Module 3

MODULE 3: NATURE/SYSTEMS OF ADMINISTRATION IN DEVELOPED AND
DEYELOPING COUNTRIES
Unit 1: Concept of Bureaucracy
Unit 2: Nature of Administration/Bureaucracy in Developed Countries
Unit 3: Nature of Administration/Bureaucracy in Developing Countries
Unit 4: Systems of Administration in Developed Anglophone and Francophone Countries

@ritain and France)
Unit 5: Systems of Administration in Developing Anglophone and Francophone Countries

(Nigeria and Senegal)
Unit 6: Problems and Prospects of Bureaucracy on Nation Building
UNIT 1: CONCEPTOFBUREAUCRACY
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Mein content
3.1 Max Weber's BureaucracY
3,2 Features of BureaucrecY
3.3 Civil Service
4.0 Conclusion
5,0 Summary
6.0 Tutor-MarkedAssignments
7.0 References/FurtherReading
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Classic Bureaucratic Model Bureaucracy is a specific institutional structure that

has received its initial designation and its characterization from the German
sociologist Max Weber (1864-1920) in the early part of the twentieth century.
Classic bureaucratic theory is linked to Max Weber's name as Scientific
Management is to Frederick Taylor's. Although Max Weber devoted his studies to
areas other than bureaucracy, his brief discussion of bureaucracy-as the form of
administration functioning in a legal-rational system of authority-became the
most widety recognized statement on the subject. Therefore, in this unit , we will
look at the concept of bureaucracy, it features and the concept of civil service.
2.0 OBJECTIVES
At the end of this unit, student should be able to:
(a) Understand the meaoing of Bureaucracy as developed by Weber
(b) Identiff the features ofBureaucracy
(c) Understand the meaning of Civil Service
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 Max Weber's Bureaucracy
Bureaucracy or the administrative system ofa country or its national bureaucracy

refers to agencies, bureaus, units, organizations, departments, miniskies, or
appointed committees of the public sector. In large govemments, these units
employ thousands and, collectively, millions of public employees. They initiate'

influence, interpret, and implement the authoritative policies and laws of the state
and its political subunits. Bureaucracy is regarded as a system because its parts and
units are inter-related in serving the policies and goals ofthe state'
While agencies and similar units constitute subsystems of bureaucracy, each of

these units and organizations by itself may also be considered a system. Viewing
bureaucracy as a large system with many subsystems enables analysts to define

and to measure its input of resources, goals, and public demands as well as its
output of goods, services, and regulatory actions. Studying and analyzing
bureaucracy as a system emphasizes functional and complex relationships among
and between actors, offices, and their environment. Focusing on the national
administrative system in comparative studies places the institution of bureaucracy
at the center of analysis. At the outset, it is important to point out that the national
administrative system is conceived flexibly to incorporate various subsequent
theoretical and practical modifications, extensions, and adaptations to the classic

model of bureaucracy.
At this macro level, one is able to delineate overall administrative characteristics

and their significance to the function of governance. A close examination of the
national bureaucracy also helps to bring out and to define crucial relations with the
political order. Interdependence of the administrative and the political systems
largely shapes the structure and defines the formal functions of bureaucracy. It is
not surprising, therefore, that studies of comparative national bureaucracy and

comparative politics converge or overlap on various aspects. Early comparative
studies were preoccupied with attributes and functions of political institutions in a
handful of Westem countries and a scattering of developing countries (Heady

2001).
Generally, the term bureaucracy is used to denote national administration, as in the
classic conceptions, and subsequent changes and adaptations that followed. A
country's bureaucracy is its national administrative system in its present form and
function. What a bureaucracy does in a particular country, and how it is doing it'
are not assumptions to be made but empirical questions to be answered through
empirical investigation and research.
3.2 Feafures of Bureaucracy
The core elements of the bureaucracy are:
r specialization,
o hierarchyofauthority,
o impersonality,
. system of rules,
. written records, and
o recruitment process based on merit (education, training, and skills).
Weber,s emphasis on generalizable properties of bureaucracy tends to challenge
the claim that westem civilization and systems are distinct, thus superior. By
accentuating the similarities among bureaucratic systems in the West and between
these and other earlier and contemporary cultures, Weber's drive to make his
theory ofbureaucratic universal dictated that he play down the cultural differences
while emphasizing the process, its rationality, and the need for its
institutionalization. The political context, however, is a different issue altogether.

The authority system dictates fundamental properties of the administrative system.
Weber identified three types of authority systerns: In the first, the legal-rational
system of authorify, bureaucracy operates within carefully prescribed rules and
processes. A main feature of this system is that obedience is based on legal and
impersonal order. Offices, rather than persons, are the basis of authority. These
offices are organized in a hierarchy, occupied by staff paid on a scale tied to their
positions in this hierarchy, and according to their levels of competence and expert
knowledge. "The persons who exercise the power of command are typically
superiors who are appointed or elected by legally sanctioned procedures and are
on their own oriented toward the maintenance of the legal order.
3.3 Civil Service
The civil service is a typical bureaucratic organization made up of civil servants

who are recruited on the basis of their skills, qualifications and expertise. The civil
service has traditional values of unquestionable obedience and loyalty to authority,
pennanence and continuity of service, as well as consistency and secrecy of its

role. The civil service according to the 1999 constitution, section 318 sub sections
I is: Service of the Federation (state) in a civil capacity, staff of the office of the
President, (Govemor), the vice President, (Depury Govemor), a Ministry or
Department of the federation (state), assigned with the responsibility for any
business of the govemment of the federation (state), (Federal Republic of Nigeria,
t99e).
The term civil service is normally used when referring to the body of men and
women employed in a civil capacity and non-political career basis by the Federal
and state Governments primarily to render and faithfully give effect to their
decisions and implementation (Ipinlaiye, 2001).
Thesignificant features ofthe civil service are inter alia:
I. Generally civil services are regarded as politically neutral,

2. The basic firnction of the civil service in all modem states is to assist the
political executive to conduct the affairs of the govemment.
3. A general code of discipline and harmony exists in the work place,
4. Permanency ofthe post held by the civil servants,
5. The work of the civil govemment is mostly governed by written procedures and
rules,
6. They are trained for general and specialised tasks set by the government,
7. They enjoy certain privileges compared to the ordinary citizens.
8. They are holders of administrative powers but subservient to their political
masters.
9. There are certain professional ethics which should be followed by the civil
servants.
It is only from these major paradigms that a meaningful comparison can be made.
The variance in the civil service system arises because they evolved from various
historical political settings. For, they are continuously changing and the change
agents are different in different countries. Thus, time is an important factor in
civil services. Adminishate reforms and modern public
analysing the features of
demands further erode the static nature of civil service. Intemally, the
organisational aspects of civil service affect the performance of governments and
the output they produce.
SELF-ASSESSMENT EXERCISE
Define bureaucracy and list five features ofbureaucracy

4.0 CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the "Ideal-Type" Concept Ideal or perfect bureaucracy is never
achieved. Yet, ideal-type theoretical construct serves useful analyical purposes

such as guiding research, specifring relationships, and clariffing basic
characteristics. The critics contend that idealizing a condition defies testing or
verification in a systematic research and, therefore, cannot be elevated to the
standing of a scientific knowledge. This is a major criticism of the classic
bureaucratic model. Concurring with this notion should not mean accepting a
derivative issue that a pure model is to be considered an idiosyncratic or a mere

aberration. Actually, the real world of organization and management often is an
approximation of ideal-type conceptions.
5.0 SUMMARY
The unit attempted a discussion on the concept of bureaucracy, its features and the
meaning and features of the civil service.
6.0 TUTOR.MARKED ASSIGNMENTS
Ql. What is Bureaucracy? Discuss any five features of bureaucracy with relevant
examples
7.0 REFERENCES/T'URTHER READING
Eneanya, A.N. (2010).comparative Public Administration and Public Policy:

Theories and Applicatioies. Lagos: University ofLagos Press Ltd'
Heady, F. (1979).Public Administration: A Comparative Perspective, 2odedition'

