C. State Administration in Egalitarianism
V. GOOD STATE ADMINISTRATION AS CULTURAL ALLIANCE
Viewing state administration m a cultural context reveals distinguishing value biases and social relations of pure cultural types (see Figure 3) The underlying beliefs and connected social practices of state administration point to what ener- gizes and what constrains different forms of administration With this framework the strengths and vulnerabilities of distinct cultures also become more discernible A culturally based assessment may be useful to state administrators in self-evalua- tion, that is, in examining the values and practices underpinning individual man- agement styles or administration within their own agencies or administration of state government in general At minimum such evaluation provides an alternative to assessment using ambiguous concepts such as effectiveness and efficiency Understanding the culture of state administration may provide an alternative framework for improving administration—in redirecting state administration through insights into the cultural basis of administrative history, patterns of cur- rent management, and even predictions concerning future direction
Cultural theory provides insight into sources of energy and inertia in state administration For example, service in the public interest energizes administra- tion in hierarchy, individual discretion and competition motivates administration in individualism, and pursuit of equality inspires administration in egahtanamsm Centralized authority constrains administration by both individualists and egali- tarians Individual deviation, tor example, whistle blowing or disloyalty, wreaks havoc on hierarchic administration
The strengths and vulnerabilities of different cultural forms of administra- tion are also more visible For example, according to Coyle
When value agreement and factual certainty are high, the corresponding or- ganizational form (and culture) is hierarchy In these cases, group identity and role differentiation are strong It is knowledge that provides order, when knowledge is complete, the organization is like a tully analyzable ma- chine, held together by standard operating procedure [Hierarchies excel at replicating routine tasks, but are ill-suited to environmental turbulence (Coyle, 1997 63, 66)
Hierarchial administration tends toward state paternalism and dampens individual initiative
Administration in individualism offers responsiveness and adaptability but is subject to higher risk of failure or even complete collapse, it stimulates expen-
100 Flentje
State Administration in Fatalism
• unknown
State Administration in Individualism
• enhancing individual liberty and restraining government through customer choice, diffusion of authority, and reciprocity in decision making,
• promoting customer choice as the underlying value 1) state services are viewed as contracts in which customers receive specified benefits at a certain cost, 2) quality of service is measured in terms of customer satisfaction with benefits and costs, and 3) service providers are accountable to customers,
• diffusing authority in service delivery through 1) local autonomy, home rule, charter schools, and other forms of local control, 2) competition and privatization through contracts, franchises, vouchers, and sale of assets, and 3) empowerment of citizens through neighborhood associations, voluntarism, and coprovision,
• decision making through reciprocity, negotiation, mutual adjustment, and bargaining, and
• exercising innovative and entrepreneurial leadership, with high risk of failure, in stimulating the economy and promoting customer choice
State Administration in Hierarchy
• serving the public interest through 1) rule of law 2) hierarchial structures, 3) division of labor and specialization, 4) merit selection of personnel, and 5) standards generated through scientific method and technical expertise,
• unifying administration through centralized executive control,
• decision making by those in positions of authority with decisions executed through written rules and regulations,
• insulating administration from politics, and
• expanding the professionahzation of work and professionalizing workforce through full-time occupations and professional career paths
State Administration in Egalitarianism
• imbuing organization and employees with ideals of socal justice and equality,
• promoting equality of conditions,
• avoiding the exercise of formal authority by cooperating through informal means such as teamwork, harmony, fraternity, brotherhood and sisterhood, and professional networks,
• insulating organization and employees from external environment through internal activities solidifying organizational cohesion and critique of external social inequities and injustice,
• deciding the quality and quantity of work through norms of employee groups and associated professions,
• decision making through direct participation and consensus among employees with equal status, and
• leading through stewardship, coaching, facilitation, and enabling
Figure 3 State administration within political cultures.
