Administrative Thinkers Mukesh Sharma

Administrative Thinkers- An Introduction

Every organization is associated with a phenomenon called administration. The state will become
successful only when the administration is good. The goal of the state is society itself. Hence,
administration assumes criticality in a state. State is considered to be a deliberately created institution in
order to achieve the goals of the society.
The study relating to public administration has been taking place from quite some time. In the due course
of time, there have come up a number of crystallized ideas. These ideas explain what, why and when of
good government administration.
There have been hundreds of individual efforts in this subject. They can be divided into three broad
categories.

1.      Classical- Classical group has tried to explain this phenomenon by focusing on 2- Ms (Machine and
Method). They have focused on the non-living or inanimate aspect of the organization.
a.       Scientific Management- Taylor
b.      Administrative Management- Henry Fayol, Gulick & Urwick
c.       Weberian- Max Weber
2.      Humanistic- Bernard, Herbert Simon, McGregor, Chris Argyris, Likert- Humanist Group has tried to
explain this phenomenon by focusing on “Man” i.e. the living or the animate aspect of the organization.
3.      Contemporary- Systems Approach and Contingency Approach- Contemporary group focuses on every
aspect of the organization including the surroundings or the environment.
Other Theorists-
1.      Folett (This theorist is considered to be a link between classical and humanistic school of thought)
2.      Mayo (Initiated Humanistic Theory but somehow he is not considered to be in the humanistic school
of thought)

Every organization has a number of individuals. They carry certain responsibilities and at the same time
they also exercise power. But, all the individuals do not have same amount of responsibility or same
amount of power. Responsibility and power are directly proportional to each other. This makes an
organization, a layered organization or hierarchy.
In most of the organizations, we will find that at the lower level, more numbers of individuals are present.
As we move to the higher layers, the numbers of individuals go on decreasing. Thus, organizations are
normally in a pyramidal form.
Every organization comprises of 3-Ms.
1.      Machine- Structure of the organization (design or shape)
2.      Method- Process, procedure, tools or techniques through which the organization operates.
3.      Man- The organization operates through human beings.

Scientific Management Movement

Management is the art of getting things done.
There have been two important events in history which influenced the nature of the organizations and
organizational management.
1.      Enlightenment (Renaissance- 16th Century)- This was the era where there was restlessness and
rejection pertaining to control of church, irrationality, superstitions, unscientific approaches, feudalism,
monarchies etc. This era brought new concepts such as rule of law, sovereignty, democracy, citizenship,
science, justice, equality, rationality etc. These developments had a deep impact on the nature of the state.
Thereby, it affected and increased the size and operations of the state. The responsibilities of the state
increased and acquired a positive character.
Democracy is a spiritual concept because it enshrines a society where people can live a life of dignity and
choice.
2.      Industrial Revolution (17th and 18th Century)- It replaced the hands with machines. The
production increased manifolds. They organizations became larger and more complex in nature. The
style of management which were used pre- industrial revolution continued post- industrial revolution as
well. This created incongruence between the nature of management and the requirements of the
organizations. This led to failure, malfunctioning and inefficiency of the organizations. This worried a
large number of management practitioners.

There was a concern regarding the failure of the organizations. They required a type of response which
was not available at that point of time. This concern was more visible in the context of the functionaries
or practitioners of the private industrial organizations. Few of the important names being

1.      Charles Babbage
2.      R.H. Towne
3.      Metcalfe
4.      Halsey
5.      Gantt
6.      Gilbreth
7.      Taylor

F.W. Taylor assumes importance in this regard. He is considered to be the father of scientific
management. All of the above agreed that as far as organizational management is concerned, it should be
based on the science of management. And this science of management should be replacing the “rule of
thumb”.
Rule of Thumb- It refers to an approach towards work which is based on limited experience and limited
memory being devoid of scientism, professionalism and rationalism.
Science of Management- It refers to a systematized study of the part of the reality in order to develop
cause- consequence relationship of that reality. Management should be based on scientific approach and
not memory and experience or ad-hocism. It refers towards a scientific approach to understand and
explain management.
This idea became popular and acceptable to the extent that almost all the organizations (private and
public) started emphasizing on science of management. It created an environment called as Scientific
Management Movement. Scientcism in Management became popular.

Taylor
Taylor overlooked the fact that the principle of division and subdivision of work into the tiniest part each
is  subjected to the law of diminishing returns.
Taylor confuses the principle of analysis with the principle of action. In Taylor’s theory, the emphasis has
been on the fact that the managers were to decide and the subordinates were to follow. But, Planning
cannot be done in isolation of the action and action cannot take place in isolation of planning. The
planning and execution cannot be divorced from each other but Taylor said that the planning and
execution are to be done separately. The workers will have no say in such a planning process.
Fayol
The 14 principles of Fayol have a great deal of overlapping.
Application of the principle of unity of command would overwhelm the chief executive with problems of
co-ordination.

Elton Mayo
He has been criticized for being a Cow Sociologist because they emphasized that Mayo in terms of his
analysis of the social aspect of the organization has been amateurish. He has explained individual
behaviour only from one perspective whereas the individual behaviour is influenced by a number of
factors which are external in nature.
Carey says that the conclusions of Mayo are different from his findings in the Hawthrone Experiment.
Carey believes that the behaviour of an individual in an artificial condition cannot be considered as a
Standard Behaviour.  Also, the samples which were considered were too small to be considered as
representatives of the workers. If we consider the Hawthrone Experiment, the productivity decreased in
the last experiment (Bank- Wiring Experiment was conducted in natural condition and not in artificial
condition). According to Mayo, Social Strategies were the reason for the decline in productivity. But,
Critics believe that social strategy was not the only reason. The group maintained a lower target because
they believed that there economic interest (low payment) lies in maintaining the lower target. Thus,
Mayo ignored the economic factors in this regard.

Mary Parker Follett

Her main problem was her idealism which was clearly visible in her theories. Follett’s theories carried
some oxymoronic values such as centralization as well as decentralization, democracy as well as
aristocracy, authoritarianism as well as participation, mechanistic nature as well as humanistic nature.
Had these oxymoronic values operated in separate contexts, no problem would have existed in her
theory. But, the fact that these values operated simultaneously made her theory to be too ideal to be
perfect.
Irrespective of this, her ideas were indicative of certain ideas and those same ideas proved to be the basis
for the theorization done by the future humanistic theorists. Her theory emphasized more on the
psychological aspect and gave little heed to the social aspect.

Herbert Simon
His theory and its emphasis on Value Free Approach are problematic. The positivist underpinnings in his
theory are tricky. It is impossible to understand the manner to achieve the preference by divorcing it
from preference. The preference here signifies ‘goal’. Simon overemphasized on ‘fact’ and undermined
‘value’.
His theory has limited application for the government and public administration.
Though outwardly Simon emphasizes on politics- administration fusion, yet his emphasis on fact-value
dichotomy has introduced politics- administration dichotomy through the backdoor. Simon believes that
the study of the administration should only be concentrated on a part of the administration. Critics say
that his study is intra- organizational and not inter-organizational because of which he has insulated the
administration from politics.

Taylor and Scientific Management- Administrative Thinkers

 Some theorists say that Taylor has not been the first one to discuss Scientific Management. Theorists like
Charles Babbage, R.H Towne etc. are prior to Taylor. Taylor has also not been the one who coined the
term “Scientific Management”. Few other theorists have even said that there is nothing such as
Management and there is no philosophy in that regard.

