Module 2 ExReading Notes
The Study of Administration - Woodrow Wilson
Introduction
The Civil Service Reform not only went to improve personnel but also organizational methods of administration
Administrative study’s purpose is to discover what government can properly and successfully do and how it can do these things with the most efficiency and lowest energy/monetary cost
Key Assumptions/Arguments/Conclusions
Assumes: that reform is necessary in government, which aligns with the growth of the study of administration in schools across the nation
Argues: that administrative study is all about efficiency and low costs
Concludes: to understand this study, one must understand the history, subject matter, and methods of the study’s sphere
I - History of the Study
The science of administration is the most recent subgroup of political study, but didn’t really emerge until the 20th century
While Administration is the most obvious and old form of governance, it wasn’t written about systematically—as writers focused on constitution, nature of the state, sovereignty. So, the field focusing on types of government (democracy, oligarchy, etc)
Administration was pushed aside (how law should be administered fairly and quickly) by questions such as Who shall make law, and what will those laws be?
Administration used to be simpler when life was simpler (only thinking about who should have power), with no puzzles of debt or stocks; yet administrative struggles bubbled up in these times and came to a head during the 20th century
Administration has became not just more difficult/complex, but larger.
It has evolved to oversee services (postal service) and oversee giant corporations (railroad commissions overseeing private groups
This creates the study which aims to make government businesslike, strengthen its organization
This study developed in Europe, with few American writers playing part in its advancement—which is why Wilson wants the study to be ‘Americanized’ in the nation’s colleges
Developed first in Europe (minus England) because (1) just b/c they had a govt independent from popular influence, didn’t mean there wasn’t more governing to be done and (2) keeping govt as a monopoly made monopolists intrigued to discovering the least irritating means of governance
European countries struggled against change, and they wouldn’t have if they just let go of harsh absolute governments
European governments made their systems perfect and offered help, becoming essential to their people. Even after giving citizens rights, they stayed in control by acting like protective parents. They became so efficient, wise, and kind that no one questioned them, and too powerful to challenge. This entire effort required extensive study.
America didn’t really have administrative problems b/c new country with room and liberal principles of govt, so there was no need to study systems of administration until systems became awkward—this ‘behind’ state put America at a disadvantage to European groups
Why was America behind Europe?: there is three periods of growth to create highly developed administrative systems.
First: absolute rulers, with a system adapted to those rulers
Second: Constitutions are framed to do away with absolute rule and instate popular control
Third: sovereign people develop a new administration under that new constitution that gave them power
Examples of those perfected administrations
Prussia/Frederick the Great: stern rule but a chief servant of the state, created Prussian public service, his successors giving firmness and form to that administration
modern French: symmetrically divided territories, ordered gradations of offices.
Many countries that concern themselves with “Constitution-tinkering” (America and England) often have half-baked administrative systems
England: no monarch had the chance to use genius or enlightened conscience to create lasting civil services. They’re a lot better at making their government fair/moderate than well-ordered and effective.
What prevents the development of an administrative framework?
(In America) democracy and the importance of public opinion has hindered the ability to organize administration, as the opinions of many must be weighed over the opinion of one
When public opinion is valued, reform is slow and is full of compromises. Educate citizens of change —> persuade them to vote for change. Also, opinions are difficult to change, sometimes takes generations to do so
It’s difficult to make progress: rather than having one selfish/stupid monarch, admins must deal with many thousands of selfish/stupid citizens, and those thousands have a ton of different biases
But even if the country has insight into political past and there is strong governance, will the country even support the facets of this government?
Most voters are unphilosophical and a truth must be plain and commonplace to the commonfolk—especially in the U.S, and you must be able to influence each race with their own biases and histories
Key Assumptions/Arguments/Conclusions
Assumptions
Political science originally prioritized who rules (constitution, sovereignty, forms of government) over how government functions (administration).
Early governance was “simpler” because societies and economies were less complex.
Administrative problems inevitably emerge as societies grow more complex.
Democracy, by nature, slows down reform because it depends on the opinions of many rather than the will of one.
Most voters are unphilosophical and must be persuaded in plain, commonplace terms.
Arguments
Administration as a neglected science
Even though administration is ancient, it wasn’t studied systematically until the 20th century.
Complexity of modern government demands study
With industrialization, corporations, and services (like postal and railroads), administration has become larger and more complicated.
This makes systematic study essential.
European advantage
European states, especially Prussia and France, developed strong administrative systems under absolute rulers and then perfected them under constitutional governments.
