Ethics in Public Administration

1. Administration and Public Administration

2. Administrative Ethics –
2.1 meaning
2.2 need
2.3 importance
3. Determinants of Ethics in administration
3.1 The historical factors
3.2 The socio-cultural factors
3.3 Legal-Judicial factors
3.4 Political factors
3.5 Other factors
4. Status of Values and Ethics in Indian Administration
5. Civil Service Activism – meaning and impact
6. Weberian Bureaucracy
a. Concept of Weberian bureaucracy
b. Criticisms of Weberian bureaucracy
c. Suggestions for Weberian bureaucracy
d. Weberian model and the Indian bureaucracy
7. Problems of Ethics in Public Administration
a. Family values
b. Societal norms
c. Legal systems
d. Judicial factors
e. Organisational systems
f. Political interference
8. Strengthening of Ethical Values in Governance
9. Ethical concerns and Dilemmas in public and private institutions
a. Concept of ethical dilemma
b. Conflict of Interest – meaning and types
c. Conflict of Interest – Actual v/s Perceived
d. Resolving a Conflict of Interest
e. Conflict of Duty
f. Ethical concerns and dilemmas in the government
g. Ethical concerns and dilemmas in private institutions
h. Framework for Ethical Decision Making
10. Laws, Rules, Regulations and Conscience as sources of Ethical Guidance
a. Defining the key terms
b. Difference between Laws, Rules and Regulations
c. Laws, Rules and Regulations as sources of ethical guidance
d. Limitations of Laws
e. Conscience as a source of ethical guidance
f. Limitations of Conscience
11. Accountability
a. Concept and features of Accountability
b. Types of Accountability
c. Tools of Accountability
d. Benefits of Accountability
e. Limitations of Accountability
f. Strengthening Accountability
g. Social Accountability
h. Role of Accountability in promoting Ethical Governance
12. Ethical Issues in International Relations and Funding
a. Theoretical Perspectives to International Ethics
b. Guiding Principles for International Ethics
c. Ethical Issues in International Relations
d. Issues in International Funding
13. Corporate Governance
a. Meaning and utility of Corporate Governance
b. Stakeholders in Corporate Governance
c. Principles of good Corporate Governance
d. Mechanisms for strengthening Corporate Governance in India
e. Key terms associated with Corporate Governance
f. Corporate Social Responsibility – Benefits, Problems and Suggestions
1.Administration and Public Administration
1.1 Administration
The word administeris originated from the Latin word administere, which refers to look after
people, to manage affairs and to take care of the people. Thus Administration involves the group
activity which incorporates cooperation and coordination for the purpose of achieving desired
goals or objectives.
Brooks Adamsdefines Administration as the capacity of coordinating many, and often
conflicting, social energies in a single organism, so adroitly that they shall operate as a unity.
Felix A. Nigro explain that Administration is the organisation and use of men and materials to
accomplish a purpose.
Thus two basic components of administration are
(1) Coordination and cooperation of many as a unity and,
(2) Pursuit of common purpose.
Without collective efforts no one can aim for a common purpose or vice versa.
Therefore Administration has been the key of social relationships since ancient times.
Administration as a process occurs in both public and private organizations. Although the
administration of public and private affairs differs at many points, there is an underlying
similarity, if not identity. As an integral aspect of such generic concept, public administration
could be related to that type of administration, which operates within a specific ecological setting.

In different contexts the term administration can be defined in following ways :

A. Administration as a Discipline:
Study of organization and direction of human and material resources to achieve desired
ends.
B. As a Process:
The sum total of activities undertaken to implement Public Policy or policies to produce
some services or goods.
1.2 Philosphical Basis of Adminstation and Govrernance

Socrates

Socrates defines Justice as prime virtue and all laws and policies should be enacted to promote
justice. Unconditional abiding to laws by all the citizens,is the cardinal principal of public
administration. However a law should be criticized if it is not in accordance with justice. A rule
against the general will is tyranny. And rule of fewer property classes on mass is
Plutocracy.Socrates recommended the rule of knowledge. The source of knowledge is dialectic
or dialogue. This later developed as a concept of deliberative democracy.

Plato

Plato in his book Republic, categorized governments into five types of regimes: aristocracy,
timocracy, oligarchy, democracy, and tyranny.

Plato categories the society into three classes

 Gold classes: man with reason. His reason coupled with wisdom of love makes him an ideal
ruler.

Silver Classes: a man with Courage i.e Soldier and warriors

Bronze Classes: Every body other than Gold class and Silver class. i.e general people i.e.
producers and businessmen

Aristocracy

Aristocracy is a form of government ruled by Gold class or Philosopher King. A man of gold
does not own property. The government should identify the inner strength of every class and
abilities of every individual and educate them to become what the are best suited for.

Timocracy

Timocracy is the form of government ruled by Bronze Classe,the can produce and own
wealth.Thus this is the inferior form than aristocracy as there would be conflict of interest.

Oligarchy

Oligarchy is the rule by the rich. It is the degenerated form of timocracy. When rulers are
allowed to own property and accumulate wealth and wealth takes precedence over virtue of
justice. Oligarchy alter the constitution such that power rest only with the rich, precluding
virtuous poor from, attaining position of power.so there is always resentment in mass against the
unfaithful rulings class.

Democracy

Democracy is the rule of the poor. Since the power is dispersed among all individuals,the people
can do what they intend to. They even break the law. Thus,there is absence of law and order.

Tyranny

Tyranny is the worst form of government. Democracy becomes tyranny when an unjust man
filled with worldly pleasures gain the ruling power.

Aristotle

According to Aristotle, Monarchy is the best form of government. However,there are high
chances of monarchy being degraded into tyranny,the worst form of government. Aristotle
recommended Polity since degeneration of polity would lead to Democracy.
Kautilya

Kautilya’s Arthashastra is one of the best work on administration,highlights the importance of

government.The absence of administration is termed as Matsya Nyay, the strong will swallow
the weak.

