Wilson’s Dichotomy
Provide a detailed narrative of Wilson’s Dichotomy as it relates to public administrators and argue for or against its relevance in today’s hyper sensitive political climate.
The politic-administration dichotomy model was developed by the 28th president of the United States president Woodrow Wilson. As outlined in his essay, “the study of administration” Wilson asserts that politics and public administration should exist as two independent elements. Through this politics and administration in a democratic society are different and should be approached differently. Wilson further asserts that the field of administration closely relates to business and involves an evidence-based decision-making framework, not the hurry and strife associated with politics (Tahmasebi & Mousavi, 2011). He further observes that though politics sets the task for administration it should not be used as a means to manipulate the administrative offices. Through all these, administration lies outside the boundaries of politics and political questions cannot be treated as administrative questions since two different sets of skills are required to occupy each.
In his own view Wilson was trying to clarify the question of who shall make laws and what should such laws be in regards to what an astute politician should look like. Similarly, pertaining to administrative duties Wilson tried to address the issue of how should the law be administered effectively to create value to the citizens. Some others studies have also supported Wilson’s proposition and of such Tahmasebi & Mousavi (2011), Asserted that politics is limited to crafting policies and law-making, a function that is always left for the legislative body in the state while administration primarily focuses on implementing of the law, a duty that is left for the executive branch of the state. However, through all these the study finds Wilson’s dichotomy ineffective in the current political arena. In consideration of this, the rest of the study will analyze the ineffectiveness of Wilson’s dichotomy in the political climate witnessed in the contemporary world.
The political climate witnessed in the contemporary world is impacted by several factors. Some of these include major changes in demographic structures like an increase in the literacy level among individual citizens and the politicians vying for different political posts. Some other factors include technological innovations and inventions that have resulted in the introduction of new systems and procedures and the emergence of the concept of value creation in all systems and procedures. All these are quite incompatible with the assertions made by Woodrow Wilson.
The contemporary world’s political climate upholds the principle of justification among stakeholders as an essential aspect of value creation through a well-enhanced mode of service delivery. The democratic regimes that have taken precedence in the contemporary world require every decision made by individual politicians to be justified (Nicholas, 2013). Through this, politicians are always held accountable for their actions hence they must explain their decisions to the public to ensure optimal satisfaction among stakeholders. The justification process of public policy decisions requires politicians to reveal the benefits of such decisions from an administrative point of view.
Similarly, the justification process requires decisions made to be legitimate and considers all the factors within the society and precise to be able to effectively convince the members of the society to subscribe to these ideas. The existing scrutiny that the general public have in regards to the needs of justification among politicians, require the politicians to have administrative skills in which they can utilize in generating a precise and justifiable decision in regards to good policies for the community. On the same note, the individual politicians also have to participate in the implementation process of such policies to ensure they are implemented in accordance with the intended goal and purpose, so as to further justify the legitimacy of such policies. Through this, political and administrative duties cannot be separated in the contemporary world.
On the same note, Wilson’s proposal conceives public administration to assume a scientific-oriented and fact-based approach that renders the concept of value creation as an exogenous element in the policymaking process. Through this, there exists a separation between politics and administration, which results from the separation of facts and values in the policy generation process. However, the nature of operations in the contemporary world facts and values cannot be separated (Iacovino, Barsanti & Cinquini, 2017). The dichotomization of fact-value in policymaking in the contemporary world cannot be attained in the contemporary world considering how they are intertwined in regards to the real situations involved in the policymaking process in the contemporary. Through this, politics and administration cannot be divided. Similarly, through these Wilson’s entire dichotomy suppresses the concept of value which has been an essential concept in which the majority of systems and procedures are built on in the contemporary world.
Additionally, advocacy is also considered as an imperative aspect of policy formulation and implementation in the contemporary world’s political arena. Through this, politicians are expected to advocate for well-enhanced policies that create value for the community in a cost-effective manner. They are also expected to participate in the implementation process as part of their advocacy role in creating value for the community. Through this, the decisionism approach developed by Wilson in his politics-administrative dichotomy is bot effective in the contemporary world’s political arena (Tahmasebi & Mousavi, 2011: Nicholas, 2013). The model only assumes the significance of efficiency maximization and factual data in decision making; hence ignore advocacy, which currently plays a significant role in shaping the effectiveness of political and administrative operations within the community angled towards creating value to all stakeholders. Through this, politics and administrative duties cannot be separated, which further nullifies the effectiveness of Wilson’s model.
Further, there are additional factors that influence the efficiency and effectiveness of the decision-making process in the contemporary world. These factors include administrative loyalties and political commitments. Political commitment involves taking a keen interest in powerful stakeholders like lobby groups and trade unions and designing policies that oblige to their demands. Such can include trade unions pressurizing politicians to discard policies that do not favor them but are viable on a technical basis. Such require an individual politician to be in possession of both administrative and political skills necessary for generating a viable solution (Iacovino, Barsanti & Cinquini, 2017). Similarly, administrative loyalties involve individuals adopting policies that displease other groups but promotes the general good of the society. To perform such actions individual administrators need to have the skill set found among politicians. From all these, it is quite impossible to separate politics from administration in the contemporary world.
Moreover, by assuming that organizations heavily utilize goal maximization through an evidence-based decision-making framework the model assumes the role played by political commitment and administrative loyalty in generating well-structured policies in the contemporary world’s political environment. This further presents the ineffectiveness of this model in the contemporary world. The contemporary world has grown to be a little bit complex as compared to the 19th and 20th centuries in which Wilson’s model thrived.
Through all these, the contemporary world has acknowledged the need for effective co-existence of political and administrative duties to ensure value creation to the stakeholders involved. Out of this individual politicians are required to have some level of administrative skills and administrators are also required to have some political skills (Tahmasebi & Mousavi, 2011). In the majority of political posts, there are different education levels required among individual aspirants. These educational levels are put in place to help individuals perform their duties effectively as expected of them in consideration of different factors. Technological invention and innovation in the contemporary world has also resulted in systems and procedures that can be utilized by merging the duties involved in these two functions making it possible for individuals to hold political positions with administrative duties
Lastly, the political-administrative dichotomy is a one-way dichotomy considering that it requires elected officials not to be involved in administrative duties but expects administrators to be actively involved in policymaking. This biasness in regards to the nature and scope of defining the level of involvement cannot be applicable in the highly sophisticated contemporary world’s public administration arena. Similarly, the issue of cost-effectiveness in the contemporary world requires minimal use of public funds in matters relating to salaries and remuneration (Nicholas, 2013). Through this, politics must just be merged with the administration and the duties discharged by one individual. These render the politico-administrative dichotomy model ineffective in the contemporary world. The several factors that exist in the contemporary world require the merging of political and administrative duties to ensure value creation in a cost-effective manner.
References
Nicholas Henry (2013). Public Administration and Public Affairs. Pearson. ISBN13: 978-0-205-85586-5; or 10: 0-205-85586-5.
Tahmasebi, Reza & Mousavi, Smm. (2011). POLITICS-ADMINISTRATION DICHOTOMY: A CENTURY DEBATE. REVISTA ADMINISTRATIE SI MANAGEMENT PUBLIC. 2011. 130-143.
Iacovino, N. M., Barsanti, S., & Cinquini, L. (2017). Public organizations between old public administration, new public management, and public governance: the case of the Tuscany region. Public Organization Review, 17(1), 61-82.