Frederick Winslow Taylor

1.      Life- He was very influenced by his mother, E.W. Taylor especially mother’s puritan (high morals,
discipline, austerity and sincerity along with a sense of enquiry, dissatisfaction, dissent, revolt and also an
emphasis on new vision) background. Taylor was very influenced towards mechanization; this was very
visible at an early stage of his life. While playing, he used to very frequently use mechanistic innovations
in sports activities and equipments.
Taylor started working at a very early age. Before he could complete his studies as a student of law, he
started working in a firm called Enterprise Hydraulix Works as an Apprentice Machinist. After a small
period of time, he shifted to Midvalle Steel plant and started as a labourer. Within a very small span of
time, he rose to the post of Chief Engineer. He started working on his ideas in this plant. But, the final
consolidation of ideas came about in Bethlehem Steel Plant.
Taylor had a unique distinction as a functionary since he had experience at all the levels of organization
(top, mid and bottom). Taylor was a practitioner and not a theorist. Bottommost Level of the organization
is referred to as “Shop Floor”. It is at the Shop Floor where all the work of the organization is done
whereas at the other levels only the art of getting things done is performed.
2.     
Philosophy
a.      Failures of the organizations- The responsibility for the failure of the organizations lied both with the
managers as well as the workmen. But, a greater share of responsibility lied with the managers (Nine-
Tenth of the responsibility lied with the managers and one- tenth lied with the workmen).
                              i.      Manager’s Failure- The managers were responsible for the failure because of two I’s :
1.      Ignorance or lack of knowledge about a good day’s work- The capability or potentiality of a worker
to produce an amount of work in a given day.
It is the manager’s responsibility to make sure that the worker is performing to the best of his
capabilities. They were not able to perform this task and suffered from ignorance.
2.      Indifference towards good managerial practices- The managers were simply not concerned and
lacked a commitment about getting a higher productivity and more efficient strategies.
The managers were managing the organization based on traditional practices. Hence, they were
indifferent towards good managerial practices. Managers were performing a driving style of
management and unscientific incentive system. Driving Style Management means the type of
management which is based on authoritarianism and an emphasis on physical compulsions.
The managers were very authoritarian, thereby, leading to a disconnect between the management and
workers. The work used to be done by the manual or physical exertion or capacity of the workers.
The incentive system was unscientific. He said that one of the incentive systems being that the payment is
made to the position and not to the job or paying the position, not the job or paying the attendance and not
the performance. This type of system restricts the productivity because in this type of system, the
performance is not recognized.
Taylor has also identified another kind of incentive system. It is called as Piece Rate Wage System. This
was a wage system based on decreasing piece rate as the productivity also contributed towards
restricting productivity.
Piece rate means for each unit produced, the worker is paid separately. But, as the number of produced
units increased, the rate per unit/piece decreased, the overall pay increased with increased work but it
acted as a demotivation since piece rate had diminishing returns, more work did not really mean very
 high pay, the amount of work to increase returns beyond a threshold was way more than the returns
itself.
This traditional approach has been referred to as Initiative and Incentive Approach or an Approach
based on Lazy Manager’s Philosophy. He says that the initiative/effort/volition lies with the worker
and he takes up the job because he needs money/incentive.
To define the job, the responsibility lies with the manager. If a manager does not perform this
responsibility, it is being referred to as “Lazy Manager”. This leads to loss of productivity.
                            ii.      Workmen’s Failure- The workers were indulging in large scale soldering. Soldering refers to
restriction of work output. Taylor says that there are two types of soldering.
1.      Natural Soldering- It refers to restriction of the work output because of certain inherent or ingrained
limitations with the workers like laziness, indolence, shyness etc. Natural Soldering is a comparatively
easier situation to deal with. In this case, the workers should be persuaded. If Persuasion does not work,
they should be retrenched.
2.      Systematic Soldering- It refers to restriction of the work output based on Second Thought
Reasoning i.e. a deliberate or a planned approach towards reducing the productivity. Systematic
Soldering can be addressed through Scientific Management with a special emphasis on Time and Motion
Study and Differential Piece Rate System.
Systematic Soldering is a by-product of both managerial inefficiency and workers urge to earn more
wages and avoid unemployment. This problem could be rectified through Scientific Management.
Success or Efficiency of the Organization
Organizational Success lies in bridging the gap between the 1 st class workers (Workers having higher
potential but also acting to achieve that potential) and the 2 nd class workers (Workers who though high
on potential but are not achieving that potential). It depends on a managerial style where the managers
help or enable the workers to attain their true potential.
Efficiency in Organizational Management lies in identifying and establishing the best way of doing the job
and ensuring the performance of the job in accordance to the best way. In this context, Taylor has
discussed three methodologies.
A.    Time and Motion Study-
a.       One best way should be established- Time and Motion Study.
b.      The workers should be made to follow this one best way.
Time and Motion Study is a methodology using which the best way of performing a job can be
established. It is a mechanism to establish the optimal routine/sequence of activities along with
technology standard and time standard (minimum time taken to complete an activity) in order to
perform the job maximally.
                         I.  Breaking down the job into as many component acts or activities.
                                     II.  Finding out the most appropriate sequence of the component activities while
eliminating wasteful and duplicating activities.
                                  III.  Establishing the appropriate implements or tools and techniques to be used in each of
the component activities.
                                  IV. Using a stop watch, the minimum time to perform a component activity and the whole
of the act is to be established. Time standard has to be defined for each one the sub-activities as well as
the whole activity.
                                     V.  The optimal routine of the activities along with the technology standards and the time
standards is to be defined.
B.     Differential (non-uniform) Piece Rate System- This system ensures that workers follow the best
method mention above. It is an incentive system by Taylor in which he has emphasized on a wage system
where the payment will be for performance rather than for attendance. He said that Group performance
 should not be incentivized; rather individual performance should be incentivized. Taylor has promoted
two types of Wage Rate System.
a.       Extraordinary Wage Rate- It is a higher wage rate. Workers who will be able to achieve the target
within a given time frame will be eligible for Extraordinary Wage Rate.
b.      Ordinary Wage Rate- It is a lower wage rate. Workers who will achieve the target exceeding a given
time frame will be eligible for Ordinary Wage Rate.
Piece Rate refers to the concept of work more, get paid more and work less, get paid less. Lower
productivity needs to be discouraged and higher productivity needs to be rewarded and recognized.
C.     Functional Foremanship- It is a type of supervision that Taylor has promoted at the Shop Floor Level
which is based on the idea of multiple supervision on account of functional specialization. While
establishing the concept of Functional Foremanship, he rejected the well- established principle of his
time of Unity of Command (It refers to a type of supervision where a subordinate receives from one
super-ordinate).
Functional Foremanship is a type of supervision which is based on multiple supervisors on account of
functional specialization. Each supervisor will be specializing only in one function. Taylor believed that
division of work and specialization is required to increase productivity. He further said that
Specialization does not go well with Unity of Command. Every job has a number of aspects; a supervisor
cannot effectively evaluate all those aspects because a supervisor cannot be a specialist in everything. So,
multiple supervisors are needed to evaluate every aspect of work and Unity of Command would forfeit
this.
Taylor said there should be 8 supervisors (4- Planning Supervisors, 4- Execution Supervisors)
Planning Supervisors
A.    Route Clerk- His work is to undertake a scientific investigation of the job and find out the best way of
performing the job along with the technology and time standards.
B.     Instruction Card Clerk- He is responsible for converting the findings of the Route Clerk into
understandable language in the form of Instruction Cards meant for the workers.
C.     Time Clerk- He is responsible for maintaining a regular record of the individuals or workers eligible for
the payment under the extraordinary wage rate and ordinary wage rate.
D.    Shop Disciplinarian- He is the Personnel Manager at the Shop Floor Level. His job is to recruit, hire and
fire the workers. He also resolves disputes and addresses the grievances. He ensures that proper
management of the workers/man power at the Shop Floor level takes place.
Execution Supervisors
A.    Gang Boss- He is the supervisor at the work or the foreman at the field. He is responsible for preparing
the work environment, providing the implements of the work and handing over of Instruction Card to the
workers.
B.     Speed Boss- He is responsible for ensuring the performance of the job within the time limit and if
required, the speed boss has to demonstrate the actual way of doing the work.
C.     Repair Boss- He is the Maintenance Supervisor. He is responsible for cleanliness or hygiene of the
workplace and implements. He is also responsible for the maintenance, repairing and replacement of
various implements or work equipments.
D.    Inspection Boss- He is responsible for Quality Control. He does regular inspection of the units or the
produce or the manufactured goods and undertakes Quality inspection. He rejects all those goods which
are of inferior or defective quality.
Principle of Exception
Managers should not interfere with the work of the foreman. The relationship between a manager and a
foreman is based on the idea of decentralization. Whereas, the relationship between a foreman and a
worker is based on the idea of centralization. It is because the foreman decides and the workers follow.
The manager should not interfere with the working of the foreman except two conditions.
A.    Excessively Lower Production below the target.
B.     Excessively Higher Production above the target.
Principles of Scientific Management
Taylor has discussed his generalized views with regard to Organizational Efficiency. He has emphasized
that the Organizational Efficiency lies in the Efficiency in Management. His principles are not only meant
to explain Organizational Efficiency but they are also the principles or ideas of Social Reform. This is
because efficiency in management will increase the wages of the workers, increases the profit of the
organization and will protect and promote the rights of the people or citizens. Inefficiency in
management reduces the wages of the workers, reduces profit of the organization and compromises the
rights of the people. Efficiency in management will lead to an efficient society.
In this context, he has discussed four principles of Scientific Management.
A.   The Science of Management- Taylor is emphasizing that an organization can be efficiently run provided
the rule of thumb is replaced by the Science of Management. The manager should systematically study
the job or scientifically investigate the job in order to establish the best way of doing each job along with
bringing in such condition to enable the workers to pursue the best way to become maximally productive.
B.     Scientific Selection, Training and Development of the Workers- The manager should recruit the
workers while preferring the brain workers over the hand workers. Workers, according to their
suitability towards the job, should be recruited and once recruited, workers should be adequately trained
and educated to handle the job.
C.     Bringing Science of Work and the Workers Together- Science of work refers to Manager. This
principle refers to bringing the managers and workers and together. This is the core of Taylor’s theory. It
forms the heart and soul of his philosophy. It has been explained through the concept of “ Mental
Revolution”. It is the wilful cooperation between the manager and the worker. Taylor says that:
“As the various tools and techniques of management such as Time and Motion Study, Piece Rate System,
Functional Foremanship, Tools standardization, High Speed cutting of steel, use of stop watch and
mnemonic classification are the appendages of my scientific management are also the appendages of other
scientific management. The idea that makes my scientific management different from others is the concept
of Mental Revolution. Mental Revolution requires a psychological reorientation of the managers towards
the workers and vice-versa. In order to realize it, instead of focusing on sharing the surplus, the managers
and workers should focus on increasing the size of the surplus. The Mental Revolution will increase the
wages of the labour, the profits of the managers and bring satisfaction to the customers.”
The Mental Revolution is the key concept in the Taylor’s Arc of Scientific Management. The manner in
which the managers are psychologically disposed towards the workers and vice- versa should change.
The mutual suspicion and lack of cooperation between workers and managers is self- defeating. It is
required that the traditional and stereotypical mind set of the workers and the managers should change
and there should be a psychological reworking leading to mutual cooperation and no suspicion.
In order to bring about Mental Revolution, one should stop thinking about the sharing of surplus rather
they should focus on increasing the size of the surplus.
The traditional approach of the management and the workers towards the surplus has been based
on Zero Sum Gain Approach of Constant Sum Gain Approach. Under this approach, the value under
consideration is considered to be constant and the competing parties striving to share the value believe
that each of their respective gain can be only at the cost of the other.
Taylor’s Mental Revolution is based on the concept of Variable Sum Gain Approach. Under this
approach, the value under consideration is considered to be variable and can be increased. Thus, the size
of the surplus will increase leading to better goods and services at a lower cost. It is a win-win situation
for both, managers and workers as well as the customers.
D.    Equal distribution of work and responsibility between the management and workers- This
principle is a mere extension of the last principle. The manager should willingly take up his part of
 responsibility without shifting it towards the workers and the worker should also take up his part of
responsibility. The responsibility of the manager is the science of management i.e. to establish the best
way of doing job and the responsibility of the worker is to willingly follow the directions given by the
management.
Taylor says that if these principles are followed, the rule of thumb will be replaced by thescience of
management, discord will be replaced by harmony, individualism will be replaced by cooperation and
restricted output will be replaced by maximum output.
b.      Solutions
                                    i.      Methods- Already covered.
                                  ii.      Scientific Management Movement- Already covered.

