Speaking Notes
PADM 5011
January 31, 2013
Dr. Neubauer
WHERE WE ARE
·
·
·
This week – chapter 2.
Next week – chapter 8.
I have not heard anything from Dr. Sinclair regarding formation of teams.
Chapter 2 and the “Why Kristin Died” case.
The historic article in this chapter is by Max Weber. He is remembered for his work on
bureaucracy.
He was a German sociologist, interested in how the way people think tends to shape social
structures including organizations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Weber
He did not advocate for bureaucracy. He described it.
Authority can be based in social roles as defined in the context of an organization.
Rules, roles, and patterns of authority shape function and outcomes.
“Bureaucracy” can be a highly effective form of organization.
I wonder if this connection between STRUCTURE and AUTHORITY might contribute to an
explanation of Nazi Germany.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Germany
This archetype of hierarchy is deeply embedded in modern minds.
Milgram documented an amazing human capacity for people to both exercise authority and to
submit to the authority of others.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment
So, can Weber’s bureaucratic organizations function as the administrative state while
ANSWERING to a political leadership that derives its powers from the people?
Perhaps the underlying question is this. If “bureaucracy” is so wonderful, WHY THE RED
TAPE? Why so much “bureaucrat bashing?”
It seems to me that bureaucracy is designed to do two things well.
·
·
·
To address human BOUNDED RATIONALITY by subdividing COGNITIVE LOAD
among multiple minds.
To create SUBDIVISIONS OF RESPONSIBILITY so when things go “haywire” we
have someone to blame.
To support repetitive processes (like long runs on productive machines) to achieve
EFFICIENT processes. (Weber lived in the industrial age and used machine metaphors.)
WELL, I SEE SEVERAL PROBLEMS HERE
·
·
·
·
There is not just one just one bureaucratic organization – there are many of them, within
single governments and among multiple governments.
THE NEED TO HOLD THE “ADMINISTRATIVE STATE” POLITICALLY
ACCOUNTABLE creates a great deal of the RED TAPE. Accountability requires
DOCUMENTATION. It is often more work to document something than to actually do
it.
Most agencies don’t “manufacture” anything. The challenge is not so much productivity
as SENSEMAKING AND INFORMATION PROCESSING.
We don’t so much need organization to RUN as we need them to THINK.
HERBERT SIMON wrote about information processing by organizations. I don’t think MAX
WEBER did.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Simon
And why did “the system” fail Kristin?
http://www.scribd.com/doc/51479395/Communication-Breakdown-How-Kristin-Died
Because no one “connected the dots.” Modern organizations are not designed to MAKE SENSE
of things.
Modern organizations are designed to “RUN” and are tangled up in “red tape” because of the
need to be held politically accountable.
So we have a VICIOUS DOWNWARD SPIRAL. Government agencies can’t “dance” because
they are being held politically accountable. And because they can’t dance we feel the need to
hold them more politically accountable.
And they were not designed to THINK in the first place. So, everyone does their own little part
and ENTIRE SYSTEMS (AND GROUPS OF SYSTEMS) fail in individual cases.
There were MANY PEOPLE who directly or indirectly were associated with Kristin’s case. But
no one in particular was focused on her and no one MADE SENSE of her entire situation. Her
case was not high on anyone’s “radar.”
CASE WORKERS TYPICALLY DEAL WITH OUTRAGEOUS NUMBERS OF CLIENTS, as
if this was about some kind of manufacturing process.
The challenge is SENSE MAKING. Bureaucracies need to be somehow REINVENTED in the
image of BRAINS rather than in the image of machines.
It is not, “can the elephant RUN.” It is, “can the elephant THINK.”
BUT HAVING TAKEN THAT PATH, Herbert Simon largely divorced himself from the field of
public administration. PA scholars mostly IGNORE his scholarly contributions beyond about
1960. From their perspective, he went astray, wandering into unrelated concerns such as
computer science and artificial intelligence.
---- In my opinion, we are still too attached to SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT and need to become
more attach to SYSTEMS SCIENCES, including chaos theory and complex adaptive systems.