New York: Mariel Dekker.
UMT 2: NATURE OF ADMINISTRATION/BT]REAUCRACY IN DEVELOPED
COUNTRIES
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main content
3.1 Nature of administration in Developed countries
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
1.0 INTRODUCTION
we are in a new era. "Today we have to deal with those problems we inherited
from that time: the boom-and-bust economics, the social division, the chronic
under-investment in our public service", British Prime Minister Tony Blair,
marking the tenth anniversary of Margaret Thatcher's departure from office.
Checking Central Powers, Building Institutions Advanced, developed, or industrial
democracies are common designations denoting a gloup of countries that include
canada, Europe, Japan, and the udted States. Among other attributes, each of
these countries has a govemance system that is relatively effective in making and
implementing public poticies. Generally, these countries also have a high

consonance between adopted public policies and society's needs and demands'
citizens actively participate in govemance, usually through constitutionally

established and maintained privileges. Therefore, the unit will look at the nature of
administration in developed societies.
2.0 OBJECTTVES
At the end ofthis unit, student should be able to:
(a) understand and describe the nature of Administration in developed counkies
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 Nature of Admini5fldisa in Developed Countries
In developed societies, the enforcement of public policy is assigned to institutions

that are legally entitled to make decisions and that have the ability to act on them.
For a variety of reasons, developed countries enj oy higher overall standalds of
living than most others. Their citizens generally have higher levels of income,
better health care, higher literacy rate, and equal protection under the law.
Benefitting from the use of sophisticated and regularly refined technologies for
production and for the delivery of services, these countries manage to consistently
increase the outputs of their organizations and to augment their managerial
efficiencies.
what administrative concepts and practices are commonly employed in industrial

countries and how they evolved are subjects of universal relevance, irrespective of
levels of development. To understand how administrative systems of developed
countries have been instrumental in reaching fairly high levels of perfolrnance' one
has to examine, broadly and retrospectively, institutions as well as the prevalent

systems of govemance. Generally, public administration literature passes over the
tasks of creating a sense of tradition and of viewing institutions and societies as

constantly evolving. Although this discussion is not intended to be an exhausttve
analysis of this aspect of industrial systems, it is an attempt to highlight critical
events that left indelible marks on their institutions and processes of govemance.
Contemporary literature extends a measured recognition that the European
practicesof the seventeenth cenfury were the precursors to the emergence of

modern bureaucracies. The seventeenth and eighteenth centuries were a
foundational phase and are excellent sources of information on adminiskative
structures and the influences that shaped them. Early in the seventeenth century,
power drew away from the provinces and localities of Europe and became
concentrated in the central govemment, requiring the active aid and development
of administration and finance (Gladden 1972:141). During this time, Germany led
the west in ..profession alizing" the public service. Government activities and
services expanded, creating a need for appointees with particular knowledge and
skills. Russia had the distinction of being the fust modern state to introduce and
develop a system of entrance examinations for the public service (Gladden 1972:
ls8,163).
Between 1650 and 1850, the West experienced sigrificant political and economic
upheaval that resulted in reexamination and restructuring of its administrative
systems. Historically, the West experienced revolutions against the status quo; but
soon the consequences became far-reaching and universal. The English Revolution
of 1688, the American Revolution of 1776, and the French Revolution of 1789
preceded the industrial revolution, which produced far-reaching consequences by
the early twentieth century. The single and the collective impacts of these historical
events have been profound politicat, economic, and administrative changes,

reaching far beyond any one country (Jreisat 1997: 13). A revolution is the
subversion and the abandonment of the status quo for the promise of a better
alternative. Thus, these British, French, and American political revolutions did
more than usher in dzzzling political altematives. They also laid the foundations of
the "organizational society" as we know it and advanced modem values such as
reason, liberation, and egalitarianism.
By official design as well as a consequence ofnew socioeconomic realities, formal

organizations and professional management became indispensable for the new
states. Organizations, as newly invigorated social structures, and professional
management, which had gained more autonomy in practicing their specialized
craft, both became the trusted enforcers of public decisions. These public decisions
have already become bound to the public will rather than to the ruler's personal
authoritarian commands. Thus, the representation of societal interests rather than

individual wants in public decisions finally was inescapable. The American
Revolution, on the other hand, was managed differently by men of different
outlooks and experiences. As the common wisdom had it, these men sought to
reflect the Anglo-Saxon tradition, particularly the political and economic ideas of
John Locke, David Hume, and Adam Smith. However, contemporary historians
and researchers are finding evidence that ideas borrowed from native peoples and
their influence on European immigrants to America goes much deeper than has
been acknowledged. In all of this, the American experience made the autonomy
and will of the individual paramount no matter what final political and economic
designs were to be forged. By the middle of the nineteenth century, the feudalistic
economic order dissolved and commercialism emerged, followed by the Industrial

Revolution. As commercialism expanded, new urban centers took shape. Power
struggles intensified for seaways, colonization of other peoples and territories, and
domination of world trade. Western imperialistic expansions affected almost every

area of the known world, particularly Asia and Africa. Comparative analysis of this
early period indicates that many important philosophical and practical changes
were in the making. In England, the birth of constitutionalism inhibited the
arbitrary rule of the Crown and instituted the supremacy of the Parliament'
In France, the attack on the excessive central authority set the stage for new
centralized structures, such as those goveming local authorities initiated during the
Napoleonic period. In both France and England, the orientation as well as the
structures of public institutions was dramatically altered. Managing the affairs of
the state in the context of the new political and economic realities required
different levels of skill, commitment, and values.
Therefore, in developed countries:
(l) There is high degree of task specialization. There are a large number of specific
administrative structures each specialized for particular purpose-agricultural,
transport, regulatory, defense, budgetary, personnel, public relations, planning etc.

Moreover, a set of political structure - parties, elections, parliaments, chief
executives and cabinets are designed to formulate the rules and lay down the
targets which the administrative structures then implement. ln Rigg's view this is
highly differentiated political system.

(2) The roles are assigned according to the personal achievements of individuals
rather than according to family status or social class. This system ranks high in
terms of universalism and achievement orientation.
(3) Developed political system consists of formal political structures in which

control is exercised in conformity with a formula or a pattern which is laid down.
The making of political decision becomes the duty of politicians, administrative
decisions of administrators. Political decisions and legal judgements are made
according to secular standards of rationality. Traditional elites (tribal or religious)
have lost any real power to affect major govemmental decisions.
(4) Government activity extends over a wide range of public and personal affairs.
(5) Popular interest and involvement in public affairs is widespread.

A high degree ofpoliticization has taken place, so the population is mobilized for
intensive participation in decision making and executing Processes'
(6) The occupants of political or goverDmental leadership positions are widely
viewed as legitimate holders of those positions, and change of leadership occurs
according to prescribed and orderly procedures.
SELF-ASSESSMENT EXCERCISE
Outline five features of the adminiskation system of developed countries
4.0 CONCLUSION
In conclusion, to understand how administrative systems of developed countries

have been instrumental in reaching fairly high levels of performance, one has to
examine, broadly and retrospectively, institutions as well as the prevalent systems
of govemance. Cenerally, public administration literature passes over the tasks of

creating a sense of tradition and of viewing institutions and societies as constantly
evolving.
5.0 SUMMARY
As stated, the adminisffative system of developed countries is characterized by

high degree oftask specialization , the roles are assigned according to the personal
achievements of individuals rather than according to family status or social class
developed political system consists of formal political structures in which control
is exercised in conformity with a formula or a pattern which is laid down
,goverffnent activity extends over a wide range ofpublic and personal affairs etc.
6.0 TUTOR.MARI(ED ASSIGNMf, NTS
QI. Critically describe the nature of administration in developed countries
7.0 REFERENCES/FURTHER READING
Eneanya, A.N. (2010).Comparative Public Administration and Public Policy:

Theories and Applications. Lagos: University oflagos Press Ltd'
Heady, F. (1979).Public Administration: A Comparative Perspective' 2od edition.

UNIT 3: NATURE OF ADMINISTRATION/BUREAUCRACY IN DEVELOPING
COUNTRIES
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3,0 Main content
3.1 Nature of Administration in Developing countries
4.0 Conclusion
5,0 Summary
1,0 INTRODUCTION
Many developing countries face an ongoing need to build institutions and

organizations with abilities to overcome traditional barriers to effective
implementation of developmental policies. The creation and use of these abilities
have always been primary challenges of development administration. The absence
and breaking down of these abilities have often been major factors in development
administration's failure to meet satisfactory levels of performance. As a result,

development administration has not fared well in some critical areas, such as the
conception of an inspiring, compatible vision and managing effectively to achieve
this vision. tn utilizing modern techniques, development administration, for
example, seems to lag behind the private sector in leveraging technology to
improve internal operations and to enhance the overall effectiveness of
development organizations. Unable to attain a timely correction of its deficiencies
or to leam from its failures, development administration largely remains burdened
by a combination of inherited structures and behaviors and deeply intemalized
local cultural pattems. This combination of legacies has had the effect of impeding
performance and wasting badly needed institutional energies on other than
productive endeavors to accomplish developmental mandates. one finds a high
measure of concurrence in the literature when searching to identify and to define
typical problems and characteristics of these administrative systems'
2.0 OBJECTI\'ES
(a) Understand and describe the nature of Administration in developing countries
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 Nature of Administration in Developing Countries
The general attributes of public administration in developing countries especially

those attributes defined by Fred Riggs (1964: 13-15, 31) as characterizing
transitional systems seeking modernization include:
. Overlap and heterogeneity. The administrative system in a developing country
gives an illusory impression of autonomy, whereas in fact it is deeply enmeshed in
and cross-influenced by refirnant of older traditional social, economic, religious,

and political systems. Thus, to understand public administration in a heterogeneous
social system, one must also study "overlapping" interrelationships.

