Alasdair S. Roberts

Demonstrating Neutrality: The Rockefeller Philanthropies and the Evolution of Public Administration, 1927-36

This paper explains why the politics-administration dichotomy became entrenched in the field of public administration in its first decade. The expansion of the public administration community depended on funding from three Rockefeller philanthropies who were sensitive to public criticism of their involvement in political work, and who had resisted supporting governmental research on the grounds that it would be perceived by the public as meddling in politics. The politics-administration dichotomy - an already well-known idea that suggested there was a certain sphere of governmental work that could be considered non-political - was a rhetorical device that allowed the philanthropies to defend their support of governmental research. Scholars and practitioners in public administration re-asserted their faith in the dichotomy, and tailored their work routines to bolster such assertions, in order to allay the philanthropies concern about public criticism of the financial support which they provided to the new field. In other words, the dichotomy was an important part of a rhetorical strategy that was integral to the institutional development of the public administration community in its early years. It may be that the dichotomy continues to serve this function today.

Strategies for Governing: The Foundation of Public Administration

Excerpt from book. Leaders of modern-day states face an extraordinary challenge. They must devise a strategy for leading their countries toward security, order, prosperity, well-being and justice. They must design and build institutions that will put their strategy into practice. And they must deal with the vicissitudes of time and chance, adapting strategies and institutions in response to altered circumstances and unexpected events. To do this well, leaders need advice about the machinery of government -- how it should be designed and built, how it ought to be run, and how it can be disassembled and reconstructed. Researchers who work in the academic discipline of public administration should be expert in providing this sort of advice. And at one time, they did aspire to provide that sort of expertise. But the field of public administration took a wrong turn forty years ago, and slowly moved away from large and important questions about the governance of modern-day states. The purpose of this book is to map a way back to the main road.

Strategies for Governing: An Approach to Public Management Research for West and East

Research in Public Management (PM) has run into two obstacles. In Western countries, scholars complain that PM research is neglecting big questions about the overall design of government and its adaptation to new threats. Meanwhile, Asian scholars complain about the Western-centrism of PM research and its failure to account for the distinctive features of governance in their countries. A new approach to PM research would overcome both obstacles. This new approach assumes that leaders of the worlds 195 states face the common challenge of devising a strategy for governing their territory and population that will achieve security, prosperity, and justice. These strategies for governing vary between countries and over time, as leader’s wrestle with contradictions among goals, uncertainty about tactics, turbulent environmental conditions, and sticky cultural and institutional inheritances. This is a macro approach to PM research that provides a framework for addressing big questions about governance while overcoming the Western-centric bias of current scholarship.