Henri Fayol- Administrative Thinkers

Fayol is considered to be the father of Modern Science of Management. Fayol, as a theorist, has been
contemporary to Taylor. But, Taylor’s ideas got recognized much earlier to Fayol. Fayol being French
wrote his ideas in French making them inaccessible to the outside world. Fayol’s idea got due recognition
only when it got translated in English. What is Taylor to America is Fayol to Europe. 
Fayol has been a multi-faceted personality because he was a geologist, a mining engineer and he went on
to win a Nobel Prize in metallurgy in 1921. At the same time, he was a very successful administrator and
a renowned administrative philosopher. He penned down his ideas out of his successful experience as
being a functionary in a private industrial organization. Unlike Taylor, Fayol did not have the experience
of whole of the organization. Fayol started his career as a Manager and went on to occupy the highest
position in the organization. This difference in experience contributed towards difference in orientation
towards the Organizational Management.
Fayol, as a theorist, considered management and administration to be the same. According to him, in
essence, both of these words represent same type of activity. Fayol believed that whatever mechanism
works in the context of the private organizations works in the same manner in the context of government
organizations. The manner of managing a private organization is same as that of manner of managing a
government organization. He developed a generic view of administration or management. Fayol
promoted this generic view of administration.
“Administration is administration, nothing public about it.”- Anonymous- Wherever there is
administration (small organization or big organization), administration carries essentially the same
meaning and the same character. In this statement, public refers to government. The statement is trying
to emphasize that if administration is being carried out in the context of the government, it won’t make
any difference and the nature and character of the administration shall remain unchanged.
Fayol says that every organization carries on six essential functions.
1.      Segmental- These activities can be undertaken with relative isolation from each other.
a.       Technical- Manufacturing, Production etc.
b.      Commercial- Sales, Purchase, Exchange, Trade etc.
c.       Financial- Optimal Utilization of the Financial Resources.
d.      Accounting- Systematized Keeping of Records of Daily Expenditure and Revenue.
e.       Security- Protection of Life and Property of the Organization and its Members.
2.      Integral- None of the functions can be undertaken in isolation from administration. Administration
pervades all other functions, Administrative activities are activities Involving the Management of the
Human Resource and enabling them to achieve their Potential.
When an individual, moves up in the hierarchy or up in the layer, from the bottom of the organization
towards the middle of the organization, the share of the segmental activities keeps on increasing.
At the mid-level, maximum segmental activity takes place.
 But, when an individual moves from the middle of the organization to the top of the organization, the
share of the integral activities keeps on increasing. At the top level, the activities are only integral and not
segmental.
Out of the six activities mentioned above, the most important activity is administration. If administration
weak, everything will be weak and if administration is efficient, everything will be efficient.

Fayol on Administration
Fayol emphasizes that administration to be successful requires undertaking five important functions
(POCCC).
1.      P- Planning- He refers planning as prevoyance. Planning is the process that involves envisioning the
future goals and laying down the strategy or plan of action to achieve that goal. Planning provides
purpose to the organization. Without it, the organization will become directionless.
2.      O- Organizing- Organizing is a process that involves creating a dual structure of men and material
within the organization. It is a process of systematizing the human resources and material resources
within the organization. Without organizing, the organization will lack systematization, efforts and
activities will be chaotic and ultimately, there will be a loss of purpose.
3.      C- Commanding- It is a process which involves issuing instructions or passing authoritative
communications in order to maintain the performance or activities among the personnel.
4.      C- Coordinating- It is a process of bringing about harmonious operation among various activities and
efforts within the organization. The process through which complementarity is achieved among various
activities and efforts are referred to as coordination.
5.      C- Controlling- It is a process that involves ensuring the compliance of the personnel towards the
activities through the threat of punishment and the allurement of reward.
Fourteen Flexible Principles of Administration
Fayol believed that there are some hidden levels in the management of an organization. These hidden
levels or laws can be derived through experience and close observation. He refers to these laws as
principles of administration. These principles explain, equally, the success of every organization.
He calls them flexible because Fayol believes that these principles have the capacity to adjust and
accommodate itself to every kind of organization irrespective of the nature and the size of the
organization.
1.      Division of Work- Fayol believes that division of work or division of responsibilities among the
individuals within the organization results into increase in the ability and accuracy, thereby, increasing
the overall productivity. Thus, every organization should bring about division of work.  Division of Work
belongs to the Natural Order. As the organization increases in size and operation, the division of work
emerges spontaneously or naturally. But, the division of work should not be overdone; rather, it should
be maintained at the right proportion. Overdoing will lead to overlapping of the responsibilities,
confusion, conflict of interest and inefficiency in the organization.
2.      Authority and Responsibility- Within the organization, there should be a rational distribution of
duties among various positions within the organization. Along with that, there should be allocation of a
co-equal amount of authority. When authority is more than responsibility, it leads towards
authoritarianism or dictatorship. On the other hand, when the responsibility is more than authority, it
leads towards anarchism.
3.      Discipline- It refers to compliance by personnel towards the laws, rules and regulations of the
organization. Adequate mechanism should be put in place to ensure discipline and penalties should be
imposed on behaviour which violates the code of conduct.
4.      Remuneration- The payment should be made on the basis of fairness i.e. the performance should be
rewarded.
5.      Unity of Command- It is a kind of supervision which provides that a subordinate should receive
command only from one superordinate. If there is more than one boss, it would lead to confusion, conflict
of responsibility and possibly, the subordinate playing one superordinate against the other.
6.      Unity of Direction- He says that as far as group of activity is concerned, there should be one single
established goal. In the absence of a clearly established goal, the activities will lose direction and might
operate at cross- purpose. Unity of Command cannot be there without Unity of Direction but does not
flows from it.
7.      Centralization- Centralization belongs to the natural order. When an organization grows in size and
operation, numbers of intermediaries emerge between the management and the workers which result
into the tendency on part of the management to standardize the jobs and activities, thus giving rise to
centralization. The degree of centralization or decentralization should depend upon the nature of
workers. Here, standardization of work means defining the work in advance. If employees are sincere and
competent, the manager should give them freedom and space to work.
8.      Equity- Equity as a principle on the same plane is a broader concept than remuneration. He emphasizes
that management should treat the functionaries of the organization on the basis of fairness. The overall
approach of the management towards the functionaries should be based on fairness.
9.      Order- He refers to the idea of placement i.e. the right man at the right position. Management should
recruit on the basis of the skill and the job should be assigned on the basis of the person’s skill.
10.  Scalar Chain- The communication within the organization should always follow the lines of hierarchy.
The communication should not break or jump the hierarchy as that will create indiscipline,
insubordination and mismanagement. The formal line of communication should not be followed at the
cost of organizational interest. In such cases, there should be level jumping.
Gang Plank- If information arises at Level A and requires communication to Level D. Fayol says the
communication must travel through proper channel. The communication should go to level B, from level
B to level C and from Level C to level D. But, sometimes, this time consuming process might jeopardize the
interest of the organization. As a normal rule, this line should be followed but in cases of urgent
information, an exception needs to be created. A horizontal line of communication should be built across
the departments between the concerned positions provided the required approval or permission is obtained
from the respective immediate bosses.
11.  Initiative- Management should encourage the functionaries to undertake voluntary decisions and
comply with those decisions.
12.  Stability of Tenure- The managers should allow functionaries to occupy and operate in their position
for a considerable period of time. This is required not for emotional but professional reasons.
13.  Esprit de Corps- Managers should strive to maintain harmony within the organization. They should not
go for divide and rule because it weakens the organization.
14.  The Subordination of the Individual Interest to the General Interest- In case of the contradiction of
the views between various units or entities within the organization. The view of the higher unit will
prevail over the lower unit or the view of the lower unit has to be sacrificed for the view of the higher
unit.
Fayol says these fourteen principles are not exhaustive in nature. Through further observations, new
principles can be generated. Fayol wrote his theory at a time when there was a concept of Engineer
Managers i.e. engineers themselves were the managers. At that point of time, a separate cadre of
managers or administrators did not exist. The general belief was that any individual with an able mind
can handle administration or management. Fayol rejected this view while emphasizing that
administration or management is a specialized area of activity and thereby, an individual without
adequate training and education in management cannot manage an organizational effectively. Thus, he
emphasised on the training and education for administration or management. He was one of the initial
theorists to emphasize on the professionalization of administration.
 Fayol v. Taylor
1.      Both have penned down their theories out of their experiences as successful functionaries.
2.      Both are from Private Industrial Undertakings.
3.      Both believed in the generic view of administration (administration as a activity is same in every
organization (private and public).
4.      Both emphasized on science of management or administration.
Differences
1.      Taylor while focusing upon the organizational efficiency, he focused on the efficiency on account of
production (efficiency in doing the activities). Thus, Taylor focused on the shop floor level of the
organization. In order to explain the efficiency, he has referred to the knowledge of engineering (use of
stop watch, time and motion study, high speed cutting of steel etc.) 
2.      Fayol while trying to explain organizational efficiency, he believed that organizational efficiency is
dependent on the administration i.e. the art of getting things done. Thereby, he focused on the higher
level of the organization. Thus, he has referred more to the knowledge of management.