1.2 Public Administration

Public administration is the concept of governance which encompasses each and every aspect of
human life.Woodrow Wilson explain Public administration as the detailed and systematic
application of law. Every particular application of law is an act of administration.Public
administration consists of all those operations having for their purpose the fulfilment or
enforcement of public policy.
The terms Publicin Public administration can be looked at formally to mean government. Public
administration is government administration, government in action, or a socio-economic and
politico-administrative confluence, the focus being especially on public bureaucracy. So in
simple word public administration implies services rendered by the government to the public.

2. Administrative Ethics – meaning, need and importance

2.1 Meaning of Administrative Ethics

Ethics differentiate human being from other living beings. Man has intellect. By using intellect,
man can choose his / her actions such as deciding 'right or wrong', 'good or bad'. 'justice or
injustice', 'is or ought' and so on. So ethics or moral philosophy is essential for human beings. In
administrative ethics, a subfield of ethics, moral attribute such as sense of responsibility, sense of
social duty or being devoted to one's social duty are essential for public administrator or civil
servants. So morality is a primary for personal management and the moral characters of civil
servants. Moral characters are of special values for not only administration but also society.
Ethics in Public administration refers to the professional code of morality in civil service. Ethics
in public administration can be refers to a set of rules which regulate the conduct and behavior of
different categories and levels of civil services.This code of conduct consists of traditions,
precedence, and standards which have to be kept up by the civil servants .They constitute the
moral structure of civil services. In the context of the development, role of administration and its
impact on the society, the civil servants are expected to set up high moral standards not only for
themselves but also for the society.
Glen Stahlin his book Public Personnel Administration remarked that the problem of ethical
conduct of public official arises by virtue of the power and influence that he commands and the
commitment that he undertakes of loyal and disinterested service to the public. The ethical
conduct or moral behavior is governed by beliefs or feelings of what is right or wrong regardless
of self interest or immediate consequences of a decision to do or not to do specific things under
particular conditions.
Paul H. Appleby preferred the term morality‟ instead of ethics”. He argues that morality and
administration cannot be separated. He argues morality in administration alone could ensure
better government and morality in administration is sustained by patience, honesty, loyalty,
cheerfulness, courtesy and like traits.
Ethics of public administrator begins with duty. Duty entails not only internalized standards but
also the responsibilities to take actions such as making proposals, investigating problems, to
advance the public good. In this respect, public administrative ethics is mainly grounded on duty.
It means that a person who seeks the positions in the government or nonprofit organizations are
commonly motivated by a sense of duty to serve, sometimes called the public service motivation.
They want to help others, to benefit the society, or to serve the public interest.

Thus the term public ethics or Administrative Ethics is used here to refer to ethical norms and
standards in the administration of government.

Ethics in Politics
Ethics in Legislative Bodies
Ethics in Political Administration
Ethics for Permanent Executives (Bureaucracy)
Ethics for Regulatory Bodies
Thus ‘Ethics’ is integral to public administration. In public administration, ethics focuses on how
the public administrator should question and reflect in order to be able to act responsibly. We
cannot simply bifurcate the two by saying that ethics deals with morals and values, while public
administration is about actions and decisions. Administering accountability and ethics is a
difficult task. The levels of ethics in governance are dependent on the social, economic, political,
cultural, legal-judicial and historical contexts of the country. These specific factors influence
ethics in public administrative systems.

Public service values

In society, public administrators should be honest, simple, independent, and committed to do
their best and they should demonstrate integrity. These are assumed as virtues. And then they
should act fairly and equally and they do any action, observing the law and following the
direction set by the leaders and their organizations. These facts are regarded as principles. After
that public administrators should try to get the greatest good for the greatest people. Here it may
be assumed as a beneficial consequence. But all these components are mainly based on sense of
duty. Thus it may be said that all aspects of administrative ethics is grounded on philosophical
traditions of virtue, principle and consequence. These are integrally related to the conception of
duly. That is why, the concept of duty is central to administrative ethics.
The various values or attributes of administrative ethics are:

a. Service to the public: Public servants are committed to serving the needs and interests of
the public. This involves providing high-quality services that meet the needs of the
people and working to improve the lives of citizens.
b. Integrity: Public servants must be honest, transparent, and accountable in their actions
and decision-making. This means acting with integrity, honesty, and fairness in all
aspects of their work.
c. Impartiality: Public servants must be impartial and objective in their decision-making,
free from personal or political bias. This means treating all citizens equally and
impartially, regardless of their characteristics or beliefs.
d. Professionalism: Public servants must be competent, skilled, and dedicated to their work.
This involves upholding professional standards and being committed to continuous
learning and development.
e. Respect for diversity: Public servants must respect and value the diversity of the
communities they serve. This includes valuing diversity in terms of race, ethnicity,
gender, sexual orientation, religion, and other personal characteristics.
f. Responsibility: Public servants must be responsible and accountable for their actions and
decisions. This means taking ownership of their work and being accountable to the public
for their actions.
g. Transparency: Public servants must be open and transparent in their actions and
decision-making processes. This involves making information about government policies,
programs, and decisions available to the public.

Several ethical principles are important in public service and public administration. These
include:

1. Fairness: Public servants must be fair and impartial in their decision-making, treating all
individuals and groups equally and without bias.
2. Confidentiality: Public servants must protect the confidentiality of sensitive information
and ensure that it is not disclosed without proper authorization.
3. Loyalty: Public servants must be loyal to their organization and the public, and must not
act in a way that undermines the trust and confidence of the public.
 4. Objectivity: Public servants must be objective and unbiased in their decision-making,
and must not be influenced by personal interests or biases.
5. Conflict of interest: Public servants must avoid conflicts of interest and disclose any
potential conflicts to their supervisor or the appropriate authorities.