State Administration in Cultural Context 101 mentation and innovation but shows little concern for resulting inequities Such administration can function in an environment of rapid change, conflicting de- mands, and turmoil Its preference for restrictions on public authority limits pub- lic accountability and makes administration susceptible to conflicts of interest resulting from negotiated deals
Egalitarian organization, as Coyle has indicated, is likely small and short- lived and therefore may not be capable of administering large, complex state functions which require continuity Egalitanamsm aspires to decision making through direct participation and consensus among equals and challenges manag- ers to work with idealistic forms—organization without formal authority and leadership without formal leaders—which may spawn stalemate and disorganiza- tion The norm of consensus in decision making likely precludes quick action, defers action on matters of internal conflict, and may produce conformity in out- look Egalitarian administration also acts as a constant thorn in the side of society as a whole by pointing out existing social inequities and injustice
The inherent vulnerabilities of each cultural type suggests that public insti- tutions would not mirror any one culture but are more likely organizational com- pounds in which different cultures are stronger or weaker (Wildavsky, 1989 107) According to Coyle
The fundamental types may best be thought of as tendencies or pressures rather than organizational forms Other organizational structures may de- velop as hybrids, and gradual movement from one pole to another through tnal-and-error experience more plausibly describes organizational change Even supposedly untettered markets move far enough on the grid and group axes to enforce basic rules against force and fraud, for exam- ple And as long as human perception is flawed and individualized and coop- eration and understanding depend in part on the imperfections of language, hierarchy can never be pure In the case ot hybrids, the basic types indicate the kinds of tensions they internalize or the dissonance they will experience (199764-65)
Good state administration, then, would likely be comprised of alliances among these political cultures n
By way of illustration, state administration as an alliance of the cultures of hierarchy and individualism would be an organizational compound valuing both liberty and order, which could take numerous forms depending on the strength of the cultural elements For example, such organization could stnve to derive the benefits of a market orientation by expanding customer choice while
11 Marshall et al explore this concept ol cultural alliances with respect to state school statutes and more generally as an ongoing tension among cultural values (1989 146-150 162-174)
702 Flentje
retaining the accountability of public organization Or, using the counsel of Os- borne and Gaebler, state administration could delineate between the functions of steering and rowing, retaining the steering duties within government and as signing rowing—that is, the delivery of services—to private providers Current state developments in competition and privatization of service delivery, indeed, seek to foster both liberty and order
State administration as an alliance of hierarchy and egahtariamsm would be an organizational compound valuing both order and equality Such organiza- tion might have "loose tight" qualities, for example, tight in serving the public interest under the rule of law and loose in allowing public employees to determine through agreement how best to serve those ends Many state agencies have ad- vanced both order and equality by professionalizing work and the work force and then relying on the authority and decisions of professionals to carry out public purpose
An alliance of individualism and egalitananism—of liberty and equality—
may be an unlikely compact tor state administration Proponents of such a com- pound would have to be convinced that enhancing liberty—for example, by ex- panding customer choice—could achieve equality of conditions Further, an orga- nizational compound disconnected from the rule of law is not readily apparent in state administration