Max Weber- Administrative Thinkers

Weber was primarily a sociologist. Referring to his work, he can be referred to at most as a political
sociologist or a political economist. His contribution to Administration has been incidental to his
sociological studies. His study on rationality and process of rationalization in the modern world has
contributed towards the theory on bureaucracy. His theory on bureaucracy has gained status to the
extent that the name Weber and the concept of Bureaucracy is being treated synonymous. Weber is the
first theorist who took the concept bureaucracy out of its pejorative meaning.
Unlike the other theorists of the classical period, Weber was an academician. He developed his theory in
the context of the government organizations. Since, he also believed in the generic view of administration,
his theory of bureaucracy was also applicable to the private organizations.
One of the important characteristics of the modern western society is rationalization. It is a process that
involves consistency, logic or reason. It also involves a logical correlation between the means and the end.
Weber says that Rationalization is a process that does not involve magical elements. Weber came across
a phenomenon called as “Domination”. Domination is a relationship between the ruler and the ruled
whereby the ruler has the right to rule and the ruled has the duty to obey.
Weber has studied “domination” in the context of various organizations such as religious bodies,
economic bodies, government bodies etc. While studying in the context of religious and economic bodies,
he referred to “domination” being based on the constellation of interest. While studying in the context
of government bodies, he referred to “domination” as authority.
Domination based on Authority
Power is the ability to get things done irrespective of resistance in a communal or social situation.
Legitimacy refers to exercise of power based on values those are accepted by the subjects in a society.
A legitimate exercise of power is Authority. (Power + Legitimacy = Authority)
In order to study Authority, he used a methodology called as “Ideal Type”. Ideal Type is not something
which is perfect or could be considered as a role model or something which is average. It is derived from
the concept of “idea”. “Ideal Type” is a mental construct or a mental map of the researcher or it is a one
sided exaggeration of the reality or it is a researcher’s imagination in order to act as a reference point so
as to observe compare and classify the reality so as to derive hypothesis and generalizations. It is a utopia
which is though derived from reality is not found in reality.
Weber’s study was very comprehensive. It was both, historical and contemporaneous. It was based on
both primary sources and secondary sources. It was historical in the sense that Weber undertook his
 studies during the latter part of the 19 th century. By that time, a lot of study had already taken place on
these subjects. It was contemporaneous in the sense that he took present existing conditions into regard.
By using Ideal Type, Weber came out with a Threefold Classification of Authority.
1.      Traditional Authority- Weber refers to a type of authority, obedience to which is based on tradition,
customs and conventions. It is a type of authority which is based on the fact that certain things are to be
obeyed because those are used to be obeyed. It emphasized on the importance of the eternal past.
a.       Patriarchal Traditional Authority- It refers to a type of authority obedience to which is based on age.
The individual who is the eldest exercises the power. Most of the societies are male dominated so
normally the eldest male exercises the power.
b.      Patrilineal Traditional Authority- It refers to a type of authority obedience to which is based on
lineage.
2.      Charismatic Authority- It refers to a type of authority obedience to which is based on the
extraordinary qualities or exceptional personality.
3.      Legal Rational Authority- It refers to a type of authority obedience to which is based on law. According
to Weber, this is the most rational form of authority. He says laws are established through a process and
carries a purpose.
Charismatic Authority is the most temporary or provisional form of authority. Charismatic Authority is
based on the exception qualities which are relevant to the situation. Weber says situation changes and as
the situation changes, the charismatic authority comes under threat. The charismatic authority which
comes under threat will either dismantle itself or it might decide to continue. If it decides to continue, it
can continue by converting itself into traditional authority or legal rational authority. But, in modern
society, it mostly converts itself into legal rational authority. This is the process through which
charismatic authority continues itself. This is referred to as routinization of
charisma or institutionalization of charisma.
Weber has considered the charismatic authority of being capable of bringing about fastest possible
changes because under the traditional authority, change affects the source of authority and under the
legal rational authority; the change has to follow the due process. But, charismatic authority has little
limitations.
Weber was not only interested in understanding the relationship between the ruler and the ruled but
also the manner in which the ruler exercised their rule over the ruled. In that particular context, he
entered into the domain of administration. In this context, in order to understand administration, he also
used the “Ideal Type” Methodology.
Administrative Systems 
1.      Traditional Authority
a.       Patrimonial Administrative System- It is a highly centralized administrative system. The
functionaries are treated as the personal servants of the Supreme Authority. Various functionaries
derive their power out of their loyalty towards the Supreme Authority. It is based on the principle
of“loyalty is bartered with power”. It is a type of system where there is a heightened importance
ofprimordial identities such as region, caste, language etc.
 A good example is that of Monarchical Administration. In such a system, king is considered to be the
supreme authority. Every other functionary owes his/her position to the king.
b.      Feudal Administrative System- It is a comparatively autonomous administrative system.
Functionaries for their remuneration are not dependant on the Supreme Authority rather they have their
own source of remuneration. Rest of the characteristics of this system are in close resemblance with that
of the Patrimonial System. Weber has conceived Feudal Administrative System in the background of
the Western European Feudalism.
Western European Feudalism- In Western Europe, Kingship System was prevalent. The head of the
state was the King. The kingdom was divided into various feudal areas which were owned by theFeudal
 Lords. A king might himself be a feudal lord of any feudal area. The entire authority relating to the Feudal
Area was vested with Feudal Lords. Feudal Lords used to raise taxes and were not dependent upon the
king for remuneration. Feudal Lords shared a part of their taxes with the King and in turn, King provided
them protection through his army.
2.      Charismatic Authority- It has no Administrative System. There are only followers and disciples. There
have been certain exceptions where the charismatic authority tried to establish administrative system
and wherever it had been, it had been the Patrimonial Administrative System.
3.      Legal Rational Authority- The administrative system under this type of authority is called
as Bureau orBureaucracy. Weber says that Bureaucracy is the most rational form of organization. Even
though Weber was not the first one to theorize on bureaucracy nor did he coin the term bureaucracy nor
did he define bureaucracy, both prior to Weber and post- Weber, his idea on bureaucracy has been one of
the most important conceptualization on bureaucracy. Yet, his theory assumes critical significance. His
importance lies in providing a detailed, elaborate, functional and structural characterization of
bureaucracy.
a.       Bound by Impersonal Law- Bureaucracy is a type of organization in which the functionaries do no act
as per their own choices or whims and fancies. Rather, they act as per the prescriptions of the law or the
provisions of the law. These laws are impersonal or neutral to various individuals occupying the
positions within the organization.
b.      Sphere of Competence- Within bureaucracy, every position carries a defined area of responsibility
while carrying the required authority and skill.
c.       Hierarchy- Bureaucracy is a hierarchic or layered organization in which there is a clearly established
relationship between the superordinate and the subordinate. Further, the line of authority from the top
of the organization to the bottom of the organization is clearly established.
d.      Meritocracy- The recruitment into bureaucracy is based on expertise or ability. Further, the individual
within the organization operates with a contractual relation i.e. while individual remains under
obligation towards the job but personally remains free.
e.       Impersonal Detachment- Within bureaucracy, there is a separation between ‘the personal office and
the public office’ and ‘personal property and private property’.
f.       Career Service- For an individual functionary, the occupation in bureaucracy is a career i.e. a lifelong
engagement and the engagement in bureaucracy is the only engagement. Individuals in bureaucracy
gradually move from lower amount of responsibility, authority and remuneration towards higher amount
of responsibility, authority and remuneration.
g.      Written Records- In this administrative system, the administrative acts, decisions and rules are
maintained in writing. They are not conducted orally.
h.      Non- Appointed Head- Bureaucracy is an appointed body of officials being headed by a non-appointed
official or having a political head. Weber has conceived the concept of Bureaucracy in the context of
Modern Democratic Setup.
4.      Functional Characteristics of the Bureaucracy- Bureaucracy is scientific, rational, technical,
impersonal, impartial (non-discriminatory), neutral (politically unbiased), carrying honesty and integrity
and operating with precision and predictability (it operates on the basis of impersonal laws and scientific
approach). Thereby, according to Weber, it is the most efficient form of organization. It is said that
“Weber is the first theorist who took out bureaucracy from its negative meaning”. But, Weber has not blind
towards the limitations of Bureaucracy.
5.      Limitations of Bureaucracy
a.       Problem of Alienation within the Bureaucracy- Here, Weber is referring to the separation of the
individual from his own self. Weber further says that because of Impersonal Detachment andCareer
Service, the members of the bureaucracy gradually face the problem of alienation i.e. they gradually get
separated from their own self. Bureaucracy turns out to be an iron cage from where there is no escape.
 This phenomenon has been referred to as “Phenomenon of Golden Cage” (Golden because it provides
power and privilege and Cage because it curtails freedom and makes the person an automaton) by
various other theorists. C. Wright Mills has called this phenomenon as“Prostitution of Personalities” (In
order to suit the job, the person adopts a separate personality other than his own self).
b.      Problem of Institutional Character of Bureaucracy- Weber has theorized his concept of bureaucracy
in light of Modern Democracy. As per Weber, the State is an instrument to achieve the purpose of the
society and goals of its citizens. State is a means to an end and not an end in itself (Staatraison- German
Term). State cannot achieve its purpose without expertise or technicism or without a disciplined group of
professional manpower. Bureaucracy is a form of organization which is ingrained in the purpose of the
state. Bureaucracy is also a means to an end rather than an end in itself. Bureaucracy is instrumental in
character.
Weber says that Bureaucracy is a professional body of official which exercises power. But, there is a
possibility that bureaucracy instead of using power or exercising power for the purpose of the state or
the society, it might misuse or abuse the power for its own private purpose or goal. Thereby, it being
instrumental in nature, it might turn institutional. Institutional here refers to becoming an end in itself
rather than being a means to an end. But, Weber is not pessimistic on this account. He is optimistic about
a solution for this problem in bureaucracy. He considers certain solutions such as:
                                    i.      Separation of Power
                                  ii.      Collegiality
                                iii.      Amateurism
                                iv.      Direct Democracy
                                   v.      Representative Democracy
He finally accepted “Representative Democracy” as a viable solution to address the problem
ofInstitutional Bureaucracy. Representative Democracy being a loop-based democracy, the citizens
will be able to control bureaucracy, its actions and intention through the exercise of control over the
representatives who in turn will control bureaucracy as per the views and interests of the citizens and
the society.
6.      Emergence of Bureaucracy- According to Weber, the rise of bureaucracy has been because of
a.       Capitalism- It is a type of economic system which is based on the idea of private investment and profit.
It is a type of economic system which prefers stability in the environment. Bureaucracy as an institutional
development which is based on an impersonal law provides stable and predictive environment. Thus,
Capitalism became one of the factors for the rise of bureaucracy.
b.      Industrialization-Industrialization had a critical impact on the size and functioning of the
organizations. Organizations became big in size and large in operation. They could be no longer managed
in an unprofessional and unscientific manner. They required a scientific approach. This provided a basis
for the rise of bureaucracy.
c.       Democracy- Democracy as a philosophy promotes impartiality, ensures equality and envisages a state
which works towards the welfare of the people. Democratic spirit can only be furthered where
discrimination does not exist. This is only possible when the law is impersonal in nature. Bureaucracy
works within the framework of impersonal law. Hence, bureaucracy grew with democracy.
Democracy promotes welfare of people but this cannot be provided without the requisite expertise or
professionalism. This expertise and scientific approach can be provided by bureaucracy. Thus, democracy
provided a suitable environment for the bureaucracy to nurture.
d.      Money Economy- Money economy provided a basis for the mode of exchange. The prices of goods and
services were fixed. Bureaucracy is a hierarchic organization with a sphere of competence i.e. every
position has ad defined responsibility and authority. Bureaucracy being hierarchic in nature,
responsibility and authority within the organization is unequally distributed. Thereby, different
remuneration is given to persons performing different types of responsibilities. This required
 standardization of remuneration in the mode of payment and this standardization is only possible in case
of a Money Economy. Thus, Money Economy provided a basis for the rise of bureaucracy.
Mary Parker Follett- Administrative Thinkers