2.2 Need administrative ethics

Nowadays, global social transformations are happening very quickly in any aspect of society.
The changes of society, economy, and lifestyle are accompanied by social tension and conflict.
The role of moral sections in the regulation of public relations is becoming more and more
important for modern day society. So, the role of legal, political and other regulatory instruments
becomes more important for civil servants and the government.

2.3 Importance of ethics in public administration

1. check the arbitrary activities of civil servants
2. promote the sense of administrative responsibility
3. establish and promote the correct relations between the citizen and the civil service
4. cultivate high standards of conduct among civil servants
5. preserve and mote social welfare, public interest and common good
6. control that part of administrative power and discretion which cannot be controlled by formal laws,
methods and procedures
7. improve the efficiency and effectiveness and administrative process
8. strengthen the legitimacy and credibility of public administration
9. stabilize and harmonize the relation between the civil servants and the political executives
10. foster and maintain high morals among all categories of civil servants.

3. Determinants of Ethics in administration

Ethics as a subject develops over a long period of time and is influenced by a number of factors
during its development and growth. The levels of ethics in governance are dependent on the
historical, social, economic, political, legal-judicial factors of the country.

3.1 The historical factors

The history of a country marks a great influence on the ethical character of the governance
system.The long legacy of unethical practices in governance is likely to enhance the tolerance
level for administrative immorality.The forces of probity and immorality co-exist in all phases of
human history.Precedents and traditions set by the top administrators, ministers and legislators
also play an important role.
3.2 The socio-cultural factors
The administrative class is a product of society itself, and as such, the prevailing values, customs,
and behavior of the society are likely to be mirrored in the actions of administrators. It would be
unrealistic to expect administrators to be unaffected by the societal norms and values. Both the
family and educational systems are influential in shaping individuals' attitudes and beliefs. If
these institutions prioritize honesty and ethics, it can have a highly positive and impactful effect
on the mindset of citizens.

Religion also plays a significant role in shaping work ethics. For instance, Protestantism
emphasizes the value of hard work, leading to increased productivity in Christian societies.
Judaism also places importance on physical labor performed by its followers. In contrast, Hindu
and Islamic societies tend to view manual labor as less prestigious than mental work. These are
subjective matters but are worthy of further study.
3.3 Legal-Judicial factors
A well-crafted legislation that prioritizes fair and honest behavior has the potential to
differentiate between right and wrong in the ethical realm. A proficient and prompt judicial
system can hinder immoral activities in public affairs. On the other hand, a sluggish judiciary
that focuses solely on technicalities rather than the true intent of the law will hinder and prolong
legal proceedings, inadvertently aiding criminals by granting them loopholes and the benefit of
doubt. Similarly, the convoluted procedures of the government's anti-corruption machinery
unintentionally provide relief to the accused, indirectly assisting them through drawn-out and
complicated processes.
3.4 Political factors
The moral compass of citizens is heavily influenced by political leadership, making it a powerful
force. However, in a democracy, not only do rulers have the ability to shape minds, but so do
political parties, interest groups, and the media when it comes to moral perspectives. The
administrative system cannot escape the impact of political morality. The degradation of ethical
values in administration can be traced back to the infiltration of politics and politicization of
bureaucracy.
3.5 Other factors
Apart from the factors mentioned above, there are other elements that significantly impact the
ethical standards in administration.
a. The communication structures within the administrative system
b. The impact of disciplinary measures on civil servants
c. The ethical principles and moral principles prevalent in society
d. The adequacy of working conditions for civil servants, including salary
e. The changing dynamics of internal relationships
f. The effectiveness of training initiatives aimed at fostering a strong sense of
professionalism among administrators.
g. Attitude of general public towards the administrators

In the realm of public administration, ethics plays a vital role. It centers on the idea that public
administrators must consistently evaluate and consider their actions in order to act responsibly.
The effective execution of strategies and dedication to change, coupled with clear
communication channels and the establishment of ethical safeguards, are crucial for ensuring the
proper application of ethical principles.

4. Status of Values and Ethics in Indian Administration

When A.D.Gorwala presented his report on Public Administration in India in 1951, he had
emphasisd that integrity was one of the cardinal philosophical premises of good administration.
It is paradoxical that despite visible decline of moral standards in public life, the mainstream
reports on administrative reforms have not focused on ethical issues. Except for the Santhanam
Committee report on the Prevention of Corruption in India in 1964 and a specific segmented
report on the theme, the Railway Corruption Enquiry Committee by Acharya Kriplani in 1955,
there have been no major efforts at recommending strategies for integrating moral values with
the administrative system at various levels. True, the ARC report on Lok Pal and Lok Ayukta
was published in 1966, but that again was confined to structural changes rather than bringing
about a new ethical order in public systems.
In 2005, second Administrative Reforms recommend that the ethical concerns of public services
are likely to be accorded a respectable place in the emergent inquiry on administrative reforms in
the country. The need is to go beyond the general statements of administrative morality and be
more meticulous in recommending modifications in laws, rules, structures and behavioural
patterns in the specific context of individual departments or organisations. The issues of ethics in
the Police Department, for instance, carries a distinctive character and possible solutions than,
say, in the Education Department. This would further require a rigorous modification in the laws
and procedures pertaining to specific functional areas.
How is the administrative ethics of the twenty-first century likely to be different from that of the
twentieth century? The answer is to be found in the increasing convergence of ethical concerns at
the cross-national level. Globalization of the economic order is likely to pave the way for the
globalization of governance issues. Not that there would be universally uniform configurations
of the governance systems, much less the bureaucratic systems. But with the mitigation of chasm
among nations in the realm of the goals, philosophy and strategies of governance, the ethical
concerns are likely to transcend international boundaries. These will reflect the classical concerns
of public administration like efficiency, responsibility, accountability and integrity along with
the emergent beliefs in equity, justice, openness, compassion, altruism, responsiveness, human
rights and human dignity. Hopefully, this would be instrumental to the blossoming of a new
citizenship committed to the sustenance of administrative morality. Even for nurturing such a
positive citizenship, public administration institution will have to act as facilitators and educators.
That is the biggest challenge as well as an opportunity for the administrative system in the times
to come.

