International Research journal of Management Science and Technology

  ISSN 2250 - 1959 (online) ISSN 2348 - 9367 (Print) New DOI : 10.32804/IRJMST

Impact Factor* - 6.2311


**Need Help in Content editing, Data Analysis.

Research Gateway

Adv For Editing Content

   No of Download : 107    Submit Your Rating     Cite This   Download        Certificate

BUREAUCRATIZATION AND PROBLEMS OF MODERN BUREAUCRACY AND POLITICAL CONTROL OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS

    1 Author(s):  DR.RAMESH DHARMASOTH

Vol -  8, Issue- 6 ,         Page(s) : 279 - 291  (2017 ) DOI : https://doi.org/10.32804/IRJMST

Abstract

The term “bureaucracy” is of recent origin. Initially referring to a cloth covering the desks of French government officials in the eighteenth century, the term “bureau” came to be linked with a suffix signifying rule of government (as in “aristocracy” or “democracy”), probably during the struggles against absolutism preceding the French Revolution. During the nineteenth century the pejorative use of the term spread to many European countries, where liberal critics of absolutist regimes typically employed it to decry the tortuous procedures, narrow outlook, and highhanded manner of autocratic government officials (Heinzen 1845). Since then this pejorative meaning has become general in the sense that any critic of complicated organizations that fail to allocate responsibility clearly, or any critic of rigid rules and routines that are applied with little consideration of the specific case, of blundering officials, of slow operation and buck-passing, of conflicting directives and duplication of effort, of empire building, and of concentration of control in the hands of a few will use this term regardless of party or political persuasion (Watson 1945). During the years following World War ii this common stereotype was given a new twist by the witty, mock-scientific formulations of Parkinson’s Law, which derided empire building, waste of resources, and inertia by implying that official staffs expand in inverse pro-portion to the work to be done.

1. Bendix, Reinhard 1960 Max Weber: An Intellectual Portrait. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday.
2. Bendix, Reinhard 1964 Nation-building and Citizenship. New York: Wiley.
3. Berger, Morroe 1957 Bureaucracy and Society in Modern Egypt: A Study of the Higher Civil Service. Princeton Oriental Studies: Social Science, No. 1. Princeton Univ. Press.
4. Chicago, University of, Committee for the Comparative Study of the New Nations 1963 Old Societies and New States: The Quest for Modernity in Asia and Africa. Edited by Clifford Geertz. New York: Free Press.
5. Delany, William 1963 The Development and Decline of Patrimonial and Bureaucratic Administration. Administrative Science Quarterly 7:458–501.
6. DeWitt, Nicholas 1961 Education and Professional Employment in the U.S.S.R. Washington: 
7. Eisenstadt, Shmuel N. 1958 Bureaucracy and Bureaucratization: A Trend Report and Bibliography. Current Sociology 7:99–164.
8. Esman, Milton J. 1951 The Hatch Act: A Reappraisal. Yale Law Journal 60:986–1005.
9. Fainsod, Merle (1953) 1963 How Russia Is Ruled. Rev. ed., Russian Research Center Studies, No. 11. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press.
10. Fallers, Lloyd A. 1956 Bantu Bureaucracy: A Study of Integration and Conflict in the Political Institutions of an East African People. Cambridge: Heffer.
11. Kilpatrick, Franklin P.; Cummings, Milton C.; and Jennings, M. Kent 1964 The Image of the Federal Service. Washington: Brookings Institution.
12. Kingsley, John D. 1944 Representative Bureaucracy: An Interpretation of the British Civil Service. Yellow Springs, Ohio: Antioch College Press.
13. Kirchheimer, Otto 1941 The Historical and Comparative Background of the Hatch Law. Public Policy 2: 341–373.
14. Luhmann, Niklas 1964 Zweck-Herrschaft-System, Grundbegriffe und Prämissen Max Webers. Der Staat 3:129–158.
15. Merton, Robert K. (1949) 1957 Social Theory and Social Structure. Rev. & enl. ed. Glencoe, III.: Free Press.
16. Neustadt, Richard E. 1965 Politicians and Bureaucrats. Pages 102–120 in David Truman (editor), The Congress and America’s Future. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
17. Parkinson, C. Northcote 1957 Parkinson’s Law, and Other Studies in Administration. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

*Contents are provided by Authors of articles. Please contact us if you having any query.






Bank Details