Introduction

Development and upward growth have been what has been sought after by countries in the

world. The issue with development is that it is a very ambiguous term that means different things

to different national governments of the world. Some people see development as the flourishing

of the economy, others see development as the betterment of the lot of citizens in a country. In

recent years, many countries have undertaken administrative reform as a crucial step towards

strengthening their economy and better management of their social development. The state is still

playing a key role in the change management of nations. The United Nations programme in

public administration and finance has continuously supported developing countries and countries

in economic transition in their efforts to reform their public administration structures. Public

administration involves the development, implementation, and management of policies for the

attainment of set goals and objectives that will be to the benefit of the general public. Since

public administration involves taking decisions that affect the use of public resources, there is

often the question of how to utilize public resources for maximum public good (Gedelenas,

2013).

Development administration is concerned with plans, policies, programmes and projects which

focus on nation building and socio-economic development. It aims at achieving socio-economic

goals through the talents and expertise of administrators or bureaucrats. Unlike the traditionalist

view of strict observance of rules and regulations, it concentrates on the results to be achieved.

Thus, development administration is result oriented. As development is eventually aimed at the

people, all development functions should be people oriented (Ikelebe, 2014). If the development

functions have to be effective and people oriented, there must be emphasis on the participation of

people in formulating plans, implementation and sharing the benefits derived, i.e., citizen
governance should be encouraged. In other words, development administration needs to be

focused on ‘planning with people’ and not ‘planning for people’. Development administration

has two concepts, namely administration of development and administrative development.

Administrative reform is common parlance in public administration and its practice has

dominated government activities cross-nationally since the ancient era (Farazmand, 1999). Kroll

and Pasha (2019) explain that public organisations have to conduct administrative reform in

response to innovation, and stakeholders’ demands for better services. Not surprisingly, the

practice of administrative reform continues to occupy a central position in governmental

activities until modern times. This is because there is increasing demand for better service

delivery from citizens, this has put pressure on administrative systems globally (Azizuddin,

2012). From a conceptual perspective, administrative reform is difficult to conceptualise because

it means different things to different people. Even amongst scholars, the concept has attracted

divergent understanding because different scholars conceived it differently (Caiden, 1991).

Interestingly, the core objective is undisputable globally "removing obstacles and fashion out

better way of doing things". Administrative reform as an activity has remained a centrepiece in

the lives of every nation-state (Liviu, 2015).

Development administration thus emerged out of the realization that governments and their

bureaucracies in less-developed countries needed to be recreated and revitalized as a prerequisite

for transforming those societies. It became both an academic discipline and a prescription for

implementing and administering government programs for economic development (Hope 1984:

64), as scholars, particularly in the United States, and the United States government grappled

with the problem of how to build such bureaucracies.

Concept of Development Administration

According to Schaffer (1969: 184), development administration is a distinctive form of

administration for development programs, policies, and plans in those conditions (traditional,

transitional or newly independent, and less-developed political system) in which there are

unusually extensive needs (which could coincide with urgently expressed demands of political

elites, modernizing ideologies, and exercises in mobilization), precisely where there are

peculiarly few resources and exceptionally severe obstacles to meeting the needs.

The Development Administration is a recent branch of public administration. ‘Development

administration’ is the expression used to indicate the intricacies of agencies, administrative

systems and the processes a government set up in order to achieve its development goals.

Development administration, which is regarded as the public apparatus was established in order

to achieve the social and economic objectives of a nation. Hence it reflects the ‘Four P’s’ —

policies, programmes, projects and purposes. It is portrayed by its purposes, its reliability and its

outlook. The key purpose of Development Administration is to encourage and assist defined

programmes of social and economic progress (Dolgee, 2014).

The broader view of ‘Development Administration’ means that it embraces the variety of

methodologies and points of view that mark the study of public administration in developing

countries. It deals with procedures, programmes, policies and development ventures which

concentrate on nation building and socio-economic development. Its main target is to achieve

socio-economic goals through the aptitudes and knowledge of bureaucrats. According to some

supporters this is the unique form of administration according to which the key duty of the
government in a developing country is to lead, inspire and centrally synchronize the country’s

total development effort (Daniel, 2007). As compared to traditional administration which focuses

on strict rules and procedures as well as adheres to hierarchy system, development administration

focuses on the results. The word was coined in the late 1950s. The term ‘Development

Administration’ was used to signify the intricate organizations, administration systems and

process of government forms to accomplish its developmental goals. It is the public apparatus set

up to transmit the numerous mechanisms of development in order to articulate and achieve

national social and economic goals. Some of the variables which are essential for development

administration are: Reconstruction of society, socio-economic development, institution building

and formation of an assimilated political community (Chandra, 2013).

Katz: (1999), defined ‘Development administration’ is generally similar to the traditional ‘public

administration’ in its concern with how a government implements its rules, policies, and norms.

It differs, however, in its objectives, scope, and complexity. Development administration is

innovative, since it is concerned with the societal changes involved in achieving developmental

objectives.