5. Civil Service Activism – meaning and impact

Civil service activism is essential in promoting beneficial reforms in the government and its
operations.Civil service activism encompasses various proactive measures undertaken by civil
employees to promote a people-oriented, transparent, effective, and democratically compatible
government. By organizing public conferences, seeking public opinions, educating citizens about
their rights, ensuring government requirements are met, and remaining vigilant against anti-
constitutional activities, civil servants bring about a major transformation in their offices.
However, the path to civil service activism is not without its challenges. In India, civil servants
face obstacles such as bureaucratic regulations, structural issues, resistance to change, and
political interference. Nevertheless, through their actions, civil service activists have made a
significant impact on society.
5.1 The Challenges of Civil Service Activism in India
a. Regulations of Bureaucracy: The bureaucratic system frequently places more
importance on following rules and regulations rather than meeting the needs of the
population. As a result, many civil servants develop a bureaucratic mindset, resulting in
complicated processes, excessive paperwork, and insufficient solutions for public needs.
To overcome this obstacle, it is necessary to adopt a more citizen-focused approach,
where regulations are viewed as tools to benefit the people rather than bureaucratic
objectives.

b. Structural Issues:
The rise of globalization and economic reforms poses significant obstacles for civil service
activism, as it must adapt to the changing landscape. The traditional functions of the State and
administration are being reshaped, with the incorporation of technological advancements such as
cyber security being a crucial aspect. Additionally, it is imperative to prioritize accountability,
transparency, and inclusive decision-making processes. However, these efforts are hindered by
structural challenges, including restricted job opportunities and corrupt practices in recruitment
within the administration.
c. Indian Bureaucracy Claims Status Quo:
Civil servants, as guardians of the Indian administration, should be receptive to change.
Nonetheless, their reluctance to change frequently obstructs their capacity to adjust to changing
roles, accountability, and duties. The 73rd and 74th constitutional amendments, which were
designed to empower rural and urban local governments, have been hindered by the lack of trust
and eagerness of bureaucrats to implement them effectively.
d. Political Involvement:
Collaboration between civil servants and local political representatives is a frequent occurrence
in addressing regional concerns and serving the general population. However, the involvement of
political figures can potentially hinder administrative duties and result in corrupt practices, unjust
transfers, and overall ineffectiveness. Maintaining a harmonious equilibrium between political
demands and the well-being of the public is an ongoing struggle for those involved in civil
service.

5.2. Impact of Civil Service Activism

Civil service activism challenges the perception that government servants should remain silent
observers of systemic errors, corruption, and inactivity. It acts as a guiding light, pushing for
greater transparency, responsibility, and alignment with the principles of the constitution within
the system. By embracing civil service activism, the moral compass of the administration is
fortified, resulting in a more equitable and comprehensive governance structure.

5.2.1. Important Examples of Civil Service Activism

Vinod Rai: Having served as the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG), Vinod Rai boldly
brought to light the mishandling of the coal block distribution matter, emphasizing the
importance of responsibility and openness in government proceedings. Despite potential
consequences, his steadfast dedication to promoting the values of effective governance acted as a
driving force for transformation.
T. N. Seshan (former Chief Election Commissioner):
T. N. Seshan is widely regarded as an activist civil servant ,leading the charge in combating
election fraud and strengthening the integrity of the Election Commission of India. He diligently
enforced the Model Code of Conduct, resulting in some of the most ethical elections in India and
restoring public faith in the democratic process.
Kiran Bedi
During her time as an Inspector General, Kiran Bedi implemented revolutionary methods to
reform prisons. She established centers for yoga and meditation, integrated vocational education,
and spearheaded transformative measures to facilitate the rehabilitation of prisoners and promote
a more compassionate and effective correctional system.
D. K. Ravi:
D. K. Ravi's unwavering investigation into the nexus between politicians and the mafia exposed
rampant corruption and unethical actions. Despite the ultimate sacrifice of his life, his
unwavering pursuit of the truth sparked widespread discussions and sparked a call for
responsibility.
6.WeberianBureaucracy
The term bureaucracy was coined by French economist Vincent de Gurny in 1745. J.S. Mill,
a renowned political scientist, incorporated bureaucracy into his analytical
studies.According to Marx, bureaucracy, like the state, is a tool used by the ruling class to contro
l other social classes. Hegel believed that the bureaucracy of public administration played a
crucial role in bridging the gap between the ruling government and the citizens.
The above discussion shows that there existed a bureaucracy much earlier to Weberian writings
and also there were attempts to understand the bureaucracy by different writings.

6.1 Concept of Weberian bureaucracy

Max Weber is the first thinker who has systematically studied the bureaucracy. He has provided
a theoretical framework and basis for understanding bureaucracy. Max Weber’s analysis
influenced many modern writers on bureaucracy. Weber never defined bureaucracy. He only
described it as “an administrative body of appointed officials”. He also described its
characteristics. Bureaucracy includes explicitly appointed officials only leaving out the elected
ones. Weber wrote a great deal about the place of the official in a modern society. For him, it has
an increasingly important type of social role. Max Weber's concept of bureaucracy is closely
related to his ideas on legitimacy of authority.
As in the case of authority, Weber categorized bureaucracy in to
I. Patrimonial bureaucracy- found in traditional and charismatic authorities and
II. Legal-rational bureaucracy -found only in the legal type of authority.