r Formalism. Forms in developing countries do not always represent reality. Laws
passed by legislators are not enforced by the administration, necessitating more

rules, which remain as formalistic as the previous ones.
. Diffusion. This is an attribute of a low level of differentiation (or no
differentiation) of administrative structures and functions: Everybody is doing
everything. The opposite of diffrrsion-as used by Riggs-is diffraction, where

structures of the system are specific and perform particular functions. Here, the
system becomes differentiated, and the processes are universal and achievement-
oriented. Thus, diffirsion is low differentiation-a characteristic of

underdevelopment.
r Particularism and ascription. Administration in developing countries tends to
apply rules variably according to family connections, wealth, and influence rather
than uniformly according to universal rule.
Based on experiences of many developing countries, these conclusions are widely
acknowledged:
I. Genuine national development is not based on a priori economic assumptions,

but on empirical understanding of local political, administrative, and economic
realities.
2. National development is a collective effort that involves the full capacities of

private and public institutions, in a partnership.
3. Sustainable development is not totally dependent on capital infusion from

extemal sources, nor limited to export-orientation of the economy. Development is
more dependent on self-reliance and on employing processes that address
community needs and demands and employ relevant technologies in creative ways
to cause an overall improvement of productivity.
4. The development process is qualitatively enhanced when public decisions are
transparent and accountability ofpublic officials and institutions is affirmed.
5. Application of scientific and technological methods to achieve growth and
increase production is unavoidable.
6. The process of development faces the continuing challenge of transforming

institutions and cultures to embody efficiency, orderliness, rationality, and
knowledge-based decision processes.
Finally, today's human development concept encompasses producing enabling

environmentfor people to live productive, healthy, and creative lives, and to
develop their full potential. Also, development entails sustainability and
affirmation that people are the real wealth of a nation.
The Implementation Challenge Public managers in developing countries are

particularly challenged by the complex requirements and needs of managing
national development. Conceptually, development management (administration) is

regarded as an outgrowth or a subfield of international and comparative
administration.
A cluster of common administrative pattems typical of administration in

developing countries, according to Heady (2001 : 299-302):
(a) Imitation rather than development of indigenous public administration. This

refers to the conscious effort to imitate some version of modem Westem
bureaucratic adminishation or to introduce it into developing countries'
(b) Bureaucracies deficient in skilled workers necessary for developmental pro-
grams despite high levels of unemployment. Bureaucracies in developing countries
face shortages of trained managers with technical and managerial capabilities.
(c) Bureaucracies that are not production-oriented. Much of bureaucratic activities
619 shanneled toward the realization ofgoals other than pro- gram objectives.
(d) Formalism. A widespread discrepancy between form and reality'
(e) Bureaucracies with generous amounts of operational autonomy. This is the

result of several factors, including lack of transparency and poor institutional
control. A cluster is derived from an examination of administrative systems of
several developing countries, with special reference to the Arab states, confirming
some of the characteristics suggested by Riggs and Heady, though with some
different emphases. A of studies have assessed implementation and

number
outcomes of proposed reforms of administration in the contemporary Arab
societies, and provided appraisals (Ayubi 1989; Jabbra 1989; Palmer, Leila, and
Yassin 1988; Jreisat 1997; 1988). These are some the reported attributes of
bureaucracies:
Overstaffed public organizations whose employees are underpaid and whose

productivity is low. The growth of bureaucracies in most Arab states has been
excessive without commensurate improvements of public services. The magnitude
and the type of groMh in public employment indicate that the bulk of expansion is
at the central offices and not at the local govemment; the growth is also in the
.'conventional" rather than "developmental" jobs. Except for major oil-producing
countries, in most Arab or African states, public employment is an opportunity to

have a job in countries with chronically high unemployment rates, as in Egypt or
Nigeria. The state has always been the largest employer, and its hiring practices
aimed at meeting minimum standards rather than seeking the most qualified
applicant. In most of these states, wages as well as expectations of productivity are
kept perennially low (Jreisat 1999:29-30).
Administrative structures, mirroring the political context, that have not adapted to
the urgent need for inclusive decision-making processes. Public employees have
not experienced involvement and participation that induce them to improve their
performance. Moreover, citizens (at least those directly affected) are not included
in deliberations of policies that shape their lives and affect their futures.
These typical patterns of development administration survive as long as the

political and cultural contexts have not embraced or intemalized fundamental
principles of a civil society, a term that has been used to denote the rule of law,
property right, and human rights. Also, wherever the state is highly centralized and
dominant in the economy through direct ownership or excessive regulations, the
nongovemmental sector has been generally sfymied, its functions limited, and its
competitiveness constrained.
But, during the past few years, most nations have been attempting to correct
traditional shortcomings by adopting more decentralized political and
administrative systems, employing more trained workforce, and paying more
attention to human rights issues as well as to matters of global concem such as
migration, environment, security, and healthcare. Comparative analysis and

continuing internationalization trends in public administration have enforced these
tendencies (Jreisat 2005). universal values are stimulating new needs for
administrative knowledge and skills, thus the distinctiveness of development
administration has been diminishing in the face of increasing internationalization

of management and the growing emphases on universal needs and values for
public administration.
Describe the nature of administration in developing counkies
4.0 CONCLUSION
Overlapping and heterogeneity, formalism, difflrsion, particularisrn, ascription,

imitation rather than indigenous deficiency of skills, nonproduction- oriented
bureaucracy, formalism autonomy, overstaffed public organizations Underpaid
pubtic employees Low productivity Lack of innovative and skilled public
managers, excessively centralized decision making, comrption administration
mirrors of the political context are some of the features of adminishation in
developing societies.
5.0 SUMMARY
5.0 TUTOR-MARKED ASSIGNMENTS
el. Explain the cluster of common administrative pattems typical of administration
in developing countries identified by Heady.
7.0 REFERENCES/FURTHER READING

Theories and Applications. Lagos: University of Lagos Press Ltd.
Heady, F. (1979). Public Administration: A Comparative Perspective,2ndedition.
New York: Mariel Dekker'
Palmer, M., Leila, A. and Yassin, E. (1988).The Egyptian Bureaucracy' Syracuse,

NY: Syracuse University Press and the American University in
Cairo Press'
Palmer, Monte, et al. (1989). Bureaucratic innovation and economic development

in the Middle East: A study of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the
Sudan. ft Bureaucracy and Development in the Arab World, ed"
Jabbra, J. G.PP. 12-27. New York: E. J
Riggs, F. W. (1964). Administration in Developing Countries' Boston, MA:

Houghton Mifflin.
UNIT 4: SYSTEMS OF ADMIMSTRATION IN DEVELOPED ANGLOPHONE AI{D
FRANCOPHOITE COUNTRIES (BRITAIN AIYD FRANCE)
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Msin content
3.1 Nature of Administration in developed Anglophone end Francophone countries
3.1.1 Britain
3,1.2 Frence
4.0 Conclusion
5,0 Summary
r.O INTRODUCTION
of a parliament under a hybrid presidential regime. The

France is the example
French govemment is responsible to parliament. But unlike in the United
Kingdom, parliament power is circumscribed in controlling the executive and to
legislate. This unit features discussion on the system of administration in both
Britain and France
2.0 OBJECTIVES
(a) Understand and describe the nature of Administration in Anglophone and

Francophone countries with reference to Britain and France
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 Nature of Administration in developed Anglophone and Francophone countries:

Britain and France
3.1.1 Britain
While in the USA and France there were successful enough effort to differentiate
the role of administration and govemment as a distinctive one, such distinctions
never occlured in Britain till the beginning of the nineteenth century. The
evolution of state system from the twelfth century to the nineteenth 'century, there
were no clear distinctions between administrative and political role. Recruitment
was largely by patronage to the members of royal families and to the feudals of
landowning classes. Merit based recruitment and rationalJegal modes of
in the UK started only by the nineteenth century. The
personnel administration
modern personnel administrative system in the UK was formed by two major
official investigations of civil service:
Generalist administrators' has been a unique contribution by the British experience