She was the first female administrative thinker. Though, in terms of time period, she belonged to the
classical era, but in terms of the content of her theory, she was much ahead of her times. She discussed
ideas that  were subsequently discussed during the Humanistic period and the Contemporary period. She
was very dismissive of the classical theories of the organization as being mechanistic in nature. She can
be considered as a precursor to the Humanistic Period or Behavioural Period. Unlike the theorists of her
time, she was an academician and not a practitioner. She was a lecturer in Political Science. Her theory
was a by-product of her academic research which was based on both secondary as well as primary
sources. Many of her contributions were path-breaking. She is considered as a link between the classical
theorists and the future theorists.
Her Views on various issues
1.      Individual- Human being a social animal likes to associate with others. This very nature gives rise to
the formation of group. Individual previously was independent but weak, subsequently individual
became dependant but strong. As the time progressed, goals became many and human being could not
achieve those goals on his own. Human-being being an intelligent individual and innovated his own
strategy to achieve goal which was by cooperating with others.
2.      Group- The group is an outgrowth of Human Nature. Human being cannot remain in isolation. The
group is as well an outgrowth of human purpose. Group is created out of the deliberate effort of the
human being because Individuals believe that it cannot achieve certain goals which it can achieve
through a group process. This results into the formation of groups. Group is a natural creation as well as a
planned initiative. Within a group process, individuals interact with each other.  This Interaction is a
process of interpenetration. This doctrine talks about interinfluencing of each other. This interaction
gradually evolves into a synthetic or composite view which Folett has explained through her doctrine of
Whole. This provides the identity or view of the group.
3.      State- Group evolves out of the individuals but it carries an identity different from the individual. The
group and the individual enjoy a symbiotic relationship. The group represents the individual and the
individual represents the group. The interest of the individual lies in the interest of the group and vice-
versa. In modern times, the highest form of the expression of the group is a State. The state and the
individual also enjoy a symbiotic relationship with each other. The interest of the citizen lies in the
interest of the state and vice-versa. The identity of the citizen and the state flow from each other. Folett
says that “the home of my soul lies in the state. True nature of the state of this type is found only in
democracy”. State is also a type of group but it has a special place since it operates at a higher level. The
very process of state emerging out of an individual does not take place in systems such as dictatorship or
tyranny.
But, Folett has rejected the representative form of democracy. She subsequently emphasizes that such
a relationship(discussed above) cannot exist in the representative democracy. Representative
democracy is based on the law of consent rather than the law of co-action. In a representative
democracy, few decide and many follow. In reality it is nothing but a rationalization of arbitrary
exercise of power. That is why Folett has emphasized on the concept of “Participative Democracy”. In
such a democracy, institutional mechanisms are put in place through which people regularly participate
in the process of decision-making. She is stressing on Collective or Group Orientation and
underemphasizing the Individualistic Orientation.
Evans & Burns- In a representative democracy, liberty vanishes into the ballot box in two seconds after
which the people consume other’s politics. Democracy is a philosophy based on the idea that people
consume their own politics.
 The liberty of the voter is till the person casts his vote. Once the vote is cast, representatives no longer
follow the diktats of the voters and no longer act on their behalf. They became masters of themselves or
usually, there is a small group of powerful individuals which dictates terms to the representatives and
others consume it.
Folett on Administration
She has contributed on various phenomenon such as
1.      Conflict- She has been dismissive of the classical view as being mechanistic. Here also, while referring
to Conflict, Folett differed from the classical view on Conflict.
Classical theorists believed that Conflict is dangerous and destructive to the organization. Conflicts
should be avoided in the interest of the organization. Thus, they believe that it is possible to avoid conflict
in the organization. They emphasize that conflict is a by-product of flaws or inadequacy in the
organizational structure. Conflicts within the organization must be immediately eliminated.
We see that classical theorists assume that persons with same set of skill will perform /in the same
manner if same position is assigned to them and same remuneration is being provided. They fail to take
into account the behavioural or psychological aspect of the management or administration. Folett says
that two persons with same set of skills might not perform in the same manner because they are two
different human beings or two different psychological beings. Human beings are not automatons or
mechanical in nature. Thus, classical theorists have ignored the human element of the organization and
hence are being referred to as “mechanistic”.
Folett also says that Conflict refers to a difference in opinion among the various positions with regard to
the job under consideration. Conflict is natural and thereby, cannot be avoided. This is because
Conflict arises out of the human nature which is different from each other. The organization is a group
and therefore, it is an assemblage of human beings. These are social beings with different social and
psychological nature. Thereby, the difference of opinion is natural to emerge. Hence, Conflict cannot be
avoided and is natural. Conflict, in itself, is not dangerous or destructive; rather the manner in which it is
managed or handled makes it destructive or even constructive in nature. In this context, Folett has
considered three types of strategies to manage Conflict.
a.       Domination- Domination is a strategy in which the view of one is imposed upon the others in a conflict
situation. Folett believes that it is a dangerous or destructive strategy. Under domination, the conflict is
not addressed; rather the conflict continues and manifests itself in the next opportune moment. At the
same time, domination creates or leads to resentment and makes the organization more and more
conflict ridden or conflict prone. Conflict is an opportunity for the organization because it provides new
ideas which can become the basis for the reform within the organization or better initiatives within the
organization. Through domination, this opportunity is not utilized, rather it is lost. Domination as a
strategy is a destructive strategy.
b.      Compromise- Compromise is a process of mutual adjustment. It is a process in which each party in a
conflicting situation gains something as well as loses something. Thus, each party partially wins and
partially loses. This is one of the most frequently followed strategies to address Conflicts in the
organizations. But, she says that Compromise is also a destructive strategy to handle Conflicts. She
similarly believes that through Compromise, the conflict is not addressed and it continues. Compromise
does not take advantage of the opportunity provided by the Conflict to reform or improve the
organization or job performance.
c.       Integration- It refers to a process of establishing creative synthesis among the conflicting parties
through the principle of Evocation. The views should come to the open and confront each other rather
than supressing the views. The confrontation of views should be in conformity with scientism and
rationalism. This will gradually bring a synthesis between both the parties. The synthesis or the
synthesized idea will belong to both the parties and not just to any one party. Integration is a strategy
which is based on Win-Win Basis.
 Integration is a constructive strategy of managing conflict because first of all, it addresses to the conflict
as well as able to take advantage of the available opportunity. Integration is a difficult process to be
established within the organization. For it to exist, it is required that the contracting parties be flexible,
skilled and rational. Through Integration, the conflicting parties develop a sense of participation.
Thereby, the organization becomes less and less conflict prone. The organization is also able to take
advantage of the available opportunities.
Integration may not be possible in every situation. She has rejected the principle of Lineal Responseand
replaced it with the principle of Circular Response. The dialogue should not be unidirectional. She
emphasizes on a dialogic approach rather than monologue approach.
2.      Leadership- Leader is the one who is able to understand the situation in totality and successfully move
from one situation to the other. Folett says leadership is a critical function within the organization
because organization is nothing but a group of individuals working towards a common goal. The job of
the leader is to successfully influence the group towards achieving the goal. There are three different
types of leadership.
a.       Leadership by Position- An individual acts as a leader by the virtue of occupying a superior position
within the organizational hierarchy. This view is also promoted by the classical theorists of
administration. The superior decides and the subordinates follow. The individual who carries the skill or
the ability relevant to the job is most capable of acting as a leader and it is not necessary that the superior
shall always possess the requisite skill set. Thus, she has rejected the concept of Leadership by Position.
b.      Leadership by Personality- It is a style of leadership where the one having the appropriate skill or the
ability relevant to the job acts as the leader. Folett agrees in principle with this type of leadership. But,
Folett also highlights some operational difficulties in this kind of leadership. She rejects Leadership by
Personality but promotes Leadership by Function.
c.       Leadership by Function- This is a combination of Leadership by Position and Leadership by
Personality. Folett says that it is the kind of leadership based on the principle of Circular Response. It is
based on an associative or participative approach. The advantage of Leadership by Position is that it
ensures discipline and the advantage of Leadership by Personality is that the person will always have the
requisite skills.
The leadership exists not just because of the virtue of the position but also the ability and the skill the
person possesses. The deficiency in the ability and the knowledge of the leader can be fulfilled by
adopting a participative approach of sharing knowledge within the organization.
3.      Power and Authority- Folett says power is the ability to get things done. According to her, Authority is
a vested power i.e. a legally assigned power. It is merely a right to develop and exercise power. Authority
may not actually result into power Authority to be meaningful should be functional, pluralistic and
cumulative. Power being given or powers being exercised are two different things. By pluralistic, she is
referring that the authority should be exercised in association and not in isolation. Cumulative means
that the authority should be exercised meaningfully using the ability of others. She also says that
Authority is objective and responsibility is subjective. Within the organization, the responsibility is
delegated, authority is not because authority lies in the job and stays with the job. Delegation of Authority
is a misnomer. Authority being a vested power remains objective and does not vary. Responsibility, being
the expected duty of the individual within the organization, varies because of the infusion of perception
or thought process in the job. Within the organization, there can be assigning of the responsibilities and
not the authority. When responsible is assigned, the associated authority automatically goes to the
assignee. Responsibility should also be functional, pluralistic and cumulative.
4.      Order- She differs from the classical theories and does not accept their view of exercise of order based
on the principle of Power-Over and replaces that with the concept of Power-With. Within the
organization, the order might be complied, obeyed, disobeyed or partially obeyed. Whereas, the classical
theorists say that the order is necessarily obeyed and will exactly follow what the superior has said.
 Folett differs from this view. She says for Order to be exercised meaningfully, it should be based on
certain conditions.
a.       Conscious Attitude- There should be awareness about all the principles based on which the order is to
be exercised.
b.      Responsible Attitude- One should be able to identify the appropriate principle based on which the
order is to be exercised.
c.       Experimental Attitude- In certain cases which are unprecedented or unusual, newer initiatives should
be taken.
d.      Pooling of the Resources- Within the Organization, data and information on various aspects of the
organization should be meaningfully consolidated and maintained.
Order to be exercised meaningfully should be based on depersonalization of power i.e. power should
seem to be flowing from the situation rather than the position. The depersonalization of order is based on
law of situation. Depersonalization of Order leads to effective exercise of the Order. Human beings want
to remain free. Thus, they resist domination because domination leads to resentment. This resentment
restricts or retards compliance. The one who is exercising the order should act as a Salesman. The
superior should always try to bring about awareness among the subordinates and try to develop the
relevant attitude and only when the relevant attitude is manifest, the order should be exercised.
5.      Control- Within the organization, the Fact Control should replace the idea of the Man Control. The
control should be exercised by the job and situation rather than the control being exercised by the
superior. The responsibility should exist towards what rather than responsibility towards whom.
6.      Co-ordination- Co-ordination is the harmonization or the synchronization of the organizational
activities. In order to establish co-ordination, Folett has provided four strategies.
a.      Co-ordination through Direct Contact- Within the organization, the effort should be to establish as
direct a contact as is possible between the concerned parties involved in the problem of co-ordination.
b.      Co-ordination at an Early Stage- While making policies, laws or rules and regulations, the concerned
entities or functionaries should be involved. This will make the policies and laws more realistic and it will
not subject the laws to multiple interpretations.
c.       Co-ordination as a Continuous Process- A specialized unit should be set up continuously to look into
the problems of co-ordination within the organization and suggest measures accordingly. (e.g.- Ministry
of Plan Implementation)
d.      Co-ordination through the Reciprocal Relationship of all Concerned- The process of resolving the
problem of co-ordination should involve all those who are concerned with the problem of co-ordination.
Follett’s analysis and conceptualization of administration has been dynamic in nature as compared to the
classical theorists whose conceptualization was static in nature. Classical theorists developed a very
machinist view of the organization. Whereas, the views developed by the later theorists were pretty vivid
and dynamic.

