Question 1
The US bureaucracy has faced a lot of criticism from its citizens, some viewing it as failed system whose mechanisms perpetrate incompetence and corruption in the pretext of serving the US citizens. However, Goodsell in his book, “The New Case for Bureaucracy” comes to the defense of the US bureaucracy, terming it as the most effective and efficient bureaucracies in the world.The central themes of this book revolve about bureaucracy, the citizens’ expectations from the bureaucracy and finally how anti-government ideas have reinforced the image of failed bureaucracy in the United States. I his defense of the US bureaucracy, Goodsell incorporate statistical surveys to justify his points. Goodsell asserts that the bureaucracy especially as large as the United States’ cannot be absolutely perfect (Goodsell, 2014: 25).The government through its bureaucratic structures conducts millions of transactions on a daily basis and perhaps over a trillion transactions in a year. There is no structure or individual who is perfect and considering the population that the US bureaucracy is mandated to serve, few inefficiencies cannot lack, and it is normal. However, the public is quick to judge the few failures or blow them out of proportion without necessarily looking at the numerous good deeds of the bureaucracy. As Goodsell (25) asserts, the best way to evaluate the effectiveness of the US bureaucracy is to survey the level of satisfaction statistically by the public in terms of service delivery.
Another aspect that the book majors on is the pressure mounted by the public to the government to deliver the impossible or the undeliverable. Although with good funding and resource allocation the US bureaucracy manages to deliver on some issues, it is pretty impossible for the government to deliver on some issues even with enough funding and resource allocation. Examples of such cases include elimination of HIV/AIDS or ending trade deficits (Goodsell, 2014: 77). In a nutshell, this book is centered on the theme of bureaucracy and defends the US bureaucracy. Written in a conversational tone, the book provides plausible and rationalized reasons as to why the US bureaucracy is a pillar to good leadership and quality service delivery.
Kettel’s view of public administration is based on the bureaucracy relations of institutionalism that seem to be the reflection of the actions of the public administration.
Kettel focuses on determining varying views of public administration and how public administrators are gauged from a political, accountability and performance aspects. This metric is also within the uncertainties of the economy and ever-changing demographics which the citizenry seem to avoid when gauging the performance of the public administrators (Kettl, 2014: 73). In what can be termed as street-level practicality, Kettel employs case studies that would that explore how the public administrators strain to accommodate the opinions of the common man against the strict budget allocations and the high levels of scrutiny that the public administrators tend to go through. The general perception of the government or what Goodsell (2014) refers to as the conventional wisdom of the government has a negative perception on the operations of the government. Thus the public administrators as the operations entity of the government tends to face unwarranted scrutiny even when their performance is at peak. The lack of informed ideas about how the government functions tends to place a general perception that governments as bureaucracies are inept, incompetent, a waste of public resources, inefficient, and a plain of mediocrity without giving credence to the functions that they play amidst very tough economic uncertainties and limited resources that cater for a wide range of public issues (Goodsell, 2014: 35). In Goodsell’s view, this is informed by the unrealistic view with which the citizenry view the government. For instance, when the view of the functioning of the government is conducted, many of the respondents tend to critique or shatter the functioning of the government. But at the agency level, the views are quite different with most people arguing that the agencies function well or fairly. This contradiction of opinions on the same government can be attributed to the negative stereotypes of the citizenry on roles, functions and capabilities of the government. Such stereotypes include the perception that the government is naturally a monopolistic entity that fails to respond to market forces, has its major focus on maximization of budget and is highly inefficient in the allocation of the resources in an equal manner (Goodsell, 2014: 199).