of adminisffation to the world. The Northcote-Trevelyan report recommended for
merit system of recruitment and also firmly affirmed the need for generalist
service. The Futton committee strongly opposed the generalist cadre of British top
civil posts and it wanted to induce more professionalism into the service. Out of
158 recommendations the most striking recommendation was the creation of
career management approach to public services. Thus, a pe(manent civil service
systematic recruitment, and a clear division of authority and uniform rules for civil
servants emerged only in the early part of the nineteenth cenhlry. The American
experience of spoil system never took root in Britain. In the same way, the legacy
of past administrative institutions like that of the prefectoral system of France has
not been an experience of the British personnel system.
However, by the beginning of the nineteenth century the UK, the USA and France
never failed to conduct merit system in the recruiting process. Secondly, the
clearly differentiated the political role from the administrative role. In these three
counffies civil service is largely regulatory in nature. But by the beginning of
twentieth cenhry, it expanded very widely and included many social services
under the control of permanent civil servants. For instance, in the UK new kinds
of services were included with the passage of the Old Age Pension Act of 1908,
the Labour Exchange Act of 1909 and the National Health Insurance Act of
1911.13 It was rightly recommended by Professor Greaves that "the social service
democracy of the twentieth century was bom before the maladministration and
paternalism ofthe eighteenth century had wholly disappeared'
The only major difference is that both France and Britain developed their
personnel system from a centralised administrative framework. On the other side
the USA expanded its civil service from the requirement of a federal polity.
Recruitment
Merit is highly followed in uK and they relied more on non-specialists in the
careercivil service system. It rested on open written examinations set by the civil
service commission in academic subjects. After the successful written
examinations, the candidates' personality is tested by interview methods. For the
past 50 years in the UK, there are three kinds of non-specialist civil servants being
recruited by fixing the following qualifications.
1. Administrative class-recruited primarily from university graduates. Age 2l-28

years.
2. Executive class-recruited at matriculation standard, minimum age 18 years.
3. Clerical class-required qualification is a pass in the first major school

examination (General Certificate of Education). Minimum age is 15 years but
recruits are accepted up to the age of 59.
Training
In Britain, the Civil Service College (CSC) (1970) imparts training in three main
ways:
1. Post-entry training for administrative recruits in economic, financial or social

areas of govemment.
2. Courses in administration and management for specialists.
3. Conducting research into administrative problems.
one unique feature of the British training institute is that is also organises a wide
range of shorter training courses for local govemment staff, industry, and the
lower rungs of the civil service and the British training programmes are latgely a
product of their own tradition and based on the functional requirements of
'generalist' cadre of various departments.
The major weakness of training in Britain is largely due to the lack of in service
haining or indoctrination for specialist groups.
Promotion
At the top of civil service administration in the UK, promotions are made on merit
but at the lower levels promotion tends to take place in accordance with seniority
rules agreed to by the staff union. such automatic promotion at the lower levels
was criticised by Fulton Committee report and suggested introduction of the
system of promotion by merit for the entire system of administration.
In the UK, promotions of civil servants are made partly through centrally
conducted competitions and partly by departments. In this regard, promotion to
most of the highest positions in civil service, for instance, permanent secretaries,
deputy secretaries, are approved by the prime minister who is advised in these
matters by Head of the Home Civil Service.Automatic promotion based on
seniority principle applies to Grade 7 from Grade 4 while a combination of merit

based performance appraisals and seniority applies to Grades 3 and 4 for Grades 1
and 2 on purely political and merit consideration.
Retirement
l. Civil service pensions have been govemed comprehensively by non-statutory

(superannuation act) enabling act. Therefore, it is possible to make any change
pension without further legislation.
2. Ten years minimum service is requirement to receive pension.
3. A civil servant is eligible to receive an annual pension of one-eighth of his

average salary over the last tbree years of service.
4. Temporary civil servants who have served five years or more are eligible to
receive a lump sum quantity.
5. No. contribution is made by a civil servant towards his pension.
6. Widows and children of the pensioner will get pension through contributory
scheme.
7. Superannuation benefits are the same for men and women, except that an
established women civil servant who chooses to resign on marriage after not less
than six years' of reckonable service may be granted a rnarriage gratuity of one
month's pay for each completed year of her established service, subject to a
maximum of 12 months' pay.
3.2.2 France
The French Revolution was driven by hungry citizens who revolted against the
whole sinking political and economic structure of privileges and monopolies
granted by the king. This revolution made it the duty of govemment to provide for
welfare of the people. It transformed the nature of politics and administration by

the dramatic introduction of notions such as citizen, rights, liberty, equality, and
justice (Jreisat 1997: l4).
France claimed to be the oldest form of public personnel system even through
there are historical accounts which subscribe that well-established personnel
system existed in China (353 BC) and Kautilya has accounted the existence of a
well-established administrative system in his most celebrated book The
Arthasastra. But these earlier personnel, institutions and practices of

adminishation has been considered by western scholars for various reasons shall
we refer, it was never westem scholars' academic hegemony or they were ignorant
such historical truths. The earliest known modern personnel system in France was
the institution of prefects. It is an inheritance of the pre-1789 System of

Intendants. Pre-1789 French society was administered by 30 Intendants under the
direct control of the king of France. Each intendant was responsible for the
administration of a single province and there were totally 30 provinces.
In 1800, Napoleon Bonaparte provided successors to the Intendants and replaced
provinces with territorial divisions. Each territorial division was administered by

prefects. During the nineteenth century the prefects took charge of the entire
administration of the territory under their control. They were charge of public
order, the police and the preparation of elections. In the course of Second, Third
and Fourth Republic the prefectoral administrative power had steadily increased
and they were also largely represented as the advisers of the cabinet ministers
from earlier times.l0 tn England during the same period of historical development
it was the parliament which asserted the right to control the crown, while in France
a highly centralised administration was being established which asserted the right
to assist the king and to control him. The French prefects were appointed based on
the patronage, kinship and appointed by feudal lords. Despite various changes in
the prefectoral system of administration since 1800, the basic original features are
still maintained.Today, the prefects and sub-prefects are govemment's appointees

at the local level in charge of local administration. However, the prefectoral career
is now a regular civil service career. It is open to graduates of the EcleNationale

Administration. The other pattem of personnel system was started by the French
king and was reaffirmed by Napoleon. Democratic and rational legal
administrative elements were introduced later by successive regimes, where liberal
or authoritarian.
Recruitment
The Frenchcivil service is organised on the basis of "Corps" -categories of staff

which form the groups into which recruitment occurs. The National School of
Administration CNSA), the EcoleNormale, Superieure, the Ecole Poly technique
(School of mining public works, etc.) and EcoleCentrale des Arts et manufacturers
gives the country the greater part of its upper technical staff and also many of its
managers. Members of the 'grands corps' (which includes the senior level of
general administrators) are recruited from the graduates of special competitive
entry haining schools founded by the state.
Training
The best method of training is imparted to the civil servants only in

France.Training in France, unlike in the UK, the USA and India, starts before
recruitment. Non-technical civil service training by Ecole Nationatrouale'd
Adminiskation provides the best training for the administrators than its
counterparts elsewhere. The total training period is about 3 years and consists of
the following packages:
l. One-year practical leaming about public administration in prefectural provinces.
2. Specialised training by attending lectures and seminars which are necessarily

spent at ENA, Paris.
3. At the end ofthe second year, the studentjoins a department ofhis own option
and remains there on probation for 2 or 3 years.
Promotion
In France, promotion is affected only within the same corps and there is less scope
for promotion unlike the USA, the UK and India where the scope of promotion is
not limited but goes well beyond the compartmentalised administrative hierarchy.
The restricted scope for promotion in France is due to the fact that each category
and corps is classified on a three-fold basis such as gtades, classes and echelons.
Each of these grades differs in their authority and responsibility. Promotion of
echelon is automatic and mainly based on seniority and to some extent annual
A list is prepared every year by ENA and is submitted to an advisory

rating.
committee composed of an equal number of staff representatives and the
representatives of the official side. The committee is empowered to approve the
list for promotion and can also solve any conflict of interests in the promotional
list. There is also an existence of promotion outside the government organisation
to provide bodies which is legally allowed in France. A civil servant can retain his
of corps and is also empowered to get back his post after serving
authority
sometime in the private organisation. But such civil servants may lose their
pension rights. Thatcherison (1979-89) strongly favoured such kind of disguised
promotion and exchange of public and private pensions at the managerial level.
Retirement
In France, the retiring age for a civil servant is fixed at 60 years, 60 in the uK.
There are certain services in the USA for which the retirement age is 70 (Judges of
Federal and State Courts). In India, for Supreme Court Judges it is 65 years and
for High Court Judges it is 62 years. To qualiff for pension benefits different
yardsticks are applied in France:
1 . Pension calculated as a proportion of the last salary received'
2. Those who worked for 30 years will receive half the salary received last.
3. Those who spent 40 years in service will receive two- third of the salary
received at the time of retirement.
4. To qualifu for pension, a minimum of l5 years must have been spent in service'
5. Pension amount increases automatically when there is a pay increase in the civil
servlce.
6. The widow of the pensioner will receive half the pension.
7. Children of the demised pensioner will receive l0 per cent of the pension
amount till they attan 2l years of age.
Briefly compare the adminisffative system of Britain and France
4.0 CONCLUSION
Both Britain and France are Unitary Systems, concentrating, power in the central
govemment. France is more strongly unitary than Britain, because in Britain local
govemment like cities and countries enjoy certain autonomy' A comparative
political study of Britain and France is more feasible, since both of them are
unitary governments. But the basic difference is that the British constitution grew
gradually and peacefully while it is not so with France. While members of civil
service are recruited by the open competition which is generally open to the society
at large as it is practised in the UKthe French system is somewhat different. The

French civil Service has been organised on the basis of 'corps' categories of staff
which form the groups into which recruitment occurs.
5.0 SUMMARY
In summary, we have looked at the system of administration in developed
Anglophone and francophone using Britain and France as case. However, the
recruitment, training, promotion and retirement criteria are used for the purpose of
our discussions.