England and America focused too much on constitutional tinkering, resulting in weaker administrative structures.
Why America lags
America didn’t face pressing administrative problems early because it was a new, spacious, liberal society.
Democracy hinders administrative development because reforms must pass through slow, biased, and divided public opinion.
Need for “Americanized” study
Administration must be developed and taught in American colleges to adapt European methods to U.S. democratic conditions.
Conclusions
Administration is as fundamental to political science as constitutional theory, and must be recognized as its own scientific field.
Modern governance cannot function well without systematic, professional administration.
America, by lagging behind Europe, risks inefficiency unless it deliberately develops its own administrative science.
The future of good government in the U.S. depends on reconciling democracy with an effective administrative framework.
II - Subject-Matter of the Study
Administration is just a mere part to the machine of politics, but the technical detail of its connection to lasting political progression raises its importance—it also places executive methods on a foundation of stable principle
Civil Service reform was changing the appointment process, Wilson says the movement should further adjust executive organization/functions to work more smoothly—as reform is creating a foundation of public trust in order to make administration “businesslike”
Administration lies outside the sphere of politics.
Politics sets administrative tasks but should not manipulate its officeholders: politics is for the statesman, administration for the technical official
Also, administrative questions should be separate from those of constitutional principle (changing purposes of admin vs. governmental adjustment)
Yet, arguments about where administration resides in government are full of particulars and confuse administration with political management and constitutional principle
Constitutional law and administrative function should not be confused for one another
Administration acts as a conduit to carry out the public laws created by constitutions that control general law (think assessing/raising taxes, mail delivery—all carried out by administration)
Only the President/Judiciary has a say in the legislative/policy side of government, administrators do not
Even so, administrators still have discretion and are not a passive instrument in upholding law
Sometimes, though, the two are viewed in tandem because the philosophical study of administration is similar to the study of distributing constitutional authority
Ideas of distributing authority are far more important in democratic systems where officials serve many masters—where trust in strength is important to the citizenry
Also, administrators SHOULD have a lot of power and discretion b/c a man who is burdened with power is less likely to abuse it, but if he has less power and feels unnoticed he would feel readier to engage in misconduct
Relations between public opinion and administration: what part should public opinion play in the conduct of administration? — the public should act as critics
America struggles to organize administration b/c the public has their hand in too many parts of it—like how a cook must be trusted with discretion in how to manage his establishment, not the people that eat there
In Germany, on the other hand, citizens have to be begged to have a public opinion. Their public does not meddle in administration
Therefore, public opinion should still be apparent, but not meddlesome. Administrative study must find a way to give public criticism control without undermining effectiveness —> further, this study should go on to drill candidates for public service
Political education was becoming more popular when Wilson wrote this, but he argues that it creates critics and legislators, not executive officials—to improve public opinion, education must create good servants who are an ‘apparatus’ of government
Wilson understands that this sounds like a group of semi-corporate, bigoted officials who are separated from a free citizenry—but he counters by saying that the principle of this new administration should be sensitive to public opinion
Bureaucracy can only exist where civil servants are removed from common political life but are still sensitive to the public opinion
Overall: ideal for civil service is a self-sufficient, cultured group that acts with sense but is still connected to popular thought through election and public counsel.
Key Assumptions/Arguments/Conclusions
Assumptions
Administration is distinct from politics and should not be confused with constitutional law or political management.
Civil service reform provides a foundation of public trust that enables administration to be “businesslike.”
Public opinion must exist in a democracy but should not intrude too heavily into administrative function.
Officials with more discretion and responsibility are less likely to abuse power than those with little authority.
Arguments
Administration is not passive: although it carries out laws, administrators exercise discretion and thus require principles and structure.
Politics sets tasks; administration executes them — mixing the two undermines both.
Over-involvement of the public in administration creates inefficiency; Germany’s opposite problem (apathy) also shows the need for balance.
Education should focus not just on producing critics and legislators but also well-prepared executive officials.
Bureaucracy can only succeed if civil servants are insulated from partisan politics yet remain sensitive to public opinion.
Conclusions
Administration must be established on stable, principled foundations, distinct from politics but still guided by constitutional authority.
The ideal civil service is a professional, cultured, and semi-independent body that executes law effectively while remaining accountable through public counsel and elections.
Public opinion should act as a check through criticism, not direct interference, to preserve both administrative efficiency and democratic responsiveness.