On the other hand, the perception of the government as an entity that specializes on adherence to rules opposed to performance tends to portray their functions as having less meaning to the society. This opinion tends to contradict with the same need to show accountability for the resources within government, their allocation and usage which the public has so much concern for (Goodsell, 2014: 154). These opinions according to Goodsell (2014) are a reflection of the government as a bureaucratic institution that not only endangers the democracy but also saps the nation’s economy gradually while also acting as an embodiment of the evil actions. As such, the government must come to terms with the market champions who fight it so hard from left. These market champions will critique on matters of sapping the economy while also proving the public-choice theory a false by initiating developments and promoting democracy with the limited resources available and ensuring continued dominance of performance to neutralize the opinions of the critical theorist, the Marxists and the post-modernists.
These views form the platform upon which Goodsell develops the ideas of how the government functions and how well the citizens’ benefit and their standardized view of the government functions from a comparable aspect as opposed to a wholeness analysis of the government. Goodsell holds that a government cannot be compared to a business and thus cannot be gauged from the same perspective which is the common notion for critiques and citizens alike who have no clue as to its functioning. Appealing enough is the use of comparable data and standardized citizens’ view that show that the government apart from benefitting a larger society has more efficiency, output, accuracy, cost benefits analysis and productivity. On the other hand, is the very open discussion about the fact that not all government actions are capable of being subjected to a performance review but citizenry views on the same would offer a more direct and useful assessment of the government’s effectiveness in delivering (Goodsell, 2014: 88).
While there are similarities between the government and the business functionalities, Goodsell gives helpful insight into the differences between the two entities which further strengthens an understanding of the government functions, while the business entities are focused on profit and growth, the government must focus on the multiple statutory duties which in one way or another are always a risk to focus on but again a necessity to the larger public. On the other hand, the government while accomplishing its roles must adhere to the due process; seek public participation as well as involvement while symbolizing a caring, open regime that upholds the nations’ dignity (Goodsell, 2014: 154). According to Goodsell, this is a tall order considering that the public administrators act in a politically inherent environment characterized by competing interest and unclear goals. These competing interests then mean that some desires will still go unfulfilled and may claimants also go unrewarded which could explain the multiple frustrations and irritations against the government. This view provides for a reality that would inherently show the dynamic, but complex nature through which the government has to navigate at least to satisfy the basic demands while showing progress.
These insights are quite an eye-opener to the public and are vivid; not relying on pep-talk but on the ideologies of practice, data and information. However, at times, Goodsell’s views tend to act like a save-face situation for the government functions which without doubt tend to be less active or effective as compared to businesses. In the same way that he would wish the public offers the government its due where it is worth, he fails to show the same aspect when handling the comparisons with businesses while openly admitting that the business have done well in some sectors than government. Clearly, Goodsell does not shy away from this aspect of failure but again leaves to open without explaining to the public why the government should continue offering some services which are better offered in business even at less cost when there are channels that offer partnerships between the government and the businesses. Could this be a way to regulate the market unlawfully or is it a way to curb businesses control of the economy? These questions and many others still remain open to discussion and Goodsell does not venture into answering them.
Question 2
The government usually works with various non-profit organizations to achieve its primary goal that is the delivery of services to its citizens. As such, NGO’s work in collaboration with the government based on their orientation to assist or supplement the production and delivery of services. Collaboration with non-governmental organizations is one of the methods that the government uses to produce and deliver goods and services to its citizens. For instance, the United States government work in collaboration with various NGO’s to deliver agricultural extension services to the farmers. Additionally, the government works in collaboration service based organizations to health and education services to the citizens. However, there are various factors such as politics, patronage and authoritarianism (Kettl, 2014: 27). Political interference is a key factor that hinders the efficient delivery of services by the government collaborations with NGO’s.
Government Partnership with non-governmental organizations is another method that the government uses to produce and deliver services to its citizens. For instance, the government partners with Community-Based Health Insurance (CBHI) schemes to deliver health services to the communities. The collection of funds is managed by local NGO’s that are answerable to public health officials and the community. In addition, some of the NGO’s act as funding agencies whereby this supplements the budgetary allocations in various ministries. As such, the main advantage of government partnerships with NGO’s is that it enhances accountability. For instance, funding agencies in the health industry enhance accountability in funding and performance that leads to better patient’s satisfaction. On the other hand, non-governmental agencies such anti-corruption agencies improve the delivery of services to the citizens because they enhance financial, political and performance accountability (Goodsell, 2014: 102).