Ql. compare the administrative system of Britain and France on the basis of the
following criteria: recruitment, training and promotion
?.0 REFERENCES/T'URTHER READING

Theories and Applications. Lagos: University ofLagos Press Ltd.
Heady, F. (1919).Public Administration: A Comparative Perspective. 2nd edition.

Thomsan D. (l952)Democracy in France, London: Oxford'
Rathod, P.B. (2007).Models of comparative Public Administration in Comparative

Public Administration, Jaipur, India: ABD Publishers'
Ridley F and Blondel J., (1969).Public Administration ln France,

London,:Routledge and Kegan Paul 1969, pp. 15-16.
UNIT 5: SYSTEMS OF ADMINISTRATION IN DE\aELOPING ANGLOPHONE AND
FRANCOPHONE COTJNTRIES (NIGERJA AI\D SENEGAL)
CONTENTS
1,0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main content
3.1 Nature of Administratlon ln Developing Anglophone and Francophone: Nigeria and

Senegal
3,1.1 Nigeria
3.1.2 Senegel
4,0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
1.0 INTRODUCTION
While we can assume that the different methods of colonisation and colonial
experiences influenced post- colonial methods of Sovemment, yet, apart from the
fact that Belgian colonization was at least as different from the French as the
English, the colonial masters themselves adopted quite different colonial practices
depending on the territory occupied. For instance Morocco was not colonized in
the same way as Algeria or Kenya, and the list goes on. Thus, risk of over-
differentiation between francophone and anglophone systems some sources point
to the fact that the difference traditionally highlighted between English indirect
colonial rule and French direct (assimilation) colonization has been blown out of
proportion and really does not tie in with actual and, in any case, uniform practice.
The unit discusses the system of administration in Nigeria and Senegal.
2.0 OBJE,CTIVES
(a) Understand and describe the nature of Administration in developing

Anglophone and Francophone countries with reference to Nigeria and senegal
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 Nature of Administration in Developing Anglophone and Francophone: Nigeria and

Senegal
3.1.1 Nigeria
The Civil service/Bureaucracy
Legal basis
The legal basis is provided by the civil service Rules that replaced the General
Order(GO)-bequeathed to the civil service by the British colonialists-and the
Civil ServiceHandbook. Those covered by the Rules include all public offrcials,
including thePresident of the Republic.The civil Service Rules cover, among other
issues: appointments to and separationfrom service, civil servants' discipline,
salaries and increments, annual performanceevaluation reports and certificate of

service, petitions and appeals, leave and haveland reward for outstanding work.
Federal Service Commission

The Federal Civil Service Commission is a constitutional body, established under
Section 153(1) d of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Part
of (D), Paragraph llb of the Third Schedule of the constitution vests the
commissionwith powers to appoint persons to offices in the Federal civil Service;

and to dismissand exercise disciplinary control over persons holding such offlces.
Each of the 15 Commissioners is assigned to oversee a number of States and
Federatministries/extra-ministerial departments. They meet regularly to consider

briefs onrecommendations from ministries/extra-ministerial departments on
appointments,transfer, promotion and disciplinary matters, etc.The Commission

has delegated some of its powers on appointments, promotion anddiscipline of
officers on Salary Grade Levels 0l to 06 and the promotion anddiscipline of
officers on Salary Grade Levels 07 to l3 to ministries/extra-ministerial
departments.
Recruitment
Appointments into the Federal Civil Service are done through recruitment, transfer
and secondment. By recruitment is meant'the filling of vacancies by appointrnent
ofoersons not already in the Civil Service"l3. Transfer means "pennanent release
of an employee. A State Civil Service commission holds the same powers

regarding the state civil Service. The constitution also provides for a Federal
Judicial Service Commission and a Police Service Commission vested with equal
powers under their respective authority. The Commission has reserved the right to
exclusively appoint the entry grades of

Senior Staff on Grade Levels 07 to 10. Appointments to posts graded - Grade
Level 12 to 14 are done directly by the Commission "after due advertisement as

the need arises"l5. Appointments of directorate staff, Grade Levels 15 to 77, are
made by the Commission "in consultation with the Head of the Civil Service of the
Federation" and "in response to advertised vacancies"l6. Appointments into the
FederalCivil Service are determined by three (3) major factors. The first is the
availability of vacancies. Vacancies for posts are to be declared by
ministries/extra-ministerial departments to the Commission through the Office of
Head of Civil Service of the Federation.
The second factor is qualifications. The specific qualifications and skills required
for every post are prescribed in Schemes of Service. The third factor that
determines appointment into the Federal civil Service is Federal character. For the
Federal Civil Service Commission, the major problem is how to confront the
increasing and persistent pressure for employment into the Federal Civil Service.
In 2000 alone, over 100,000 well qualified graduates applied for employment into
the Federal Civil Service. This has serious implications on the logistics of the
commission, and the selection of candidates for appointment into the Service.
Promotion
There are four major criteria that determine and influence promotion in Nigeria
FederalCivil Service. The first is that the offrcer must have spent the required
minimum number of years in his/her grade. For staffon crade Levels 0l - 06, it is
two (2) years; for officers on Grade Levels 07 - 14, it is three (3) years and for
officers on Grade Levels 15 to 17, it is four (4) years. The fourth criterion is that
affect the promotion ofan officer is the availability of vacancies orjobs at a higher
level.
Remuneration
One major problems of the Civil Service is the very poor remuneration package
ofcivil servants. According to the Director of Recruitment and Appointment in the

Federal Civil Service Commission in 2003, the civil servants are the most
disadvantaged and depressed wage earners in Nigeria. Also, through a Govemment
Circular issued on 27 June 2003, under the title "Monetization of Fringe Benefits
in the Federal Public Service", the Federal Govemment of Nigeria formally
introduced its monetization policy into the core Federal Civil Service.
Training
In Nigeria, the Office of the Head of the Federal Civil Service is the body charged
with this vital responsibility for providing central guidance in manpower
development. Secretarial staff is trained at Federal centers to acquire basic
secretarial skills, Technicians and Professionals aspiring to become managers of
resources are given managerial training at, inter alia, the Administrative Staff
College of Nigeria (ASCON), Agricultural and Rural Management (ARMTD,
Centre for Management Development (CMD), etc. Managers and senior
administrators and professionals aspiring to occupy leadership positions are
prepared at higher haining and policy and institutions, especially the National
Institute for Policy and Strategic Studies (MPSS), where a lot of emphasis is put
on shategic policy studies.
3.1.2 Senegal
Senegal issituated between Mauritania and Guinea-Bissau. The country also

borders on Gambia, which is almost an enclave within Senegal, Guinea, Mali, and
the North Atlantic Ocean. Predominantly rural and with limited natural resources,
Senegal earns foreign exchange from fish, phosphates, peanuts, tourism, and
services. Its economy is highly vulnerable to variations in rainfall and changes in
world commodity prices. Of Senegal's estimated 12.5 million people,

approximately 5lohlivein rural areas. French is the offrcial language, but it is used
regularly only by the country's literate minority. All Senegalese speak an
indigenous language; of these Wolof is the one most commonly used. Other
commonly spoken indigenous languages include Pulaar, Jola, and Mandinka'

Ninety-four percent of Senegal's population is Muslim. The remaining 6 percent of
the population adhered to ttre tenets of Christianity (5 percent) or indigenous
beliefs (1 percent). Senegal was once part of the Mali Federation, which integrated
Senegal and the French Soudan into one political entity. This Federation, formed in
January 1959, became fully independent in on 20 June 1960, as a result of France's

signature on a transfer of power agreement. Intemal political difflrculties caused the
Federation to dissolve on 20 August 1960. The French Soudan (renamed the
Republic of Mali) and Senegal declared independence. That same month, Leopold
Senghor was elected to be Senegal's first president.
The Civil Service/Bureaucracy
Legal basis
The senegalese law requires that its civil service sector be impartial, independent,
and fairly managed. While the Senegalese constitution has no national regulations
to prevent nepotism, cronyism and patronage within the civil service, because it
UN convention such restrictions are automatically part of
has ratified the relevant
im legal provisions. (Article 98 of the country's constitution states that legally

ratified conventions have immediate effect over the law.) Under Senegalese law,
civil servants couvicted of com.rption are prohibited from future govemment
employment.
Recruitment
Each sector of the public service has a unit responsible for the management of
public servants. The head of this unit is assisted by two or three chiefs, one of
whom is solely responsible for the management and monitoring of the careers of
public servants: recruitment, assignment, disciplinary sanctions, and so forth'
Public servants are briefed about the ethical standards by which they are bound
during their pre-recruitment induction haining. Prior to their recruitment, public
sewants attend a training course during which they are introduced to the values and
standards conceming their future functions. It is only after satisfactory tests

