Theoretical approach towards bureaucracy intiated by Max Webber can be considered as an attempt to give a clear shape and structure to the changing power equations or administrative requirement.Though he never attempted to define bureaucracy, it can be treated as defining its character.For this he called bureaucracy as “ administrative body of appointed officials.” Considering the qualification of officials in the past, he insisted on the selection of technically qualified people for the system of administration.
Inspite of the criticisms invited by Webber’s theory, his approach was modernized with a focus on ‘administrators are considered as change-agents and bureaucracy as a catalyst for modernization.’ This clearly indicates a thrust on the administrative apparatus of bureaucracy with a re-defined goal.
This new treatment calls for the reciprocative nature of governmental mechinary which should learn from the external environment, adjust itself with the aspirations of the people of the time and giving the output back to the society.
Modern-day administration stands for developmental administration. This makes it necessary for the bureaucracy to open up itself coming out of the conceived limitations of being a closed-system as remarked by F.W.Riggs in his work ‘The Ecology of Public Administration.’ Participation of people in the process is now recognized by involving them in designing the plans suited for development, at the lower level. It is much clear in the shift from ‘top-down’ approach to ‘bottom-up’ approach in the planning process.
In Indian context a special attention was called for in the functioning of local self government bodies with the passing of 73’rd and 74’th constitutional amendment acts of 1992.It widely recognized the participation of public in designing the plans for development which government is expected to deliver.
Theoretically bureaucracy has gained a lot from the modern-days as perceived by Riggs in his advocacy for administration and ecology.In other words it can be regarded as fusing the merits of being an open system, simultaneously keeping the structural merits of Webberian theory.
Inspite of the criticisms invited by Webber’s theory, his approach was modernized with a focus on ‘administrators are considered as change-agents and bureaucracy as a catalyst for modernization.’ This clearly indicates a thrust on the administrative apparatus of bureaucracy with a re-defined goal.
This new treatment calls for the reciprocative nature of governmental mechinary which should learn from the external environment, adjust itself with the aspirations of the people of the time and giving the output back to the society.
Modern-day administration stands for developmental administration. This makes it necessary for the bureaucracy to open up itself coming out of the conceived limitations of being a closed-system as remarked by F.W.Riggs in his work ‘The Ecology of Public Administration.’ Participation of people in the process is now recognized by involving them in designing the plans suited for development, at the lower level. It is much clear in the shift from ‘top-down’ approach to ‘bottom-up’ approach in the planning process.
In Indian context a special attention was called for in the functioning of local self government bodies with the passing of 73’rd and 74’th constitutional amendment acts of 1992.It widely recognized the participation of public in designing the plans for development which government is expected to deliver.
Theoretically bureaucracy has gained a lot from the modern-days as perceived by Riggs in his advocacy for administration and ecology.In other words it can be regarded as fusing the merits of being an open system, simultaneously keeping the structural merits of Webberian theory.
No comments:
Post a Comment