Human Relations Approach and Elton Mayo- Administrative Thinkers

Elton Mayo is considered to be the initiator of the Social Psychological analysis or Human analysis in
Organizational Management. His theory is post- Follett. But, Follett’s ideas became known much later.
Mayo’s theorization is based on a number of studies he conducted along with a number of researchers
and functionaries. Mayo’s theory is not only based on studies and experiments but at the same time, it
came out with a novel analysis which became the subject of theorization for the later theorists such as
Bernard, Simon etc.
A Preliminary View of Mayo on the Individual and the Society
He believes that the modern society is in a state of disorganization or anomie or planlessness. The
traditional society was based on a routine which has been broken down by science and rationality but
 has not been adequately replaced with a new set of routine. This has resulted into disorganization. The
disorganization manifests itself today in every aspect of the society (politics, culture, economy, industry
etc.).
This can be addressed by bringing about an Adaptive Society. It is a type of society which has the
capacity to accommodate or adapt to the newer conditions or newer situations. It is a society which
emphasizes on education and administration. The emphasis is on value based education. Value based
education intends to impart wisdom i.e. the ability to distinguish between the right and the wrong. While
referring to administration, he says that the administration is managed by the Administrative Elites.
Administrative Elites means administrators which are not only equipped with the technical skills but also
the social skills i.e. both the hard and the soft skill. Thus, he emphasizing on a participative approach.

Hawthrone Study
Mayo along with a team conducted this study in the Hawthrone unit of the Western Electrical Plant in
USA.
1.      Philadelphia Textile Mill Study or the First Enquiry- Philadelphia Textile was a model and a
successful organization. But, during the early 20 th century, a spinning unit of this mill developed certain
problems such as absenteeism, high labour turnover (250%- number of workers joining and leaving the
organization. Thus, an organization will require hiring much more persons than it would originally
require to maintain the organization in a working condition) and thereby, inefficiency and loss persisted.
The mill took the help of a number of Engineer-Managers to address this problem. All this went in vain.
Finally, it was referred to the Harvard School of Business Administration. In that context, it was assigned
to Elton Mayo.
When Mayo visited the unit, he found that the work condition inside the unit is very noisy and the
workers were working for very long work hours without any rest. Mayo took a simple initiative by
introducing few rest periods or rest pauses between the work hours. Very surprisingly, the absenteeism
reduced, turnover vanished and productivity increased.
Subsequently, after some time, the managers withdrew the Rest Periods. Previous condition of
absenteeism and loss of productivity revisited. Alarmed by the condition, the managers introduced the
rest periods with conditions and linking it with production. Again, the absenteeism reduced but
productivity did not increase to the previous levels. So, Rest Periods were introduced without conditions
which brought the productivity to the previous level.
Mayo said that the nature of work being monotonous, work condition being noisy and work duration
being long, the workers are suffering from fatigue and witnessing melancholic or pessimistic reveries.
The workers were not able to interact with each other and were not able to enjoy the social or optimistic
reveries. The introduction of Rest Pauses enabled the workers to interact with each other and able to
adjust to the boredom of the work. It also relieved their fatigue. Because of this the absenteeism stopped
and the workers were able to concentrate on work.
2.      Western Electrical Plant was a well-developed, profit making organization. It witnessed similar
problems. The organization responded in a usual manner by employing Engineer Managers. It failed
miserably. So, the organization initiated some studies.
a.       Illumination Experiment- Under this experiment, the very aim was to understand the co-relation
between the physical condition of the work and productivity. In this experiment, the effort was to
understand the effect of lightning on the productivity.
Two teams were created and each team comprised of six females workers. In the beginning, the level of
lighting was maintained at a constant level. The workers were allowed to work under a particular level of
lighting for a particular time so that they were able to acclimatize themselves with that level of lighting.
After a period of time, in the context of one of the teams, the level of lighting was gradually increased.
Interestingly, as the lighting was gradually increased, the productivity also increased simultaneously.
 After reaching a point, the level of light was gradually decreased. As, the level of lighting was reduced, the
productivity increased. The productivity went on increasing till the level when the lighting became so
dim that the workers were not able to see at all.
With the other team, the level of lighting was maintained at a constant level. Interestingly, the
productivity with the second group also increased. By this time, Mayo joined the experiment. Mayo and
his team started with a new experiment called as Assembly Relay Test Room Experiment.
Under this study, Mayo selected six female workers. In this study, gradually numbers of incentives were
provided. They were provided with shorter work hours, bonuses, rest periods, refreshments etc. While,
these incentives were being provided, the productivity went on increasing. After a point of time, these
incentives were gradually withdrawn. As the incentives were being withdrawn, the productivity was
increasing.
Subsequently, Mayo came out with an explanation to explain these findings. The reason for the increase
in productivity is social and psychological. Thus, the reason is human and not mechanical in nature. The
workers are aware that they are being observed and are part of an experimental team. This is giving them
a sense of importance and recognition. Here, the supervisor is friendly and consistently interacting
with the workers. The observers were also interacting with the workers. The changes introduced were
introduced with the knowledge of the workers. These conditions resulted into creation of a group
feeling and developed a sense of participation among the workers. This particular social interaction
and feeling is responsible for the rise in productivity.
With this, the team wanted to conduct further studies to concretize their findings.
b.      Interview Experiment- This is also referred to as Human Relations and Sentiment Experiment. The
aim was conduct as many interviews of the workers as possible. The Hawthrone Plant employed around
40,000 workers. Under this program, around 21,000 workers were interviewed. Interviews were
recruited for the said purpose. The interviewers were asked to be patient and attentive towards the
remarks of the workers. They were also asked to maintain records and not interfere even though the
workers deviate from the questions and gave vague answers. Also, the views of the workers were not
shared with the management.
While the interviews were being conducted, the productivity went on increasing. Later on, when Elton
Mayo went through the data, he found that the workers have come out with a diverse range of views.
Most of these views were negative in nature related to the management and the working conditions.
Some even mentioned the problems in their families and neighbourhood. Mayo concluded that the
increase in productivity was because of the interview program which acted as a Ventilation Therapy for
the workers and at the same time, the workers developed a sense of “We” feeling. This was the reason for
the increase in productivity. Workers developed a feeling that their views were important for the
organization and those views will be incorporated in the work process. This view of the workers was
reinforced by a changed behaviour of the supervisor towards them because supervisors were instructed
to be friendly. This feeling resulted into a sense of participation and the workers were psychologically
attached with the organization.
Mayo was aware of the fact that the studies have been conducted in an artificial environment i.e. the
workers were aware that they were being observed. Mayo wanted to conduct further studies in a natural
or a spontaneous environment.
c.     Bank Wiring Experiment- This is also being referred to as Social Organization and Disorganization
Experiment. It was conducted through Participant Observation method. Under this, the researchers
became a part of the workforce. The study found out that the supervisors have set a target but the
workers were not working as per the targets set by the supervisor. Rather, they are working and
producing an amount of work which was less than the target fixed by the supervisor. Very interestingly,
the productivity of all the workers was similar. The study found out that the group itself has set a target
which is below the supervisor’s target. The group, in order to ensure compliance of the workers towards
 the group target, introduced several social strategies such as social ostracization or social ridiculing,
name-calling etc. One who produced more than the targets was called as Ratebuster and one who
produced less than the designated target was called as Chiseller. Also, the one who disclosed secrets to
the management was called as Squealer. Mayo emphasized that there was an informal aspect present in
every organization apart from the formal aspect which is apparent.
Formal aspect refers to that part of the organization which is recognized and established or the part of
the organization which is defined by the rules and manual of the organization. On the other hand, the
informal aspect of the organization refers to that part of the organization which is not recognized by the
organizational rules and manuals. These are rules which though exist but are not recognized by the
organizational rules. Organization does not carry a single identity. It also has an unofficial identity i.e. the
informal aspect. Informal aspects can be positive as well.
Informal aspect, if not nurtured well, will result into negative behaviour and retard productivity. If it
nurtured well, it will enhance productivity and further the organizational goal.
Organization is a social group based on an intricate web of Human Relations bound together by
sentiments. This view is contrary to the line of thought adopted by the classical theorists because they
considered individuals as members of the organization who were isolated beings driven by their own
self-interest. Classical theories of the organization have developed a view of the organization which is
merely an assemblage of individuals with hedonistic interests.
This view of Mayo attracted certain comments. Some say that Mayo has promoted a herd hypothesis
(Mayo’s Theory) as against a rabble hypothesis (Classical Theory). Group influencing the individual-
Herd, all individuals act under self-interest- Rabble. Mayo says that individuals are influenced by non-
economic incentives as well. He also says that within the organization, there exists an informal aspect to
it which influences the productivity.
d.      Much later in 1944, after Hawthrone Studies were over, Mayo was invited to view the California Aircraft
Industry which was under similar difficulties such as absenteeism and loss of productivity. He did not
conduct any study here but went to his institute and looked at the findings which he gathered during the
Hawthrone experiment. He applied the same findings to the California Aircraft Industry. He observed that
the organization is being managed mechanically and not being managed by considering the human aspect
within the organization. He suggested for relaxed supervision, regular consultation with the workers and
allowing their participation in the decision-making. He focused on the human aspect of the organization.
This resulted into a group feeling or a team feeling among the workers and the absenteeism reduced. This
particular event further corroborated the Elton’s view under the Hawthrone Studies.