In sum, viewing state administration in cultural context illuminates cultural biases and related practices and offers a cultural perspective in gaining self knowledge and undertaking self assessment Such knowledge could presumably be applied to improving state administration No cultural type of state administra- tion is best in any universal sense, each has strengths and vulnerabilities One may be more applicable than another under certain environmental conditions Historically, society has been shifting away from beliefs and social relations based in hierarchial culture toward individualism and egalitananism Good state administration is moving in these directions as well but will likely continue as organizational compounds relying upon an alliance of cultures
REFERENCES
Argersmger, P H (1995) The Limits of Agrarian Radicalism Western Populism and American Politics, University Press o± Kansas, Lawrence
Babcock, B A (1983-84) Defending the guilty, Cleveland State Law Review 32(1) 175- 187
Bardach, E , and Kagan, R A (1982) Going fe> the Book, Temple University Press, Phila delphia
Barzelay, M (1992) Breaking Through Bureaucracy A New Vision for Managing in Government, University of California Press, Berkeley
State Administration in Cultural Context 103
Bowling, C J , and Wnght, D S (1998) Public administration in the fifty states a half- century administrative revolution, State and Local Government Review 30(1) 52- 64
Brace, P (1993) State Government and Economic Performance, Johns Hopkins Univer- sity Press, Baltimore
Chai, S , and Swedlow, B (1998) Culture and Social Theory Aaron Wildavsk\, Transac- tion Publishers, New Brunswick, NJ
Chi, K S , and Jasper, C (1998) Private Practices A Review of Privatization in State Government, Council of State Governments, Lexmgton, KY
Conant, J (1992) Executive branch reorganization in the states, 1965-1991, Book of the States 1992-93, Council of State Governments, Lexmgton, KY, pp 64-73 Coyle, D J (1997) A cultural theory of organizations, Culture Matters Essays in Honor
of Aaron Wildavsky (R J Ellis and M Thompson, eds ), Westview Press, Boulder, CO, pp 59-78
Coyle, D J , and Elks, R J , eds (1994) Politics, Policy, and Culture, Westview Press, Boulder, CO
de Leon, L (1993) As plain as 1, 2, 3 and 4 ethics and organizational structure, Administration and Society 25(3) 293-316
de Tocqueville, A (1945) Democracy in America, (P Bradley, ed), Alfred A Knopf, New York
Douglas, M (1978) Cultural Bias (Occasional Paper 35), Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, London
Elazar, D J (1966) American Federalism A View from the States, Thomas Y Crowell, New York
Eismger, P (1988) The Rise of the Entrepreneurial State, University of Wisconsin Press, Madison
Ellmg, R C (1992) Public Management in the States A Comparative Study of Admmis trative Performance and Politics, Praeger, Westport, CT
Elks, R J , and Thompson, M , eds (1997) Culture Matters Essays in Honor of Aaron Wildavsky, Westview Press, Boulder, CO
Elks, R , and Wildavsky, A (1989) Dilemmas of Presidential Leadership from Washing- ton Through Lincoln, Transaction Pubkskers, New Brunswick, NJ
Elks, R J (1993) American Political Cultures, Oxford University Press, New York Fiske, A P (1991) Structures of Social Life The Four Elementary Forms of Human
Relations, Free Press, New York
Flentje, H E , and Newton, J P III (1995) Indigent Defense in Kansas A Report on State Policy and Management, Hugo Wall School of Urban and Public Affairs, Wichita State University, Wichita
Fosler, R S , ed (1988) The New Economic Role of American States, Oxford University Press, New York
Fredenckson, H G (1980) New Public Administration, University of Alabama Press, Birmingham
Gormley, W T Jr (1997) Regulatory enforcement accommodation and conflict in four states, Public Administration Review, 57(4) 285-293
Governing the American States A Handbook for New Governors (1978) National Gover- nors' Association, Washington, DC
704 Flentje
Handler, J F (1996) Down from Bureaucracy The Ambiguity of Privatization and Em powerment, Pnnceton University Press, Pnnceton, NJ
Hawkins, K (1984) Environment and Enforcement, Clarendon Press, Oxford
Hunter, S and Waterman, R W (1996) Enforcing the Law The Case of the Clean Water Acts, M E Sharp, Armonk, NY
Kansas (1913) Session Laws of Kansas (chapter 305), State Printer, Topeka Kansas (1917) Session Laws of Kansas (chapter 299), State Printer, Topeka
Kettl, D F (1993) Sharing Power Public Governance and Private Markets, Brookings, Washington, DC
Kincaid, J (1982) Introduction, Political Culture Public Policy, and the American States (J Kincaid, ed), Institute for the Study of Human Issues, Philadelphia, pp 1-23 Kost, J M (1996) New Approaches to Public Management The Case of Michigan,
