Mini-essay

Public Administration is understood as both theory and practice. Critically evaluate to what
extent these two ideas have influence your understanding of the concept Public
Administration
According to Shafritz, Russell and Borick (2009) they state that Public Administration is an
academic field that studies the art and science of management applied to the public sector, but
this as long-established it goes further than the concerns of management and includes matters
of political, social, cultural and legal environments that affects the running of public
institutions. Thornhill and van Dijk (2010) argues that a theory is a summary statement
providing an explanation of a phenomenon or range of phenomena that co-varies under
particular conditions. Thus, this explains the practice of Public Administration which is the
implementation of government policies by the public servants. Public Administration is an
applied science. Therefore, the Discipline has to relate any theory to the practical situations
within which public administration is practised (Thornhill & van Dijk, 2010). This essay will
critically evaluate how the understanding of a Public Administration as a theory and practice
influence this concept by looking at the relationship between the two.
Public Administration as an academic discipline:
The study of Public Administration has experienced various stages or identity crises since
efforts were made to study the requirements for co-operative action to achieve common
goals. It is trite to state that the study of Public Administration is a product of the national
state (Thornhill & van Dijk, 2010). It is important to state that the discipline as a member of
the Social Science fraternity is inseparable linked to human action and human behaviour.
These two further argue that, these phenomena are studied within the framework of
organisational structures operating in a particular social context i.e. a political system. Thus
efforts to consider the possibility of theorising have to consider the values, the culture, and
the social as well as the political environment within which the operational activities of
public administration are carried out. Woodrow Wilson provided the rationale for public
administration to be an academic discipline and profession management specialty (Shafritz,
Russell & Borick, 2009: 24). These authors further state that the study of Public
Administration is cross-disciplinary because it encompasses so much of political science,
sociology, business administration, psychology, law, anthropology, medicine, forestry, and

many. Therefore, the importance of a study leads to theories that affect how society
functions better.
Theory:
According to Thornhill and van Dijk (2010) they discuss that, a theory represents a mental
view of a phenomenon or a system and will form the basis for a chain of reasoning. A theory
would, thus, encompass one or more hypotheses. This in turn would result in understanding a
phenomenon, explaining its characteristics and even predicting particular outcomes
(Thornhill & van Dijk, 2010). Thus, these two authors further assert that it could be argued
that one of the requirements of a theory is that it has to define the phenomenon or object
being studied and theorised about. In creating a Public Administration theory, concepts such
as school of thought, movement and approach have been used; such that in the search for
theoretical bases for the study of Public Administration, it would be incumbent on the
theoretician to consider the relationships among the variables (Thornhill & van Dijk, 2010).
Overall, theories help in human behavioural relationships in work places where practices are
being carried out, so that for example in the implementation of government policies by the
public servants. It is then possible to identify matters concerning attitudes, problem solving,
political system, organisational culture and incumbent social strata, from the theories.
Practice:
As Weber discovered that the implementation of government polices by the public servants to
be referred as bureaucracy, he created this theory so that there could be improvement on
how the practices on government activities are done (Weber, 2012). They further argue that
bureaucracy is the principle of fixed and official jurisdictional areas, which are generally
ordered by rules, that is by laws or administrative regulations. Like Thornhil and van Dijk,
their argument on the idea that theory studies are done to develop strategies for change on
implementations in society, this then leads and agrees to why Weber formulated the theory of
bureaucracy. Furthermore, the practice of Public Administration works with the principles of
office hierarchy and levels of graded authority meaning a firmly ordered system of super and
subordination in which there is a supervision of lower offices by higher ones (Weber, 2012).
For instances, since the duty of the government officials is to implement service delivery to
the citizens, this is done through the bureaucratic system which was developed to ensure
efficiency and productivity in government practices. In such that these activities are being
2

carried out successfully, and this is all formulated from the theory which guides those who
are in the process of implementation on how should they carry out public activities. However,
different theories have been formulated, which then create contradictions between the
theories and practice of Public Administration; that is different views have been voiced
out.
No dichotomy between theory and practice:
The assumption that practice does not need theory is equivalent to setting sail in a ship
without first possessing knowledge of navigation (Eaglehart, 2001: 371). For example, she
further argues that practitioners who assume public administration can be effective without
parameters set by theory find themselves simply reacting to whatever the day brings.
Agreeing to Eaglehart, I see theory as a formula on how the practice of Public Administration
should be carried out; such that the practice is linked to the theory. Therefore, without an
understanding of theory, the public administration officer becomes merely the user of a
cookbook, a step-by-step guide any person of reasonable ability and skills could apply.
Practice without theory is a hollow exercise and public management without theory is mere
tinkering with systems, being that the absence of theory within practice greatly diminishes the
perception of public administration as a profession (Eaglehart, 2001). I personally believe
that society operates through the construction of ideas which enhance development and
change, which why theories are created; like the bureaucracy which operates in government
as a strategy to bring efficiency and productivity. Likewise, a theory, thus derive, often
serves as a highly reliable guide for action (Frederickson & Smith, 2002: 7). This shows that
the theory for Public Administration studies how the practices of government policies are
done, however the practice is the actual implementation of these government policies.
Moreover, the recognition and the need and role of theory in public administration enhance,
rather than destroy, meaning in practice (Eaglehart, 2001). She further argues that
practitioners and theorists must realize that they are married to each other and have been for
quite some time, even if this marriage is not comfortable for all involved, neither divorce nor
separation is possible. Because a theory gives public practitioners that context and enables
them to take a broader view of their functional work. Practice is the process of passing
legislation of that understanding, as Weber states in bureaucracy. Although they seem to
reject the idea of theory, in everyday practice public administrators use theory, whether they
consciously recognize it or not (Eaglehart, 2001). Ideally as the author Eaglehart states the
3

dependency between theory and practice to be a direct one, I also see that for everyday
practices in Public Administrations to be better and developed in our society, theories play an
important role on that.
In conclusion this essay has argued that Public Administration is an academic discipline
which studies the art and science of management applied to the public sector, but this as longestablished it goes further than the concerns of management and includes matters of political,
social, cultural and legal environments that affect the running of public institutions.
Therefore, a theory represents a mental view of a phenomenon or a system and will form the
basis for a chain of reasoning. This then guides how practices are done within Public
Administration, which is from the theory. Such that theories on government policies are being
studies to bring change and development in government strategies in order to achieve
efficiency when implementing these government polies. Thus, a positive relationship between
a theory and practice of Public Administration shows a dependency between the two.

References
Shafritz, J. M., Russell, E. W. & Borick, C. P. 2009. Defining Public Administration. In J.
M Shafritz, E. W. Russell and C. P. Borick, C. P. Introducing Public Administration. New
York: Pearson Longman.
Thornhill, C. & van Dijk, G. 2010. Public Administration Theory: Justification for
Conceptualisation. University of Pretoria: School of Public Management and Administration,
vol. 45, no. 1.1, pp. 95-110
Weber, M. 2012. Bureaucracy in Shafritz, J. M. & Hyde, A. C. USA: Thomson & Wadsworth,
39-44
Englehart, J. K. 2001. The Marriage between Theory and Practice. Ohio State University:
Department of Job and Family Services, Vol. 61, No. 3, pp. 371-374
Frederickson, G. H. & Smith, K. B. 2002. Introduction: The Possibilities of Theory.
University of Kansas, pp. 1-13