, and the independence of thought and utterance in their private commission with ministers or the experienced officials, selected to fill the top posts in the service is an essential principle in enlightened Government.
'Committed bureaucracy' would therefore connote bureaucracy committed to the objectives, ideals, institutions and modalities contained in the constitution; the policies and Programmes of the government; and the laws, regulations and rules issued by the executive. The civil servants have to carry out the development and anti-poverty programmes in right earnest; if they fall short in this they would be better shifted for, regulatory departments to which they may be attuned.
'Committed bureaucracy' would therefore connote bureaucracy committed to the objectives, ideals, institutions and modalities contained in the constitution; the policies and Programmes of the government; and the laws, regulations and rules issued by the executive. The civil servants have to carry out the development and anti-poverty programmes in right earnest; if they fall short in this they would be better shifted for, regulatory departments to which they may be attuned.
SUMMERY: We have examined three important issues in administration viz., generalists specialists controversy and concepts of anonymity and commitment. We have examined the nature of generalists and specialists, arguments in favour of generalists and specialists and the nature of their relations. The concept of anonymity is examined in the context of minister-civil servant relations in general and in India in particular. We have also discussed the need for commitment on the part of civil servants to implement the welfare programmes efficiently and to realize the values of democracy, secularism ,and socialism.
KEY WORDS
Cadre: A basic unit or structure
Executive Department: Department responsible for carryiqg plans, orders, laws into efffect.
Moraie: Degree of mental or moral confidence of individual or group.
Secretariat Department: Department responsible for making framing or policies etc.
Cadre: A basic unit or structure
Executive Department: Department responsible for carryiqg plans, orders, laws into efffect.
Moraie: Degree of mental or moral confidence of individual or group.
Secretariat Department: Department responsible for making framing or policies etc.
No comments:
Post a Comment