Brookings, Washington, DC
Krane, D , Rigos, P N , and Hill, M , eds (forthcoming) Home Rule in America A Fifty State Handbook, Congressional Quarterly, Washington, DC
Lynn, L E Jr (1997) Innovation and the public interest Insights from the pnvate sector, Innovation in American Government Challenges, Opportunities, and Dilemmas (A A Altshuler and R D Behn, eds ), Brookings, Washington, DC, pp 83-103 Malecha, G L (1994) A cultural analysis of populism in late-nineteenth century America,
Politics, Policy, and Culture (D J Coyle and R J Elks, eds), Westview Press, Boulder, CO, pp 93-116
Manm, F , ed (1971) Toward a New Public Administration, Chandler, Scranton, PA Marshall, C , Mitchell, D , and Wirt, F (1989) Culture and Education Policy in theAmeri
can States, Palmer, New York
Mead, L M , ed (1997) The New Paternalism, Bookings Institution Press, Washington, DC
Mead, L M (1997) The rise of paternalism, The New Paternalism (L M Mead, ed), Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC, pp 1-38
Miller, D Y (1991) The impact of political culture on patterns of state and local govern- ment expenditures, Publius The Journal of Federalism 21(2) 83-100
Ogletree, C J Jr (1993) Beyond justifications seeking motivations to sustain public defenders, Harvard Law Review 106 1239-1294
Osborne, D (1988) Laboratories of Democracy Harvard Business School Press, Boston Osborne, D , and Gaebler, T (1992) Reinventing Government How the Entrepreneurial
Spirit Is Transforming the Public Sector, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA Osborne, D , and Plastrik, P (1997) Banishing Bureaucracy The Five Strategies for Rein
venting Government, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA
Percy, S L , and Baker, P C (1980) Citizen Coproduction of Public Services An Anno tated Bibliography, Council of Planning Librarians Bibliographies, Chicago Powers, K J , and Thompson, F (1994) Managing coprovision using expectancy theory
to overcome the free-rider problem, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 4(2) 179-196
Roberts, D D (1995) Delivering on democracy high performance government for Vir- ginia, University of Virginia Newsletter 11 1-11
Shover, N , Clelland, D A , and Lynxwiler, J (1986) Enforcement or Negotiation Con structmg a Regulatory Bureaucracy, State University of New York Press, Albany
State Administration in Cultural Context 105
Socolofsky, H E (1990) Kansas Governors, University Press of Kansas, Lawrence Stone, A A (1975) Mental Health and Law A System in Transition, U S Government
Printing Office, Washington, DC
Swedlow, B (1994) Cultural influences on policies concerning mental health, Politics, Policy, and Culture (D J Coyle and R J Elks, eds ), Westview, Boulder, CO, pp 71-89
Thompson, M , Elks, R , and Wildavsky, A (1990) Cultural Theory, Westview Press, Boulder, CO
Thompson, M , and Wildavsky, A (1986) A cultural theory of information bias in organi- zations, Journal of Management Studies 23(3) 273-286
Wildavsky, A (1987) Choosing preferences by constructing institutions a cultural theory of preference formation, American Political Science Review 81(1) 3-21
Wildavsky, A (1990) Introduction Administration without hierarchy^ Bureaucracy with- out authority ?, Public Administration The State of the Discipline (N B Lynn and A Wildavsky, eds ), Chatham House, Chatham, NJ, pp xm-xix
Wildavsky, A (1991) A cultural theory of leadership, Leadership and Politics (B D Jones, ed), University Press of Kansas, Lawrence, pp 87-113
Wildavsky, A (1991) The Rise of Radical Egahtariamsm, American University Press, Washington, DC
Wilson, J Q (1997) Paternalism, democracy, and bureaucracy, The New Paternalism (L M Mead, ed), Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC, pp 330-343 Wirt, F M (1977) School policy culture and state decentralization, The Politics of Educa-
tion (J D Scnbner, ed), National Society for the Study of Education, Chicago, pp 164-187
Wirt, F (1982) Does control follow the dollar9 School policy, state-local linkages, and political culture, Political Culture, Public Policy, and the American States, (J Km- caid, ed), Institute for the Study of Human Issues, Philadelphia, pp 81-100 Wirt, F M (1991) 'Soft' concepts and 'hard' data a research review of Elazar's political
culture, Pubhus The Journal of Federalism 21(2) 1-13