following such training that the public servant is given a permanent contract.
The Senegalese system is a combination of merit-based and loyalty-

basedrecruitment. Merit is an important factor in this process, but personal,
political andeconomic connections are significant as well.
Promotion
In practice, promotions in the civil service are not based on nepotism, cronyism or
pahonage, but are instead based on an individual's professional criteria. However,
treatment can change based on the civil servant's political loyalties.
Remuneration
Civil servants are not known to receive high wages or salaries in Senegal' They do
receive bonuses, but these bonuses generally constitute no more than l0 percent of
total pay.
Training
Training for public officials is mandatory. Part of this training focuses on public
service ethics.
Briefly describe the system of administration in Nigeria and Senegal
4.0 CONCLUSION
Similar to former British colonies, francophone African states have often inherited
and maintained the administrative and legal systems put in place by their
occupiers. While formally reflecting the French administrative rules and ethics,
these systems have usually failed to evolve to take into account changes and have
not been modernised due to lack of political will and commitment, widespread
comrption and little or no public participation in the administrative and political
process. The administrative practice is often not in line with the written
requirements and is characterised by a lack of public service ethics and a
dominance of traditional behaviours, such as patronage and clientelism, which are
not foreseen in the statutes.
5.0 SUMMARY
In summary, the system of bureaucracy between Nigeria (Anglophone) and

Senegal (Francophone) were highlighted.
Ql. Compare the system of bureaucracy/administration between Nigeria and

Senegal
7.0 Rf, FERENCES/FURTHER READING

Theories and Applications. Lagos: University ofLagos Press Ltd.
Heady, F. (1979).Public Administration: A Comparative Perspective,2od edition.

Ngu, S. M. (2001). Govemment and administration in Asia and the MiddleEast.

Zaria: Shareef Salam Press.
Ng,r, S. M. (2001). Government and administration in Europe and America:, A

comparative and evolutional perspective. Zaia: Shareef
Salam Press.
Public Service Ethics in Africa ; Global Integrity University of Minnesota Human

fughts Library: CEDAW Observations. Senegal
African Civil S ervices Observatory (OFPA) http ://www.ofo a.net/
UNIT 6: PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS OF BIJREAUCRACY ON NATION
BUILDING
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Mrin content
3.1 Roles of Bureaucracy in Nation Building
3,2 Problems of Bureaucracy in Developing countries
3.3 Bureaucracy and privatization policy
3.4 Prospects of Bureaucracy
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
I.O INTRODUCTION
Today's bureaucracy, however, has largely been customized and profoundly

adapted to fit the conditions of its context. Also, within the national bureaucracy
(administration), each organization is distinct in its practices and proficiency.
Much advancement in knowledge of human behavior over the past several decades
has resulted in modifications of Weber's classic formulations. The impact of
change in managerial concepts and practices as a result ofnew approaches such as
Human Relations School, Team Building, and Total Quality Management has been
profoundly manifested. The rationale for the CPA in focusing on Bureaucracy is a
prevalent institution, operating in almost all countries, albeit with different
competencies and accomplishments. It is hard to imagine governance of the state
without the institution of bureaucracy that brings necessary insights and knowledge
not only for delivery of public services, but also for the greater domain of policy
making and policy implementation. Therefore, this unit focuses on the role of
bureaucracy on nation building, problems of bureaucracy in developing countries,
bureaucracy and privatisation and the prospect of brueaucracy on nation building.
2.0 OBJECTIYES
(a) Identiff the roles of Bureaucracy in Nation Building
(b) Highlight the Problems of Bureaucracy in Developing countries
(c) Describe the link between Bureaucracy and privatization policy
(d) Identify the prospects of Bureaucracy especially in developing countries
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3,1 Roles of Bureaucracy in Nation Building
In developing countries, public bureaucracy has become the dominant structure.
countries included among the developing countries include: Nigeria, lndia,

Ghana, Uganda,Tar:v:ania, South Africa, Brazil, Mexico, Pakistan, Senegal etc' In
the absence of other strong institutions in these counkies, the role of
bureaucracy has been of crucial importance. Generally, the major functions of
bureaucracy in these countries are as inter alia:
(l) The most important functions are directed towards nation building and
economic gror+th.The importance of public administration in the emerging

countries of Africa and Asia goes beyond directing the organisational process an
economic and social fields. It has the immense task of creating a national unity
and national personality capable of surmounting the centrifugal force of tribal
and regional rivalries and on the other hand, instilling the ferment of
change in traditional societies. Differences of race, ethnicity, language,
religion, region and tribe often threaten the unity, stability and progress of
many developing countries. Therefore, it is the task of public bureaucracies
to either eliminate or satisfactorily enmesh the sub-cultural differences. This
task may prove to be more difficult than economic development.
(2) Another area in which public bureaucracies in developing countries may

play a critical role is the establishment of democracy. Most of these
countries lack a genuine commitment to democratic values and process despite the
lip service they pay to them. In some countries like India, Israel and Mexico,
democracy ranks with economic development as a major goal. The issue is
important because bureaucracy is inherently undemocratic and a strong
bureaucracy may be a threat to democracy.
(3) In developing counkies, bureaucracies help tomaintain the framework of a
unified polity as well as the capacity to absorb varied demands and to regulate
them effectively. Not only were they important instruments for unification and
centralisation, but they enabled therulers to implement continuous policy' In
addition, they also served as important instruments for mobilization of

resources -taxes, manpower and political support.
(4) In many of these countries, bureaucracy performs the important flmction of
political socialisation. ln many cases, in addition to being administrative arm, it
constitutes itself as an effective executive or part of it. It plays a part in setting
up, determining and implementing political goals, and establishing major policy
directives. In many developing countries, apart from the head of the executive, it
is the only body capable of formulating clear political or administrative objectives.
(5) Bureaucracy is one of the main channels of political struggle in which and
through which different interests are regulated and aggregated.
(6) Bureaucracy in most of these countries is also the Major instrument of

social change. It maintains service orientation to both the rulers and the major
shata of society.
3.2 Problems ofBureaucracy in Developing Countries
Undeniably, powerless public institutions, often controlled by comrpt and

authoritarian leaders, have been at the root of the myriad of economic, political,
administrative, and social problems afflicting a large number of developing
countries. In numerous cases, processes of public policy formulation and

implementation-major vehicles of the govemance processes-have been rendered
almost inoperabte. The catalog of failures and deficiencies of governance in these
situations can be quite lengthy. Political leaders regularly decline the opportunity
to develop reliable methods of succession that evoke citizens' confidence and trust'
They fail to advance sustainable and equitable political and economic policies that
are institutionally rather than personally based. From Latin America, to Asia, and
to Africa, the similarities of issues and problems of govemance are truly
remarkable: issues of leadership succession, poor results of developmental policies,

and lack of enforce- able legal rights of citizens within a civil society. Finally, the
evolving complex global reality requires compliance or participation by all
countries to share in its promised benefits and to minimize any potential negative
consequences. Such involvement is not fruitful without developing competent and
ethical institution of national bureaucracy.
Interestingly enough, it seems that a mixture of caricature approximation, with a
measure of distortion, provided the backdrop for Osbome and Gaebler's (1992)
characterization of bureaucracy to justiff their "reinvention of government." A less
subtle but still depreciating bureaucracy is the claim that the traditional public
administration is superseded by "a new approach to public sector governance, i.e.

contractualism,, (Lane 2000: 3). The common assumption is that bureaucracy,
preoccupied with standardization, setting rules and routine, tends to tum into a
rigid, nonchanging, noncreative edifice impeding effective govemance' Less

recognized, however, are the conditions that induce the occurrence of such
tendencies. Misunderstood also is the fact that lack of rules and standards could
create far more damaging conditions in managing public or private organizations.
The issue, then, is excessiveness in reliance on rules and standards, notion

sociologists refer to as "ritualism" in applying rules that they become the end
rather than the means. In this context the following concepts are germane:
(1) Compliance with rules and regulations is a common phenomenon encountered

in managing organizations of all types. Rules are tools for ensuring accountable
behaviors and preventing chaos.
(2) Excessive compliance often results from an organizational culture that punishes
mistakes by employees, fosters dis- trust among various echelons of positions, and
centralizes decision-making powers in the hands of the few at the top of the
organization.
(3) Over-compliance could follow overall management incompetence that