The model of legal-rational bureaucracy described by Weber has the following features:
a. Official business is conducted on a continuous, regulated basis,
b. An administrative agency functions in accordance with stipulated rules and is characterized
by three interrelated attributes;
i. the powers and functions of each official is defined in terms of impersonal criteria,
ii. the official is given matching authority to carry out his responsibility and
iii. the means of compulsion at his disposal are strictly limited and the conditions under
which their employment is legitimate are clearly defined.
c. Every official and every office is part of the hierarchy of authority.Higher officials or offices
perform supervision and the lower officers and officials have the right to appeal,
d. Officials do not own the resources necessary for rendering the duties, but they are accountable
for use of official resources. Official business and private affairs, official revenue and private
income are strictly separated,
e. Offices can not be appropriated by the incumbents as private property, and
f. Administration is conducted on the basis of written documents.

6.2 MAX WEBER: ELEMENTS OF BUREAUCRACY

Important elements of Weberian model of bureaucracy.
They are:
a. Impersonal Order
 b. Rules
c. Sphere of Competence
d. Hierarchy
e. Separation of Personal and Public Ends
f. Written Documents
g. Monocratic Type
a. Impersonal Order
Weber emphasized that the official should perform their duties in an impersonal manner. The
subordinates should follow both in the issuance of command and their obedience impersonal
order. According to Merton, “authority, the power of control which derives from an
acknowledged status, inheres in the office, not in the particular person who performs the official
role”. It talks about the de-personalisation of relationship in the organisations.
b. Rules
Rules are the basis for the functioning of the legal-rational authority. Officials are bound by the
rules. The rules regulate the conduct of an office. Their rational application requires specialised
training.
In this regard Merton felt that adherence to rules originally conceived as a means, becomes an
end in itself. Rules become more important than the goals of the organization.
c. Sphere of Competence
It involves a sphere of obligation to perform functions, which have been marked off as a part of a
systematic division of labour. It also implies provision of the incumbent with the necessary
authority to carry out the functions.
d. Hierarchy
According to Weber every office and every official is a part of a hierarchy. Under this system the
lower office functions under the control of higher office. He attaches greater importance to the
principle of hierarchy in the organisation of office.
e. Separation of Personal and Public Ends
Weber pleads for separation of officials from their ownership of the means of administration.
Officials cannot use his office position for personal ends. The office property is separated from
personal property; at the same time the official is accountable for the use of office property.
f. Written Documents
Written documents are the heart of Weberian bureaucracy. All administrative acts, decisions and
rules are recorded in writing. These documents make the administration accountable to the
people and provide a ready reference for future action.
g. Monocratic Type
It means certain functions performed by bureaucracy cannot be performed by any other
organisation. They monopolise certain functions and only the authorised official can perform that
function, makes them monocratic in nature.

For all types of authority, Weber wrote “the fact of the existence and continuing functioning of
an administrative staff is vital. It is indeed, the existence of such activity which is usually meant
by the term organization”. Weber considered pure or monocratic bureaucracy is the most
rational form of administrative staff. He further felt that “it is superior to any other form in
precision, in stability, in the stringency of discipline and in its reliability. It thus, makes possible
a particularly high degree of calculability of results for the heads of organisations and for those
acting in relation to it. It is finally superior both in intensive efficiency and in the scope of its
operations, and is formally capable of applications to all kinds of administrative tasks”.

6.3 MAX WEBER: LIMITS ON BUREAUCRACY

Weber while emphasising on the necessity of bureaucracy was aware of the fact that, the
bureaucracy has inherent tendency of accumulation of power.
The sources of this power could be seen in the special knowledge, which the official poses. In
the course of his duties he acquired a great deal of concrete information much of it artificially
restricted by ideas of confidentiality and secrecy. Nevertheless he was convinced that
bureaucratisation was inevitable and that bureaucrats gained power. Weber resisted any
identification of bureaucracy with rule by officials.
In order to prevent the bureaucracy from acquiring powers Weber suggested certain mechanism
for limiting the scope of systems of authority in general and bureaucracy in particular. These
mechanisms fall in to five major categories.
The categories are:
(a) Collegiality, (b) Separation of powers, (c) Amateur of administration, (d) Direct democracy,
and (e) Representation.
a. Collegiality
In a monocratic bureaucracy, Weber meant that at each stage of the official hierarchy one person
and one person only, had the responsibility for taking a decision. This makes the bureaucracy
more powerful. To prevent this Weber suggested the principle of collegiality involving others in
the decision making process. Weber considered that collegiality would always have an important
role to play in limiting bureaucracy. But it has disadvantages in terms of speed of decision and
attribution of responsibility.
b. Separation of Powers
Separation of powers meant dividing responsibility and functions between two or more bodies.
For any decision to emerge a compromise between them had to be reached. This will avoid
monopoly of decision by a single body or person. Weber regarded such a system as inherently
unstable. One of the authorities was bound to have edge over the other.
c. Amateur Administration
Since there is possibility of professional administration become powerful, Weber suggested the
involvement of amateur administration in certain activities. Such men have sufficient public
esteem to command and general confidence. But this system could not measure up to the
demands for expertise which modern society made, and where the professionals assisted amateur
it is always the professional who dominated the scene.
d. Direct Democracy
To limit the power of bureaucracy Weber suggested direct democracy, where the officials were
guided by and answerable to an assembly. Short term of office, permanent possibility of recall
was designed to serve the purpose of direct democracy. But this system is possible only in small
organisations and in local governments.
e. Representation
Another method of limiting bureaucracy is sharing of authority of bureaucracy with the elected
representatives of the people. With this method it is possible to control the power of the
bureaucracy. But here, there is a possibility of representatives being bureaucratised. However
Weber thought that through this medium there was a greater possibility of check on bureaucracy.
Through all the above means Weber wanted to limit the powers of the bureaucracy.
6.3 Criticisms of Weberian bureaucracy
The criticism however revolves around the Weberian model, its rationality concept,
administrative efficiency, formalism and the relevance of bureaucracy to the changing
circumstances.
a. Structure of organizations
Robert Merton has questioned the rationality of Weber’s model . Merton says that the structure
of the bureaucracy especially its hierarchy and rules can easily result in consequences which are
detrimental to the attainment of objectives of an organisation. Merton emphasises that the
bureaucracy means inefficiency.
Selznick have shown that the structure of formal organisations described by Weber is insufficient
as a description of how bureaucrats behave clearly brought out this limitation of Weber’s
bureaucracy, pointing to the division of functions in an organisation shows how sub-units setup
goals of their own sometimes conflicting with the organisation as a whole.
b. Environmental factors
Influence of environmental factors on the behaviour of the officials, which was neglected by
Weberian model.