However, some of these non-governmental agencies derive their power from public opinions and rely on citizens to identify performance failure and financial malfeasance, and this limits their operations. For example, the anti-corruption agencies monitor illegal pharmaceutical trafficking and corruption in the health industry, and this enhances accountability leading to improvements in the delivery of health services. For instance, some of the NGOs provide relief as well as developmental services to people. Additionally, various agencies NGO’s work as donor agents providing humanitarian services to the citizens. For instance, the agencies provide health and agricultural extension services to people on humanitarian grounds. On the other hand, the government invites agency leaders in the process of policy making and planning of projects (Kettl, 2014: 36). This improves on the policies made because inviting NGO leaders in the policy making process enables them to voice their experiences and concerns. Similarly, the inviting of the leaders improves accountability in performance and financing since the agencies monitor the implementation of the policies and programs.
In its endeavor to provide goods and services to the public, the public administration must be transparent and accountable. Although there are government structures that enhance accountability and transparency of the government departments, the external role of the nongovernmental organizations in promoting accountability and ethics in public administration is very vital. Where decision-making in public administration is supposed to be aimed at increasing utility for the larger majority, sometimes it ceases to be the case due to political influences or need to secure individual interests. Apart from the government uninitiated methods of ensuring accountability, the non-governmental organization are equally involved in watching the decisions made by the government and evaluating their effectiveness. To a large extent, the non-government organizations work with the civil societies and human rights activists to ensure that policies and decisions that are reached by the government departments do not violate human rights or do not satisfy individual needs at the expense of the public. Therefore, the non-governmental organizations have a role in enriching and informing the decision-makers on the policies that are adequate in solving a certain public or societal problem. They thus play a huge role in policy reform.
As depicted by Kettl (51), the government operates as an open system that interacts with the external environment. The non-governmental organizations are essentially a part of the external structure that mount pressure on the government structures to do what is right or beneficial to the larger public. One of the advantages of this approach is that it keeps the government officials on their toes knowing that any non-beneficial or ineffective policy will attract criticism from the external organizations that are not affiliated to the government. On the other hand, the non-governmental organizations ensure that during implantation of government policies human rights are not violated. However, there is one disadvantage that relates to this approach. The public administration is hugely affected by the decisions made by the politicians. Politicians at times may be driven by the desire to influence public administration to meet their selfish ends. The involvement of non-governmental organizations assists in neutralizing political interferences in public administration and shields public administration from the political pressures. This is tied to the fact that too much pressure from the non-governmental organizations compromises the autonomy of the public administration and delays decision-making.
Conclusively, the non-governmental organizations are advocators of social well being of the citizens through their direct and indirect involvement in public administration or provision of goods and services. As many public administration experts have argued, governmental monopoly is very unhealthy to social progress and development. Governments whose public administrative structures are highly monopolistic tend to slow the social, economic and political progress due to lack of oversight that translates to incompetency and corruption. The non-governmental organizations are parallel structures that run alongside the government, creating a healthy competition that ensures that the public administration pulls up its socks in terms of service delivery. For instance, the US public administration is one the largest public administration structures in the world that has managed to remain relevant and effective in its mandate to deliver goods and services to the citizens. The apparent evolvement of the US public administration and bureaucracy has been shaped by the huge involvement of the non-governmental organizations. Non-governmental organizations mount pressure on the government structures to deliver and in that way promoting effective governance and policy implementation.
References
Goodsell, C. T. (2014). The New Case for Bureaucracy. CQ Press.
Kettl, D. F. (2014). Politics of the Administrative Process. Cq Press.