employees use rules to cover lack of wits and inability to exercise judgment'
Accountability and responsiveness to citizens' needs and demands by public
employees come to the forefront of discussion. But accountability involves various
relationships, types of incentives, degree of control, and behavioral expectations
(Romzek 1997 35). Organization theory faces a real dilemma on this feature' To
improve administrative responsiveness and effectiveness, critics and reformers
seek deregulation and removal of layers of rules, regulations, and constraints. This
means also decentralization and more discretion and flexibility at lower levels of
authority. Problem is the result may be loss of control and even loss of account-
ability.
As Romzek (1997.36) points out, the trends colrespond to a pendulum that swings
between two extremes: one is the direction of control, red tape, and rigidity and the
other is towards gteater discretion and flexibility. Recent calls for eliminating red
tape, streamlining procedures, adopting customer service orientation, engaging
entrepreneurial management, and similar acts of managerialismare another swing
ofthe pendulum in the opposite direction ofthe bureaucratic rigidity. Fearing for
their jobs in societies with high unemployment levels, and dreading unrestrained
political and administrative powers at the top, public employees seek safety
through compliance and by avoiding risk. "Following the rules", usually means
minimizing the chances of making punishable mistakes. Under these conditions,
changing organizational culture, empowering employees, and training and
personnel development usually go a long way to remedy some of these symptoms
and to stimulate creativity and change. Addressing the issue of costly bureaucracy
in the Pentagon, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates pointed out that a simple
request for a dog-handling team in Afghanistan must be reviewed and assessed at
multiple high-level headquarters before it can be deployed to the war zone. The
secretary continued to say, "Can you believe it takes five four-star headquarters to
get a decision on a guy and a dog up to me?" (Jaffe 2010: A03).
3.3 Bureaucracy and Privatization Policy
By redefining Public Administration role toward the Private Sector it role is being
reexamined, and proposals for employing market mechanisms of competition for
achieving higher efficiencies in public organizations have been at the center of
debate. Public policy making in advanced states often seems to face the dilemma
of choosing between efficiency, on the one hand, and govemment's obligations to

realize accountability, equity, and justice, on the other. The market claims
commitment to and competence in the domain of efficiency. The state seeks a
balance of the two, never totally sacriflrcing one at the expense of the other. Larry
Terry pointed out, "the blind application of business management principles and
practices can undermine the integrity of public bureaucracies and so threaten our
democratic wayoflife" (1999:276). Other alternatives have been considered with
some success. The possibility of joint public-private ventures is increasingly
appealing, particularly in Europe. In these ventures, links with the private sector
are kept consistent with the principles and values of public service.
The most notable example is the practice of creating joint public-private
partnerships (PPPs) instead of cloning business practices and substituting them for
public management. The "partnerships between the private and public sectors to
fund and operate infrastructure projects (have been significantly) set to take off in
Europe" (Timmins 1999: 3).
The use of private money and private companies to hnance and operate
infrastructure that used to be entirely publicly funded is a "profound cultural
change" (Timmins 1999: 3). PPPs may become an altemative to a wholesale
privatization, which often seeks to exclude government entirely, except as a
remote regulator. [n a partnership, government is a party to the activity, and
private funding is a factor in expediting the implementation of such ventures. This

is an example of how public administration remains involved and how public
service values are kept as an important factor of goveming. Developed countries
have not ignored the intemal processes of public organizations. In fact, they have
introduced many administrative changes aimed at building overall managerial

capacities.
3.4 Prospects of Bureaucracy
To be sure, developing counries are truly displeased with the rules of the game,
but they are not against globalization itself. To be equal players, not mere subjects
of a new imperialist capitalism, these countries must recognize that good
govemance is no less important than the free markets. Moreover, in preparing
globally competent administrators and organizations, "the ability to manage

diverse, multi-disciplinary and multi-organizational work teams is critical"
(Klingner,2009: l9).
Effective governance and a properly functioning legal system and regulatory

process, supported by an accountable, legitimate political authority are also
important for professional bureaucratic performance in diverse global context.
However, team building, networking, and developing cooperative systems are
increasingly becoming central elements in global administration. This review
chapter is an attempt to convey the complexify and the diversity of views on the
subject of bureaucracy. Many of the assessments of bureaucracy are directed at its
dysfunctions rather than addressing its wide range of features and functions with
detachment. This is not to ignore the dysfunctions and unanticipated consequences
of the model, but to state that they are neither intended nor inevitable.
certainly, applying the bureaucratic model in its value neutral sense would make it
a functional framework for comparative analysis until we are able to devise a more
appropriate research model. tn the meantime, while comparative analysis is

deliberating its own limitations and how to revive its research commitment, the
comparative study of bureaucracy raises additional questions and challenges. The
resolution of most of these issues and concems is possible only through more
empirical research and field observations. Effective application of comparative

methods of research is the most likely venue to resolve many pressing practical
issues and concems as it is the certain path for the advancement of theory and
practice of public administration.
Also, today, one finds plenty of proposed ideas on what is needed to transform the
habits, culture, and performance of contemporary public organizations. Some even
promise to "reinvent" the government and to redefine it. The ideas for change vary
in their range of coverage as well as in their sense of reality. Recommendations for
change of governance offer different recipes:
(1) Limit or substitute public bureaucracy by promoting mission-driven

entrepreneurial leadership, enhancing competition and deregulation, reducing civil
service, privatizing and contracting out as much as possible of public functions,
and relying on the magic of the market to attain the desired end.
(2) Restrict, define, and reduce administrative power and discretion by invigorating
oversight and revitalizing the policy making process.
(3) Reinvent government, focusing on the customer, fostering "total quality

management," decentralizing to local authorities, and privatizing wherever
feasible. Regardless, in adapting the political-administrative exchanges and
linkages, the managerial leaders have not only to change their organizations, but
also they need to learn how to manage their interdependence with elected
politicians and apply political skills in the process of managing performance and
change (Milner and Joyce 2005: l). The various ideas for change are not mutually
exclusive, but they are often contradictory (Carroll 1995; Moe 1994). For
generations, reformers have been attempting to separate certain activities from the
political heat.
Public administration at all levels of governance has been making measureable

progress in improving definition of mission and objectives, empowering
employees, empowering independent regulatory agencies, stressing the values of
public service, emphasizing ethics of public service, improving civil service and
budget processes, fostering human rights in public service, and actively improving
professional education and training for preparing future generations of competent
and ethical managers. "There have always been innovators in the public services,
but the pressure to reform and modemize the public service are predominantly
political" (Milner and Joyce 2005: 1). The role of public administration is
established in enabling statutes and other instruments that provide administration

with the necessary authority for rule making, regulation, and administrative
adjudication. No private sector organization is qualified or capable of substitution

for public management authority or taking over its legitimate duties and
responsibilities in the modern state. Actually, the reality of the modem state
indicates that administrative discretion is essential for defining, interpreting, and
enforcing public policy decisions. The obvious fact is that eliminating
administrative-"bureaucratic"--{iscretion in the modem state is impractical as it
will bring about a paralysis of public institutions and governance itself'
However, the future of bureaucracy lies in the New Public Management (NPM)
which has been touted as a remarkable change sweeping public management in the
industrial systems and around the world (Kettl 2005: 1). Therefore, "Public
administration across the world is supposedly converging around a new paradigm
of public management" (common 1998: 59). The problem is that this new
paradigm ofNPM is hard to define and has become a collection of concepts and
practices that vary according to the user. The NPM has been described as
contradictory, haphazard, lacking precise definition (common 1998: 59), and a
.,shopping list" that countries choose from (Pollitt 1995: 133). In the United States,
the NPM conjures familiar images of "reinvention," applying market economic

practices, fostering competitiveness, privatization, and downsizing of government
programs. Advocates of the NPM in the United states were well represented in the
govemment movement to reform the federal management through the efforts of the
the
National Productivity Review, during the clinton-Gore administration. Across
Atlantic, despite the well-known criticisms, the image of NPM is somewhat
different from that in the United States' \

,NPM has been understood as a trend exemplified by the United Kingdom, New
Zealand, and Australia," wrote Barzelay (2001: 9). Even if no agreement can
be
established on what exactly NPM is, let alone pinpointing where it started, the
general conception is different. European scholars believe that the approach of the
united Kingdom, Aushalia, New Zealand, and some European countries was more
focused on the institutional and the policy side of change, relying on economic and
political science concepts and methods (Lane 2000; Hood 1995; Barzelay 2001;
Pollitt 1996).
Nevertheless, enofinous managerial changes are in progtess in many locations,

involving all aspects of public management, at both the conceptual and at the
operational levels. The call for administrative reform has become universal,
induced by legacies of costly failwes of many govemments that have been
attempting to implement their policies and reach their national objectives.
Administrative reform successes in some countries also have encouraged a much
wider pursuit of change. "The integration of the American govemmental reform
movement into a larger international movement" (Roberts, 1997: 466) is only one
outcome of such efforts.
other significant drives for management improvement have been initiated in

countries such as members of the Organization of Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD), Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom'
among others. Although these cases of administrative reforms constitute a reliable
source of information, they have not yet resulted in definitive generalizations,
which can only evolve through systematic comparative assessments and
evaluations. within a dimly defined domain of the NPM, comparative analysis is
largely underdeveloped, and generalizations, however tentative, remain under-