c. Internal consistency of Weber’s bureaucracy

Weber expected the administrative staff to be technically superior as well as poses the right to
give orders. Talcott Parsons thinks that, this itself is not always possible to ensure that the
higher-level authority will be matched by equivalent professional skills.
Rudolf questioned the very conception of Weber’s model that administration was a rational
machine and officials were mere technical functionaries.
d. Applicability of Weberian model to different places and times
Critics like Peter Blau questioned applicability of Weberian model to different places and times.
Efficient administration is possible only when an individual is allowed to identify with the
purpose of the organisation and to adopt his behaviour to the changing circumstances. Weber’s
bureaucracy and its assumptions about the human behaviour may not be valid in non-western
environment.
Simon and Barnard have proved that administrative efficiency would be reduced if we follow
Weber’s structural approach. It is possible to increase the efficiency in the organisations through
informal relations than formal practices.
Max Weber’s Bureaucracy: Relevance
In spite of criticism from the several scholars, the ideas of Weber on bureaucracy continue to be
relevant to understand the present administrative system. So far we have not been able to evolve
an alternative model to Weber’s bureaucracy. Weber is right in saying that when we are
accustomed to the bureaucracy we cannot think of any other alternative. It is highly useful for
managing large-scale organisations. His ideas on selection of officials based on qualifications,
utility of written documents in administration, hierarchy etc., can be seen in any administration
of the present day. To overcome some of the problems of the bureaucracy, we can only bring
reforms in it, but cannot replace it with any other organisation. Whether it is capitalist society or
a socialist society, irrespective of the nature of economy, we find the bureaucracy playing a very
important role. The people who talk about the debureaucratisation of the society have not been
able to find a viable alternative to the bureaucracy. Even in the present context of liberalisation
and privatisation, which emphasises on a minimalist state, cannot escape the necessity of
bureaucracy to perform some of the functions of the state.
Suggestions for Weberian bureaucracy
The performance of bureaucracy thus could be improved by introducing performance
measurement, streamlining departmental enquiries, overhauling grievance procedures, linking
performance with incentives, implementing Citizens’ Charters, bettering service delivery,
involving people, implementing a code of conduct, encouraging decentralisation, devolving
functions, and strengthening capacity building. To make the bureaucracy adapt well to the
development tasks, changes are needed both on structural and behavioural fronts. Structurally,
de-emphasis of hierarchy has been suggested to get rid of the conventional organisational
pyramid, the centralised set up and interpersonal conflicts. Behaviourally, as has been pointed
out, the bureaucratic personnel need to be sensitised to the needs of the disadvantaged and
weaker sections, motivated to take up new and innovative steps towards administrative reforms,
and appreciated for their initiative and zeal. There is a need for development bureaucracy, which
is not insular and inward looking in approach. Administrative changes are required to make the
bureaucracy goal-centric, resultsspecific and people-oriented.

6.4 Suggestions for Weberian bureaucracy

The bureaucracy has been the backbone of our system, which is undergoing transformation due
to the enhancement of the role of the people in decision-making and the changing role of the
State. Bureaucrats are confronted with new inputs from contemporary socio-economic and
political scene. It is therefore impossible to adhere to the Weberian rigid, rule-bound, and
hierarchical model of bureaucracy. Instead, the need of the hour is transparent and accountable
bureaucratic system. The resources at the disposal of bureaucracy are new channels of
information, power of decision-making and political support. These need to be directed towards
the achievement of organisational and developmental goals.
The renewed role of bureaucracy must satisfy the dual requirement of ‘capacity’ and ‘control’.
Capacity indicates the ability of an administrative unit to achieve its objective efficiently.
Control refers to accountability due to ‘higher authority’, most particularly to elected
representative in the legislative branch. The Contingency approach, it has been pointed out, seeks
to understand the interrelationships within and among the subsystems as well as between the
organisation and its environment, and to define patterns of relationship of variables.

The performance of bureaucracy thus could be improved by introducing performance

measurement, streamlining departmental enquiries, overhauling grievance procedures, linking
performance with incentives, implementing Citizens’ Charters, bettering service delivery,
involving people, implementing a code of conduct, encouraging decentralisation, devolving
functions, and strengthening capacity building. To make the bureaucracy adapt well to the
development tasks, changes are needed both on structural and behavioural fronts. Structurally,
de-emphasis of hierarchy has been suggested to get rid of the conventional organisational
pyramid, the centralised set up and interpersonal conflicts. Behaviourally, as has been pointed
out, the bureaucratic personnel need to be sensitised to the needs of the disadvantaged and
weaker sections, motivated to take up new and innovative steps towards administrative reforms,
and appreciated for their initiative and zeal. There is a need for development bureaucracy, which
is not insular and inward looking in approach. Administrative changes are required to make the
bureaucracy goal-centric, results specific and people-oriented.
6.5 Weberian model and the Indian bureaucracy