Concept of Administrative Reform

According to Caiden (1968), “Reform is based on the simple idea that man should not wait for

changes to take place naturally but should seek to speed, by artificial means, improvements in

the world order.”

An administrative reform is a conscious, well-considered change that is carried out in a public

sector organization or system for the purpose of improving its structure, operation or the quality

of its workforce.
Administrative reform is ‘a deliberate attempt to change both the structure and procedure of

public bureaucracy’ (i.e. the reorganisation of the institutional aspects). It also encompasses ‘the

attitude and behaviour of the public administrators involved (i.e. the attitudinal aspects) in order

to promote organisational effectiveness for national development’ (Shafritz et al. 2009:32).

Mosher (1965) opined that administrative reform has four major objectives, namely ‘the need to:

(1) change operating policies and programmes, (2) improve administrative effectiveness. It also

includes (3) ‘improve personnel, particularly their performance, qualification, job satisfaction,

and welfare’, and (4) ‘respond to or anticipate criticism or threats from the environment’

(Mosher 1965:15).

Adamolekun and Kiragu (2005) conceptualised ‘three main features of public sector reforms,

namely recalibration of the role of the state, modernisation of public management to improve

performance, and improving service delivery’. Caiden (1970:24) argued ‘that the intrinsic aim of

administrative revitalisation is the improvement of administration’. He therefore proposed a

process model of administrative reform with four distinct phases, namely (Caiden (1970:24):

(1) awareness of the need for administrative change, (2) formulation of goals and objectives, and

strategy and tactics, (3) implementation of reform, and (4) evaluation of reform in terms of the

reformer’s objectives.

Principles of Administrative Reforms

The principles upon which the Administrative Reform strategy is based on the principles of

“good governance" (Cohen, 2010).

Legality
Legality is of crucial importance for good governance. Public institutions act fully and

exclusively in accordance with the laws, and decisions and rules are adopted in legal procedures

and they are implemented impartially. With regard to the public administration reform, rules

should precisely and clearly stipulate obligations for the authorities, and prescribe rules for

adoption of decisions and mechanisms for their implementation.

Integrity

In accordance with the legal provisions, the public administration must be an honest and

confident partner for the citizens and businesses. Ethics, professional integrity, and honesty of

administrative servants are of paramount importance for achievement of the above stated.

Inclusivity and Impartiality

A mechanism on full inclusion of the citizens should be provided, starting from policy creation

and its realization. The public administration has an equal treatment towards all subjects

(businesses and citizens), i.e., it is completely impartial and objective in adopting decisions.

Openness and Transparency

Decisions must be adopted, approved, and implemented throughout precise and clearly

established rules and procedures. All public information must be made available. Information on

adopted decisions, their implementation, and results must be made available to the public, in a

way that each citizen could have access to them and could contribute to controlling activities

made by authorities.

Professionalism
Professional competences and expertise of those who adopt decisions must be kept at the highest

level, and at the same time, mechanism for continuous improvement of such qualities must be

provided, especially by foreseeing mandatory continuous trainings.

Service Orientation

The activities, procedures, and decisions adopted by the public administration must meet the

expectations and needs of the citizens and businesses. Information on procedures for providing

public services, as well as on public administration activities, must be provided correctly and

timely, and public services must be provided on an adequate manner and within a reasonable

time.

Efficiency, Effectiveness, and Cost Efficiency

The public administration creates policies and strategies, leads procedures, manages projects, and

provides efficient and cost-effective services for optimization of results for the society, citizens,

and businesses.

Vision and Sustainability

The administration must provide middle- and long-term optimization of use of resources and

work efficiency. The needs of future generations are directly linked and dependent from ongoing

policies. Decisions adopted today must be visionary and sustainable and cannot cause financial,

economic, or social problems for future generations.

Accountability
The role and responsibilities for adoption of decisions must be clearly and precisely established

for each institution, collective body, or any other public policy-maker. All decisions must be

adequately and clearly justified.

The Udoji Administrative Review Commission

Administrative Reforms in Nigeria and How It has Assisted Development Administration

Unlike the previous commissions, the Udoji Commission went beyond the review of wages and

salaries. The commission’s terms of reference included ‘examining the organisation, structure

and management of the public services’. Its terms of reference also involved ‘investigating and

evaluating the method of recruitment and conditions of employment and the staff development

programmes of the public services’ (Nigeria 1974:200).

The Udoji Commission was instituted because the government was conscious of the need to

secure adequate development and optimum utilisation of the manpower available in the public

service. The commission was also necessitated by the need to increase the efficiency and

effectiveness of the public services in meeting the challenges of development in the country. The

main report of the Udoji Commission (1974:170) offered many recommendations on how to

restructure the public service to make it more efficient and effective. These recommendations

included the following:

Salary increases to all categories of workers backdated and paid in arrears.

A positive conception of the Nigerian civil service such that civil servants should be positively

oriented in their work and attitude towards the service.