specified (Jreisat 2001: 540). Nor has the profusion ofscholarly contributions and
country reports, regularly recounting cases of management reforms, produced an
agreement on a reliable and coherent approach for achieving reform (Pollitt and
Bouckaert 2004). At the dawn of the fwenty-first century, public administration

literature is overflowing with examinations and reviews of various attempts to
modemize and to adapt the management of public organizations in changing
political, social, and economic contexts. Even when the NPM is presented as a
major..paradigm shift" (Kettle 1997; Osborne and Plastrik 1997:. 15; Roberts 1997;
Mascarenhas 1993), ushering in a 'hew world order" of management, there is no
consensus on the content, much less on the practice, of this NPM. Economics-
Based 'New Paradigm" Canada is one example of the countries that have
substantially restructured their public services in line with what the OECD has
..new paradigm,' in public management, which has accepted many of
called the
the NPM prescriptions. The restructuring of the Canadian federal and provincial
goverffnents is similar to reforms undertaken by other Western democracies,
particularly the united States (Roberts 1998). The precise purpose is to make
govemment 'kork better and cost less." This 'hew paradigm," the foundation for
the recent canadian reform efforts, has been applied by oECD countries in the
1990s. Basically, the reforms have had three key objectives: (1) cut all
..nonessential,, or ..noncore" public spending, (2) rely less on conventional
govemment bureaucracies for delivering public services, and (3) make public
institutions rely less on tax revenue to finance their operations and more on nontax
revenues such as fees for services (Roberts 1998: 1). Christopher Hood (1995,
1991) and June Pallot (1998, 1996), for example, considerthe dominant features of
the NPM as the removal of private-public distinctions and the imposition of
explicit standards and rules on management practices. According to Pallot (1996:
2), the following are the main characteristics of the NPM:
r Greater segregation of public sector organizations into separate "product"
centers
. A shift toward competition among the separate units offering the services
I The use of management practices (e.g., accrual accounting, organizational
desiga, career structure and remuneration practices) broadly drawn from the
private sector
. An emphasis on efficiency and cost reduction
. The rise of new managerial elite
r More explicit and measurable standards of performance
I Attempts to confol public sector organizational units through preset ouFut

measures.
Therefore, the future of comparative public administration, Ferrel Heady said that
the "comparative perspective will become more prominent, enriching general
public administration by widening the horizon of interest in such a way that
understanding of one's own motivational system of administration will be enhance
by placing it in a cross-culture setting. In the present era of globalisation and
liberalisation, the interaction between the nations of the world has increased. In
this context, the new thrust areas for an analysis of comparative public
administration can include the following:
l) Human rights enforcement.
2) Disinvestment of public sector enterprises.
3) Intemational interdependency of bureaucracies.
4) Study on citizen charter.
5) Role of people in promoting or resisting administrative reforrns.
6) Debureaucratisation.
7) Role of private sector.
8) Role of voluntary agencies/non-govemmental organisations'
l. Outline five roles of bureaucracy in nation building

2. Highlight the problems ofbureaucracy in developing countries
4.0 CONCLUSION
It should be noted that most of the sins attributed to bureaucracy are either
magnified misdeeds or consequences of misapplication. A basic question is
whether bureaucracy indeed exerts a hobbling effect on political development.

Although bureaucracy can accumulate excessive powers, more often than not, it
remains subservient to the political order. Bureaucratic power is the result of
attributes that make bureaucracy imperative in the first place such as expertise and
continuity in office. But, an effective political system has the oversight means to
check bureaucratic deviations, maintain reliability of the processes of
performance,
and continually stimulate administrative improvement to counterbalance any

excess of bureaucratic influence. To bypass some traditional shortcomings of
bureaucracy in developing countries, development administration was prescribed
with features that promise to serve better the objectives of national development.
5.0 SIJMMARY
We have discussed the role of bureaucracy and development administration in

developing countries. The most important functions are directed towards
nationbuilding and economic growth.The importance of public administration in
emerging countries of Africa and Asia goes beyond directing the organisational
process in economic and social fields. However, the future of bureaucracy lies in
the New Public Management (NPM) which has been touted as a remarkable
change sweeping public management in the industrial systems and around the
world and greater segregation of public sector organizations into separate
"product" centers and shift toward competition among the separate units offering
the services.
5.0 TUTOR-MARI(ED ASSIGNMENTS
Ql. Critically discuss the role of bureaucracy in nation building. What are the
prospects of bureaucracy in developing countries?
7.0 REFERENCES/F'URTHER READING
Carroll, J. D. (1995). The rhetoric of reform and political reality in the National
Performance Review.Pnblic Administration Review. 55 (3): 302-
312.

Theories and Applications. Lagos: University oflagos Press Ltd'
Heady, F. (1979).Public Administration: A Comparative Perspective,2ndedition.

Jaffe, Greg (2010). Gates: Cuts in Pentagon bureaucracy needed to help maintain
military force. Washington Post. (Sunday May 9: A03).
Klingner, D. C. (2009).Using US public administration to support global

development tnJournal of Regional Studies and
Development.Yol. 18, (2): 1-29.
Marume, S. B. M. ,Jubenkanda, R. R. and Namusi, C. W. (2016). Comparative
Public Administration in International Journal of Science and
Research (L/,SR/ ISSN (Online): 2319-7064
Milner,8., and P. Joyce.(2005). Lessons in Leadership. London: Routledge
Osborne, D., and Gaebler, T.(1992).Reinventing Government. Reading, MA:

Addison-Wesley.
Romzek, B. S. (1997). Accountability challenges deregulation. In Public

of
Personnel Management, eds. Ban, C. and N. M. Riccucci, 35-54.
White Plains, NY: Longman.
National open University (NoLrI\i ) (20 I 3).MGS 73 3. lS B N: 978-058-640-7

Module 3

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Module 3

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Module 3

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MODULE 3: NATURE/SYSTEMS OF ADMINISTRATION IN DEVELOPED AND

Unit 1: Concept of Bureaucracy

Unit 2: Nature of Administration/Bureaucracy in Developed Countries

Unit 3: Nature of Administration/Bureaucracy in Developing Countries

Unit 4: Systems of Administration in Developed Anglophone and Francophone Countries

Unit 5: Systems of Administration in Developing Anglophone and Francophone Countries

Unit 6: Problems and Prospects of Bureaucracy on Nation Building

3.0 Mein content

3.1 Max Weber's BureaucracY

3,2 Features of BureaucrecY

3.3 Civil Service

Classic Bureaucratic Model Bureaucracy is a specific institutional structure that

At the end of this unit, student should be able to:

(a) Understand the meaoing of Bureaucracy as developed by Weber

(b) Identiff the features ofBureaucracy

(c) Understand the meaning of Civil Service

3.0 MAIN CONTENT

3.1 Max Weber's Bureaucracy

Bureaucracy or the administrative system ofa country or its national bureaucracy

employ thousands and, collectively, millions of public employees. They initiate'

While agencies and similar units constitute subsystems of bureaucracy, each of

bureaucracy as a large system with many subsystems enables analysts to define

theoretical and practical modifications, extensions, and adaptations to the classic

At this macro level, one is able to delineate overall administrative characteristics

not surprising, therefore, that studies of comparative national bureaucracy and

studies were preoccupied with attributes and functions of political institutions in a

handful of Westem countries and a scattering of developing countries (Heady

3.2 Feafures of Bureaucracy

The core elements of the bureaucracy are:

institutionalization. The political context, however, is a different issue altogether.

3.3 Civil Service

The civil service is a typical bureaucratic organization made up of civil servants

pennanence and continuity of service, as well as consistency and secrecy of its

Thesignificant features ofthe civil service are inter alia:

I. Generally civil services are regarded as politically neutral,

political executive to conduct the affairs of the govemment.

3. A general code of discipline and harmony exists in the work place,

4. Permanency ofthe post held by the civil servants,

7. They enjoy certain privileges compared to the ordinary citizens.

8. They are holders of administrative powers but subservient to their political

Define bureaucracy and list five features ofbureaucracy

In conclusion, the "Ideal-Type" Concept Ideal or perfect bureaucracy is never

achieved. Yet, ideal-type theoretical construct serves useful analyical purposes

derivative issue that a pure model is to be considered an idiosyncratic or a mere

6.0 TUTOR.MARKED ASSIGNMENTS

7.0 REFERENCES/T'URTHER READING

Eneanya, A.N. (2010).comparative Public Administration and Public Policy:

Heady, F. (1979).Public Administration: A Comparative Perspective, 2odedition'

3.0 Main content

3.1 Nature of administration in Developed countries

implementing public poticies. Generally, these countries also have a high

citizens actively participate in govemance, usually through constitutionally

At the end ofthis unit, student should be able to:

(a) understand and describe the nature of Administration in developed counkies

3.0 MAIN CONTENT

3.1 Nature of Admini5fldisa in Developed Countries

In developed societies, the enforcement of public policy is assigned to institutions

what administrative concepts and practices are commonly employed in industrial

has to examine, broadly and retrospectively, institutions as well as the prevalent