Chester Barnard- Administrative Thinkers

Without discussing his background and life, I will directly come to his theory.He has highlighted three
elements in an organization
1.      Common Purpose-
a.       Objective Purpose- He refers to the organizational purpose or the common purpose. He calls this as
individual's purpose or individual’s goal. Unless the individuals come together, cooperate with each
other, it won’t be possible for the organization to exist.
b.      Subjective Purpose
2.      Willingness to Contribute- Organizational survivability requires that the individuals must contribute
willingly towards the organizational goal. By this, he is trying to explain the motivation of the individuals.
He has dismissed the classical view on motivation i.e. classical theories are mono-motivational in nature.
For classical theories, economic reasons are the only factors for motivation. He emphasized that the
motivation is not just monetary but also based on non-monetary factors.
 He  has come out with  a concept called as Contribution- Satisfaction Equilibrium to explain individual
motivation. By contribution, he refers to individual’s efforts and activities undertaken in pursuance of the
organizational goal. By satisfaction, he refers to the incentives or the benefits provided by the
organization towards the individual in exchange for the contribution. He says that the individual’s
motivation depends on individual satisfaction being more than individual’s contribution. Individual
becomes fully motivated when he derives a feeling that individual’s satisfaction is more than the
individual’s contribution. Equilibrium refers to the balance in the system i.e. system to be functional
requires that the individual contributes towards the organizational goal. Satisfaction of the individual has
been explained through the concept of Inducement. Inducement refers to the factors which are provided
by the organization to the individual to induce him to do work. He has discussed eight types of
inducements. The main purpose of all these theories is to achieve efficiency in the organization. He
has given few important points in this regard.
a.       Specific Inducements
                                   i.      Material Incentives- This refers to money or salary.
                                 ii.      Personal Non- Monetary Opportunities- This refers to personal power or personal
recognition etc.
                               iii.      Desirable Physical Condition of Work- The working space should not be dingy or dirty.
                               iv.      Ideal Benefaction- He refers to the job which satisfies individual’s values, ideals or
ideologies etc.
b.      General Inducements-
                                   i.      Associated Attractiveness- This refers to a desirable social condition in the workplace.
Here, social refers to Individual to Individual relationship or the relation among the colleagues.
Undesirable social condition is a disincentive to work. A friendly atmosphere is always welcomed by the
employees.
                                 ii.      Adaptation of the Working Condition of Work towards Individual’s habits and
attitudes- He refers to the matching of the individual’s habits and attitudes to the job requirements or
job conditions.
                               iii.      Opportunity for Enlarged Participation- He refers to the opportunity to participate in
the decision making or the opportunity to participate in various organizational activities.
                               iv.      Opportunity to undertake Desirable Communication- Freer communication with
colleagues and supervisors in the organization acts as an incentive.
c.       Authority- He dismissed the classical theories of organization and their view as being the Positional
View on Authority. He developed his own Acceptance View of Authority. Positional view means that
the authority flows from the position and the authority lies with the superordinate. Whereas, he has
emphasized that the authority does not lay with the position which issues command rather lies
with the position which accepts it. According to him, the authority lies with the subordinate and does
not lie with superordinate. ForAuthority to be meaningful requires that it be accepted first i.e. Command
only when it is going to be accepted by the subordinate. If the command is not accepted by the
subordinate, it won’t be complied resulting into non- meaningful authority. The acceptance of command
depends on four conditions.
                                   i.      It should be intelligible.
                                 ii.      It should be consistent with the organizational goals.
                               iii.      It should be compatible with individual’s personal goal.
                               iv.      It should be within the physical and mental limits.
In order to substantiate Authority, he used a concept called as the Zone of Indifference. Within the
organization, individuals carry Zone of Indifference as well as Zone of Denial. There are individuals who
have more of Zone of Indifference. On the other hand, there are also individuals who have more of Zone of
Denial. An individual who carries of Zone of Indifference, command issued towards them is more likely to
 fall within the Zone of Indifference and thereby will be complied. On the other hand, Command issued
towards the individuals having more of Zone of Denial is more likely to fall within the Zone of Denial and
thereby is liable to be disobeyed. The executives within the organization should always strive to increase
the Zone of Indifference while decreasing the Zone of Denial. This can be done by working on
individual’s Contribution- Satisfaction Equilibrium. Zone of Indifference or Denial refers to a
psychological condition of being obedient or disobedient. While being in the Zone of Indifference, the
individual being indifferent towards the merit (four conditions discussed above) of the authority
complies with the authority. Within the organization, while the acceptance of authority lies with the
subordinate, the power of Veto lies with the superordinate. Power of Veto has been symbolically used
and it means that the responsibility for the failure of authority or negation of authority lies with the
superordinate.
d.      Fiction of Superior Authority- He emphasizes that the manager should be aware of the myth and the
reality about the authority. Functionaries in the organization carry a number of beliefs such as
                                   i.      Superiors carry superior authority.
                                 ii.      Disobedience will lead to loss of incentive or even loss of job.
                               iii.      Lack of performance may result into loss of reputation.
These beliefs may not be real but it helps the supervisor to exercise the authority meaningfully. Such
beliefs can be manipulated by the superior to exercise more and more control over the subordinates. The
fiction of Superior Authority will lead to making the subordinates delegate the authority upwards.
3.      System of Communication (Exchange of ideas between the sender and the receiver) -
Communication helps in conveying the purposes and helps in exercising authority. Because of this, he
believes that Communication is Authority (Everything within the organization is sustained through
communication). Thus, there should be a proper system of communication within the organization. The
characteristics of proper system of communication.
a.       The entire channel of communication should be known.
b.      Every functionary should have access to the formal channel of communication.
c.       The line of communication should be as direct as possible. The communication centres should be
competent.
d.      The entire channel of communication should be used. The communication must not jump layers.
Jumping of layers will lead to misgivings, misunderstandings or even indiscipline.
e.       The channel of communication should not be interrupted. The positions acting as Communication
centres should not fall vacant. If it falls vacant, the chain of communication will break. There should be
immediate replacement for these positions.
f.       The communication should be authentic. The communication should be made within the domain of the
authority.
g.      The communication centres should be competent. The functionaries should be skilled, able and be
equipped with tools, techniques and technologies of communication.

Barnard’s View on Responsibility

He discussed the moral aspect of the responsibility. While referring to the responsibility within the
organization, he says that the responsibility is carried out through multiple codes such as legal code,
cultural code, social code etc. Within the job situation, the individual’s responsibility might face conflict of
codes. One code might go contrary to other code. When there is a conflict between the internal codes and
the external codes, most likely, the external code surrenders to the internal code.
Based on the conflict of codes, the behaviour of individuals is identified.
1.      It might result into paralysis of action or inaction.
2.      Individual might choose one code as against other code or codes. In this case, individual goes through a
feeling of guilt.
3.      Individual while following one code might find a way to satisfy the other codes. In this case, the
individual does not go through the feeling of guilt.
He recognizes that his study is inadequate in this regard and further studies are required on these topics.
Classical theories say that individual does exactly what has been prescribed by the law. Thus, classical
theorists believe only in one code i.e. legal code.

Decision Making
Barnard is called the pioneer in Decision Making. Decision is an act of choice reached through
deliberation, calculation and thought. Choice becomes available only when there are more than one
alternative. Decisions are of two types.
1.      Organizational Decisions- Barnard refers to the decisions undertaken to advance the organizational goal
or decisions made in organizational capacity. These decisions are to be based on logical or non-logical
analysis.
2.      Personal Decisions- It refers to decisions made outside the organization. These might be based on
logical analysis, non-logical analysis or even illogical analysis. (Non- logical refers to decisions based on
inadequate or hybrid information)
Every decision carries two elements. He has used the Means- End Paradigm in this regard. He says every
decision contains the goal component and the means component. The goal component is the moral
component because the goal is a desirable one for the individual who is making the decision. The means
through which the goal is to be achieved has been referred to as the opportunistic component.
1.      Moral Element
2.      Opportunistic Element
a.       Complementary Factor- He refers to all the factors which help in achieving the goal.
b.      Strategic Factor- He refers to all the factors which when absent helps to achieve the goal.

Criticisms (Classical Theory)- Administrative Thinkers

Taylor
Taylor overlooked the fact that the principle of division and subdivision of work into the tiniest part each
is  subjected to the law of diminishing returns.
Taylor confuses the principle of analysis with the principle of action. In Taylor’s theory, the emphasis has
been on the fact that the managers were to decide and the subordinates were to follow. But, Planning
cannot be done in isolation of the action and action cannot take place in isolation of planning. The
planning and execution cannot be divorced from each other but Taylor said that the planning and
execution are to be done separately. The workers will have no say in such a planning process.

Fayol
The 14 principles of Fayol have a great deal of overlapping.
Application of the principle of unity of command would overwhelm the chief executive with problems of
co-ordination.

Elton Mayo
He has been criticized for being a Cow Sociologist because they emphasized that Mayo in terms of his
analysis of the social aspect of the organization has been amateurish. He has explained individual
behaviour only from one perspective whereas the individual behaviour is influenced by a number of
factors which are external in nature.
Carey says that the conclusions of Mayo are different from his findings in the Hawthrone Experiment.
Carey believes that the behaviour of an individual in an artificial condition cannot be considered as a
 Standard Behaviour.  Also, the samples which were considered were too small to be considered as
representatives of the workers. If we consider the Hawthrone Experiment, the productivity decreased in
the last experiment (Bank- Wiring Experiment was conducted in natural condition and not in artificial
condition). According to Mayo, Social Strategies were the reason for the decline in productivity. But,
Critics believe that social strategy was not the only reason. The group maintained a lower target because
they believed that there economic interest (low payment) lies in maintaining the lower target. Thus,
Mayo ignored the economic factors in this regard.