All writings on bureaucracy are either in the form Weber’s analyses of bureaucratic organisation
or a critique of Weber’s bureaucratic ideal type. Against this backdrop, the Indian bureaucracy
also needs to be analysed. The growing impact of liberalisation, privatisation and globalisation,
increased complexity in administrative problems, influx of Information Technology, and socio-
cultural upheavals are bringing in a lot of changes in the complexion of Indian bureaucracy.
6.5.1 Features of bureaucracy in India
Some of the features of bureaucracy in India could be summarised as:
Strong binding character
• Non-partisan advice to political leadership in the midst of political instability and uncertainties
• Administrative and managerial capacity of services
• Effective coordination between institutions of governance
• Leadership at different levels of administration
• Service delivery at the cutting-edge level
• Provision of ‘continuity and change’ in administration
6.5.2 Nature and status of Indian bureaucracy
Despite an elaborate system of Administrative Adjudication, bureaucracy in India has been
criticised for being authoritarian in outlook and a monopoliser of power. The track record of
bureaucratic performance has not been very good in India. Many scholars have pointed out the
maladies afflicting it such as red tapism, corruption, hierarchy, insensitivity and insularity. The
bureaucracy has been rather slow in adapting to the social, economic and technological
transformation in the country.
In India, it has been observed that bureaucracy still seems to be suffering from the hangover of
the colonial era. Coming from a narrow social base, bureaucracy is unable to appreciate the
problems of development, especially at the rural level. It has generally taken shelter under
conservative neutrality.
The bureaucracy in India suffers from certain strange paradoxes. It is a combination of rigid
adherence to procedure and a low resistance to varied pressures, pulls and intervention. The
Indian bureaucracy is characterised by increased self-importance, indifference and an obsession
with the binding and inflexible authority of departmental decisions, precedents, or arrangements.
The bureaucracy is often described to be ‘bloated’ and their size is believed to be disproportional
to their contribution. It is felt that bureaucrats are a law unto themselves. They hide behind their
papers and maintain secrecy on various public dealings. Due to which their misdeeds are never
found and if exposed they take shelter behind the committees and commissions.
The specific maladies of the Indian bureaucracy include politicisation and communalisation of
the civil services, dereliction of duty, wastefulness, lack of motivation for productivity. The
functioning of bureaucracy has been replete with the failure to eliminate the colonial legacy, the
failure to ensure efficiency and effectiveness, and the failure to invoke people’s participation and,
at the top of it, the failure to eliminate corruption.
To rectify the situation, there have been many attempts at reforming the system. A.D. Gorwala in
his Report in 1951 pointed out that clean, efficient and impartial administration was the first
condition to the success of democratic planning. He suggested reorganisation of the
administrative machinery to ensure greater speed, effectiveness and responsiveness.
The Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC) in 1966 also made recommendations on
specific aspects of administration.
The ARC has laid down the following norms:
a. The obligation of every bureaucrat or public servant to implement faithfully all policies
and decisions of the ministers even if these be contrary to the
advice tendered by him
b. The freedom of public servants to express themselves frankly by tendering
advice to their superiors including the ministers;
c. The observance by public servants of principles of neutrality, impartiality and
Anonymity
d. Need for accountability so that greater importance was given to performance than mere
adherence to rules and procedures.
e. To introduce modern techniques of management in the areas of financial planning and
human resource management.
f. Recognised that governance has to extend beyond conventional bureaucracies and has to
involve citizens at all levels to empower and inform the public and disadvantaged groups
so as to ensure service delivery and programme execution through autonomous elected
local bodies(1997)
The reform process in Indian bureaucracy has also been precipitated by the Liberalisation,
privatisation and globalisation scenario. The recent emphasis on New Public Management, e-
governance, Good Governance, New Public Service has led to a shift in the thinking process on
bureaucracy. Thus, the point to ponder over is the ‘foci’ of this commitment. Where should it lie?
To the ruling party or to their own political ideology or national goals? Commitment has to be
identified with the public interest rather than the minister. The drive towards achievement of
various socio-economic goals requires a strong commitment from the bureaucrat. The doctrine of
commitment aims at diverting the bureaucrats from their leanings towards the politicians and
guiding them towards the welfare of people.
Globalisation have brought about a major change in the role of the State, which has become a
facilitator, enabler, coordinator besides being the provider of the structures and processes
responsible for production of goods and services. In fact, the State with its changing role has
become functionally loaded. This overload of State has resulted in an evergrowing, self-
aggrandising, and self-seeking bureaucracy. But, the bureaucrat who has enjoyed security and
anonymity at the cost of transparency, responsiveness and accountability uptil now is in for a
face-lift.
International studies on the functioning of bureaucracies point out the following problems:
a. A, Endemic overstaffing and ill-equipped service, accompanied by unsustainable
staffing expenditure;
b. Lack of performance culture and inappropriate performance appraisal.
c. Systemic inconsistence in promotion and empanelment.
d. Lack of adequate transparency and accountability procedures.
e. Political interference resulting in arbitrary and whimsical transfers.
f. A gradual erosion in public service values, ethics and morale.