The adoption and use of modern management techniques such as Management by Objectives;

Programme, Performance, Budgeting System; and Project Management.

Introduction of a Unified Grading Salary Structure from levels 01 to 17.

The abolition of dual hierarchies in ministries and replacing them with a unified and integrated

structure.

Emphasise merit as a yardstick for the promotion of officers in the public service.

Open reporting system for the performance appraisal of employees.

Incorporation of a code of ethics in the oath for the public officers for discipline and guidance’.

(Udoji Commission 1974:170).

The commission also interrogated the duties of the Head of Civil Service and Public Service

Commission. The interrogations included staff training, and manpower planning and

development were also addressed by the commission. The unified grading system introduced by

the commission was vehemently opposed by the management of public enterprises (Nigeria

1974:170).

Contributions of the Administrative Reforms to Development Administration in Nigeria

challenges of a development-oriented society.

-Introduced a new conception of management which is results oriented, concentrating attention

and resources on identified priorities for action.

-Introduced open reporting system for performance evaluation;

-Established a unified grading and salary structure covering all post service; and

-Created a unified senior management group for administrative and professional cadres for

central management of career.

-Recommended and officers possessing the requisite skills and knowledge who can apply the

acquired skills and knowledge in establishing goals and achieving targets.

-Underscore the need for every public manager to be trained in projects managements,

management by objectives and programme budgeting.

-Recommended the adoption of project management as a tool for inter-ministerial task execution

for broadening of skills and competencies and ensuring better integration of government

services.

Recommended more delegation of human resource management functions to ministries,

departments and agencies.

-Recommended decentralisation of machinery for staff consultation and negotiation.

-Recommended speedy treatment of disciplinary cases arising in the face of complicated

disciplinary procedures and canvassed for the recognition civil services rules as part of contract

of service.

-Recommended the institution of an ombudsman at federal and state levels for reviewing

administrative decisions which are considered unjust.

It is true that to transform society from its relatively underdeveloped polity, the transformation

must be a planned one in which the government, through its administrative agencies, must be the

principal driver of the development effort (Sharma, Sadana & Kaur 2011). To be an effective

agent of socioeconomic development, the public service must adapt itself (through administrative

reforms) to cope quickly with dynamic changes and new demands that emanate from its

environment. To reduce administrative resistance to change, public servants should be involved

in the conception and implementation of public sector reforms. Moreover, the implementation of

reforms should be taken seriously. Furthermore, future reform programmes in Nigeria should be

sufficiently comprehensive to cover structural, behavioural and motivational aspects.

For reforms of public administration and public sector to be effective and meaningful in the

country, it must be consistent and transparent. It must be in the vanguard of actualising national

government policies. There has to be a political will on the part of the ruling class to carry out

the much needed reforms of the public service.

Adamolekun, L. & Kiragu, K., 2005, ‘Public administration reforms’, in L. Adamolekun (ed.),

Public administration in Africa: Main issues and selected country studies, pp. 159–176,

Spectrum Books, Ibadan.

Azizuddin, M. (2012). Public Administration Reform: A Perspective on Theoretical Challenges,

Society & Change, 6(3), 68-78.

Caiden, G. E. (1979). Administrative reform: A view from the field. Policy Studies Journal, 8(3),

456-462. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.1979.tb01252.x

Caiden, G. E. (1991). Administrative Reform Comes of Ages. W. de Gruyter.

Caiden, G. E. (2014). Administrative reform comes of age. Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG.
Cohen, L. J. (2010). Administrative Development in “Low-Intensity” Democracies: Governance,

Rule-of-Law and Corruption in the Western Balkans. Simons Papers in Security and

Development No. 5/2010. Retrieved from

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/822e/61899773808a5ff6396d23dca3a9af04b1f2.pdf?

_ga=2.147316915.540497678.1576823213-1996313637.1576823213

Farazmand, A. (1999). Administrative reform in global perspectives: A symposium.

International Journal of Public Administration, 22(6), 805-813.

https://doi.org/10.1080/01900699908525405

International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2015, World economic outlook database, April, IMF, New

York, NY.

Kroll, A., & Pasha, O. (2019). Managing change and mitigating reform cynicism. Public Money

& Management, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2019.1683982

Liviu, R. (2015). How to develop sustainable public administration reforms. Transylvanian

Review of Administrative Sciences, 11(44), 180-195.

https://doi.org/10.24193/tras.2017.0010

Mosher, F., 1965, ‘Some notes on reorganization in public agencies’, in R.C. Martin (ed.), Public

administration and democracy, Syracuse University Press, Syracuse, NY.

Naidu, S.P., 2005, Public administration concepts and theories, New Age International

Publishers, New Delhi.

Udoji Commission, 1974, Public Service Review Commission and the government White Paper,

National Library, Lagos.

Master’s degree dissertation submitted to University of South Africa, Pretoria.

Ukwandu, D.C., 2014, ‘The role of good governance in Africa’s elusive quest for development’,

Unpunished Doctoral thesis submitted to University of South Africa, Pretoria.