Mary Parker Follett

Her main problem was her idealism which was clearly visible in her theories. Follett’s theories carried
some oxymoronic values such as centralization as well as decentralization, democracy as well as
aristocracy, authoritarianism as well as participation, mechanistic nature as well as humanistic nature.
Had these oxymoronic values operated in separate contexts, no problem would have existed in her
theory. But, the fact that these values operated simultaneously made her theory to be too ideal to be
perfect.
Irrespective of this, her ideas were indicative of certain ideas and those same ideas proved to be the basis
for the theorization done by the future humanistic theorists. Her theory emphasized more on the
psychological aspect and gave little heed to the social aspect.

Herbert Simon
His theory and its emphasis on Value Free Approach are problematic. The positivist underpinnings in his
theory are tricky. It is impossible to understand the manner to achieve the preference by divorcing it
from preference. The preference here signifies ‘goal’. Simon overemphasized on ‘fact’ and undermined
‘value’.
His theory has limited application for the government and public administration.
Though outwardly Simon emphasizes on politics- administration fusion, yet his emphasis on fact-value
dichotomy has introduced politics- administration dichotomy through the backdoor. Simon believes that
the study of the administration should only be concentrated on a part of the administration. Critics say
that his study is intra- organizational and not inter-organizational because of which he has insulated the
administration from politics.

Models of Decision Making- Administrative Behaviour

Models of Decision Making

These models are the models of public policy making as well.
1.    Institutional- It is emphasized that decisions within the government are made by various agencies and
members of the government. The existence or non-existence of a decision within the government is
because of the existence or non-existence of certain agencies within the government. Also, the nature of
the decision is also defined by the nature of the agency.
This model provides a very simplistic idea about the decision making process within the government. It is
simply discounting the influence of any other agency or body other than the agencies within the
government. It has not been able to understand the complex dynamism/mechanism of decision making
within the government. Thus, this model has not taken into account the role of non-state institutions in
the process of decision making.
2.      Group- This model emphasizes that there are number of groups within the society. Each of these groups
carries their respective interests. These groups, in order to protect and promote their interest, put
pressure on the government for favourable decisions. Also, these groups are of varying strengths. The
 state makes the decision under the pressure exerted by these groups and the final decision is basically
the view of the strongest group.
This model is also too simplistic because it ignores the autonomous role of the state and at the same time,
it also ignores the influence by other multiple groups.
3.    Pluralist- This model also emphasizes that in a society, there are a number of groups. These groups
carry their respective interests and in order to protect and promote their interests, they try to put
pressure on the government to get a favourable decision. Again, these groups are of varying strengths.
This model says that the state plays the role of the umpire or an impartial referee. Thereby, it provides a
platform for negotiation/interaction to take place. Finally, the decision is the by-product of the influences
exerted by the groups but in order of their strength.
The Neo-Pluralist Theory has come with a different analysis and certain new dimensions (Robert Dahl,
Charles Lindbloom etc.). It says that the though the state acts as a referee yet the state does not remain
impartial or neutral rather the members of the state themselves constitute few of the most powerful
interest groups. These groups are actively involved in the process of decision making. Of all these groups
in the society, the Industrialists/Corporate Group is the most powerful group because they are
responsible for most of the employment.
This model is considered to be one of the most acceptable models to explain the process of decision
making within the government.
4.      Elite- Elite refers to a minority in the society which is distinguished from the masses based on its
privileges, power, style and standard of living. Who all constitute the Elites is a highly debatable question
and at the same time, Elite in a particular society might not be Elite in some other society.
C.Wright Mills has discussed about Elites in her work “The Power Elite”. This work holds good mostly in
the context of USA. He says that there are a number of institutions in a society and of all these, three
institutions can be considered to be the vital institutions of the society (Business, Politics and Military).
All those who occupy key positions in these three institutions together constitute Elite. He believes that
Elite might belong to a different profession but irrespective of their profession, they are very
homogenous in terms of their nature and culture.
This theory is emphasizing that in the modern democracy, the decisions are actually made by the Elite.
Only those decisions escape the capture of the Elite which does not concern the interest of the Elite.
5.     Marxist- This model emphasizes that the decisions in the government are made by the state as being the
executive committee of the dominant class or the bourgeois. Thereby, the dominant captures the state.
The decisions taken in this regard are taken to protect and perpetuate the interest of the dominant.
The Neo-Marxism differs from this fundamentalist Marxism or Vulgar Marxism. Subsequent theorists
who followed the conflict perspective are termed as Neo-Marxists (Althusser, Paulantzas and Gramsci
etc.). These theorists emphasized that in a society there are many classes and not just two classes as was
propounded by Marx such as Bourgeois, petty Bourgeois, White Collar Jobs, Blue Collar Jobs, Skilled
Workers, Semi-Skilled Workers etc. Each of these classes has their respective interests. In order to protect
and perpetuate their interest, they pressurize the state. None of these groups is in a position to
completely capture the state. As a result of which, the state gains in autonomy or the state becomes
relatively autonomous. Being relatively autonomous, the state makes decisions and at times, it might
make decisions contrary to the Bourgeois. The state makes decisions while remaining within the overall
domain of Capitalism.
6.      Rational- It is also known as the Root model of the decision making. It is an economic model of
decision making which is based on the premise that an issue should find closure based on absolute
rationality. All the data and information relating to the product should be considered and with regard to
the problem, subsequent to that all the strategies relating to it should be evolved. The strategy designed
based on the accurate power of prediction is to be evaluated and on the criteria of relative effectiveness, a
 strategy should be chosen which should be the best among the best. This model emphasizes on Cost-
Benefit Analysis.
But, this idea has been contested by Simon. He says that this is not possible because it presupposes the
infinite capacity of the decision makers and the decision makers are bounded by limitations. That is why,
he emphasizes on bounded rationality as against the absolute rationality.
7.     Incremental- The philosophy of Incrementalism has been propounded by theorists like Charles
Lindbloom. He emphasizes that the decision making within the government is not based on root model
rather it is based on a branch model. The decision within the government is not taken based on a detailed
rational consideration and thereby, the decisions are not new rather the existing decisions are continued
with limited or little changes. The decisions are only marginally incremental over the existing decisions.
They are not radical shifts from the existing decisions.
The incremental decision making in the government is because of the problem of
a.      Sunk Cost- The cost which is incurred when an investment goes in vain because of a subsequent
investment taking place over the same subject-matter.
b.      Problem of Consequences- Decision making in rational model is based on detailed analysis, if the
decision goes wrong, there will be a radical shift from the existing trend and the negative impacts will be
humongous. The fear of consequences inhibits the decision maker to refrain from adopting the root
model.
c.     The problem of vested interest and adaptation- The individuals within the organization need to
reorient their value which requires adaptation by individuals towards the new set of requirements. The
adaptation will attract a different value system and a different working environment which might lead to
resistance within the members of the organization.
These marginal increments are based on Mutual Partisan Adjustment Approach. Whatever limited
change that is brought in is also not based on rational consideration. These marginal changes are based
on the adjustment which is reached by various interest groups which are competing with each other or
trying to influence the decision making.
That is why Lindbloom’s model is also referred to as Disjointed Incremental Model or a Science of
Muddling Through.
The model of Logical Incrementalism by Quinn tried to improve upon the Disjointed Incremental Model.
Quinn is emphasizing that the decision within the government should be taken with limited improvement
over the existing decision but while remaining within the long term objective or the long term goal. Also,
these marginal changes should also be rational changes.
8.      Mixed Scanning- This model is given by Amitai Etaioni. While trying to address the limitations of both,
this model has attempted to combine the advantages of the Rational Model and the Incremental Model.
Under this, the emphasis is on undertaking a broad study or a generalized overview of the problem under
consideration and based on this generalized broad overview, the critical factors or the most important
factors relevant to the problem are to be identified. These critical factors have to be studied in detail to
find out the solution for the problem. The decision will be limited in nature because an absolute decision
is possible only when all the data is considered which is very unlikely.
9.      Garbage Can- This model emphasizes that the decision making within the government are not based on
rational calculation rather is temporal or accidental in nature. Decision making within the government is
chaotic or a random exercise. The decisions within the government are not based on systematized
planning or deliberate planning. Within the government, there are a number of decision makers, but
neither the problem nor the solution nor the decision makers are static. Government is a loosely
organized organization because of which many problems emerge. Many of these problems become
important problems or many of them lose their importance or many decision makers emerge or many
decision makers leave the scene or many solutions emerge or many of the solutions disappear. The
decision making within the government is a very complex process and not smoothly rational. Within the
 government, sometimes the problems chase the solution and vice versa. The decision making takes place
when the problem is recognized by the decision makers and a possible solution is available and is being
supported by a conducive situation or environment. Most of the times, these situations do not converge,
that is why many obvious, expected or important decision within the government are not taken and many
remote and unexpected decisions are taken.
This model also says that within the government certain decisions might be planned or based on rational
calculation.
Kingdon suggested a new model in 2003 called as Revised Garbage Can Model.  He hardly modified the
model rather his model is a systematization of the existing garbage can model. He emphasized that
decisions within the government take place when the three streams i.e. the Problem Stream, the Political
Stream and the Policy Stream converge. With the convergence of these streams, the political window
widens and the decisions are taken. Problem stream refers to various problems those are seeking
attention for the decision. The political stream refers to the public opinion, political support, favourable
election results or a conducive environment etc. Policy stream refers to the political decision makers,
administrators, researchers etc.
10.  Normative-Optimal- Refer to the models on Policy making.
11.  Public Choice- Refer to the models on Policy making.
12. Game Theory- This theory is primarily used to explain decision making in a competitive environment. In
a competitive environment, a decision maker does not fully or partially controls the consequences. The
consequences are also dependant on the decisions made by the others present within the decision
making arena. The decision maker should try to analyse all the possible consequences and the final
decision should be made while avoiding the extremes.
A new model has been propounded recently which is a mix of all the above mentioned models. No single
model can fully explain the entirety of the decision making within the -government.