7. Problems of Ethics in Public Administration

7.1. Family values
The family system and the educational system are influential instruments of socialisation and
training of the mind in its impressionable years. If the values inculcated through the family and
the school have underscored honesty and ethics, the impact on the mind-set of citizens is likely
to be highly positive and powerful. An administrative class – comprising civil servants at higher,
middle as well as lower levels – emerges from the society itself. Naturally, therefore, the mores,
values and behavioural patterns prevalent in the society are likely to be reflected in the conduct
of administrators. To expect that the administrators will be insulated from the orientations and
norms evidenced the in society would be grossly unrealistic.
7.2. Societal norms
Values that permeate the social order in a society determine the nature of governance system.
The Indian society today seems to prefer wealth to any other value. And in the process of
generating wealth, the means-ends debate has been sidelined. Unfortunately, ends have gained
supremacy and the means do not command an equal respect. A quest for wealth in itself is not
bad. In fact, it is a mark of civilisational progress. What is important is the means employed
while being engaged in this quest. Mahatma Gandhi very much wanted to transform the priority-
order of the Indian society. The issues of morality may or may not be rooted in the religious
ethos of a society. Indian religious scriptures do not favour pursuit of wealth through foul means.
Interestingly, Thiru Valluvar’s Kural, emphasises that earning wealth brings fame, respect and
an opportunity to help and serve others, but it should be earned through right means only. The
cultural system of a country, including its religious orientation, appears to have played a
significant role in influencing the work ethics of its people. For instance, the stress on hard work,
so characteristic of the Protestant ethics, has helped several Christian societies to enhance their
per capita productivity. While Judaism has valued performance of physical labour by its
followers, the Hindu and Islamic societies, on the other hand, have generally considered physical
labour to be of lower rank than the mental work.
7.3 Legal systems
The legal system of a country determines considerably the efficacy of the ethical concerns in
governance system. A neatly formulated law, with a clear stress on the norms of fair conduct and
honesty, is likely to distinguish chaff from grain in the ethical universe. Conversely, nebulous
laws, with confusing definition of corruption and its explanations, will only promote corruption
for it would not be able to instill the fear of God or fear of law among those violating the laws of
the land and mores of the society. Likewise, the anti-corruption machinery of the government,
with its tangled web of complex procedures, unintendedly grants relief to the accused who are
indirectly assisted by dilatory and knotty procedures. In India, there is hardly any effective
anticorruption institution.
7.4 Judicial factors
An efficient and effective judiciary with fast-track justice system will prove a roadblock to
immorality in public affairs. Conversely, a slow-moving judiciary, with a concern for letter
rather than the spirit of the law, will dither and delay and even help the perpetrators of crimes by
giving them leeway through prolonged trials and benefits of doubt.

7.5 Organisational systems

a. Corruption: Abusing authority or a position for one’s gain is considered one of the
biggest issues with public service ethics. Bribery, theft, and nepotism are just a few of the
various ways that corruption manifests. It may erode public confidence in the government,
result in inappropriate resource allocation, and result in unequal distribution of benefits.
b. Conflicts of interest arise when a public servant’s interests or relationships collide with
their obligations and responsibilities as such. For instance, if a public employee
participates in decision-making regarding a corporation that transacts business with the
government and has financial ties to that company, there may be a conflict of interest.
 c. Ethical dilemmas: When confronted with opposing moral principles or allegiances,
public employees may experience ethical conundrums. For instance, a public servant
might struggle with balancing their devotion to their political party or personal convictions
with their obligation to serve the public.
d. Lack of transparency: To avoid responsibility or to further their interests, public
employees may feel compelled to act secretively or withhold information from the general
public. The public’s faith and confidence in the government may be weakened by this lack
of transparency.
e. Lack of accountability: If there aren’t enough checks and balances in place to make sure
that public employees are held accountable for their activities, they may be held less
responsible for them. Power abuses could result from this, compromising the public
service’s integrity.
f. Ethical lapses: Lack of awareness or comprehension of ethical principles and values can
lead to blunders or unethical behavior on the part of public employees. Public harm and
bad decision-making may result from this.

7.6 Political interference

The political leadership, whether in power or outside the power-domain, is perhaps the single
most potent influence on the mores and values of citizens. The rulers do rule the minds, but in a
democracy particularly, all political parties, pressure groups and the media also influence the
orientation and attitudes on moral questions. The behaviour of politicians has a demonstration
effect on civil servants. Besides, the capacity of the less honest political masters to control civil
servants is immense. It is ironical that the moral environment in a country like India is designed
more by its politicians than by any other social group.

8. Strengthening of Ethical Values in Governance

Fostering “sunshine” in public administration is one of the finest methods of ensuring higher
standards of administrative ethics. Openness is the enemy of corruption. Almost all countries of
the world have Freedom of Information or Right to Information Acts. In the U.S., at the federal
level, freedom of information and open hearing provisions are an integral part of the
Administrative Procedure Act. In India, the Freedom of Information Act of 2002 was redesigned
as Right to Information Act, which was enacted in 2005. Besides, a number of state governments
including Goa, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra have enacted legislations that help in
securing accountability of public employees through this device.
Legislation alone is not enough. Its enforcement would require a will on the part of the State,
willingness on the part of administrators and an initiative coupled with courage on the part of
citizens themselves. The State machinery should be ready to punish those civil servants who
obstruct the implementation of Right to Information Act. The age-old orientation to treat every
information, as `secret’ must give way to greater openness and transparency. This would require
a substantial transformation of the mind-sets of administrators in order to reorient the thinking of
administration at all levels, more particularly at the cutting- edge level.
The movement for the Right to Information cannot succeed unless people themselves become
motivated to ask for the fructification of this Right. Even though, it has culminated in the Right
to Information Act, there are miles to go before we can ensure its effective implementation.
People’s groups, such as the one led by Aruna Roy, will have to continue to take initiative on a
massive scale. Even the educational system and the media will need to play a purposive role in
this realm.
In the American system, ‘whistle blowing’ by public employees is considered as legitimate and
statutorily protected. Public employees are expected to use their voice to protest administrative
activities that are illegal or immoral. They can even resort to resignations from their positions to
give vent to their protests. And these acts are considered moral and appropriate.
In the American federal government, there functions a hotline, called `Fraud Net’, for preventing
fraud, waste and abuse. Through this hotline, employees and others can anonymously report
instances of misconduct for investigation to the General Accounting Office. Besides, the
American public employees enjoy Constitutional protection on speaking out on matters of public
concern like dangers to public health or safety.
In Britain, a new appeals procedure for civil servants has come into effect. Under this procedure,
a civil servant could raise concerns, confidentially, with an individual outside his normal
hierarchy. When he believes that the response is not satisfactory or reasonable, he may report the
matter to the Civil Service Commissioner.