We need to think more in terms of NETWORKS than in terms of monolithic organizations
(elephants).
Public Administration needs to “dance.” Public Administration needs to “think.”
And yet we are bound by the DISTRUST that feeds continued efforts to achieve POLITICAL
ACCOUNTABILITY by being tied to policy makers with the forward perspective of the next
election and a population for whom issues have to be reduced to bumper sticker solutions.
THE CASE STUDY – HOW KRISTIN DIED
Chronology of Facts (SOURCE: http://amongstsaintsandsailors.blogspot.com/2011/11/howkristin-died-case-study.html )
When viewing this case it is best to view it in order of significant chronological events as
bulleted below from Stillman’s text (2009):
1988 – Michael Cartier (Kristin’s ex-boyfriend) is arrested on charges of burglary and is
sentenced to a six months but he never serves. A year later he tampers with restaurant ketchup
container by injecting in his own blood.
October 1990 – Cartier goes on a destructive warpath with a sledgehammer and ends up
smashing through the wall and into a neighbor’s apartment and commits other mentally unstable
acts such as animal cruelty/brutality.
December 1990 – Cartier intimidated, threatened and assaulted Rose including stating that if she
didn’t do as he stated that he would kill her – foreshadowing the events with Kristin.
In March of 1991 Rose called Cartier’s probation officer, Tom Casey, after he threatened to kill
her and got a restraining order issued against Cartier; a warrant was also issued for his arrest.
During the next month Michael attacks Rose multiple times and even with a weapon until Cartier
is finally arrested on the warrant that was issued. His trial sentences his to three months for
violating his probation and another twelve months for the attacks but he only serves six months.
By November of 1991 Cartier is released on good behavior (although overcrowding did play a
role) but again taken in for nearly two months for his tampering with consumer products incident
back in 1989.
In December of that same year another warrant gets issued for Cartier for contacting Rose via
mail while imprisoned. The following month Cartier attends a court-ordered alternatives to
violence class in place of his one year sentence for assaulting Rose with a weapon.
March 1992 – Cartier callously beats Kristin for the first time. By mid-April Kristin ends their
relationship due to another beating in an alley.
Things escalate in May as Cartier purchases a gun and Kristin calls Cartier’s parole officer with
her concerns and obtains an emergency restraining order but this does little to stop Cartier from
contacting Kristin.
Finally on May 30th, 1992 Cartier finds and kills Kristin by shooting her three times and going
to his apartment and killing himself.
There are multiple case workers, judges, parole officers and others involved in this case. My
students usually “need” to identify ONE BUREAUCRAT as the cause of the failure of the
“system” to protect Kristin.
The analysis in this blog post is insightful.
http://amongstsaintsandsailors.blogspot.com/2011/11/how-kristin-died-case-study.html
ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURES MATTER
The division of the criminal justice system into separate hierarchies (police, justice, probation,
parole, and others) creates ADMINISTRATION EFFICIENCIES but is not CASE CENTRIC. In
other words, often “the right hand does not know what the left hand is doing.”
This “divide and conquer” strategy in approach heavy case loads makes ADMINISTRATIVE
SENSE, especially in situations that resemble INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES. But in the
INFORMATION AGE, when most work is COGITIVE in nature, such structures can result in
FAILURES TO “CONNECT THE DOTS.”
The two critical aspects are COMMUNICATIONS and SENSE MAKING. In the absence of
communications, sense making is impossible. (Reference story of three blind men and an
elephant.)
Also, administrative decisions do not get immediately and “magically” implemented. Even when
KNOWLEDGE informs DECISIONS, there are DELAYS inherent in implementation. “Things
happen” while the wheels of bureaucracy (sometimes slowly) turn.
IN AN BETTER WORLD, there would be the money necessary to employ enough case workers
(and others) to stay on top of things.
IN A BETTER WORLD, agency employees would easily and share information with one
another.
IN A BETTER WORLD, ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURES AND PROCESSES would be
case-centric rather than designed around administrative needs and preferences.
IN A BETTER WORLD when people placed trust in systems that trust would be well grounded.
IN A BETTER WORLD Kristin would not have died.
It is possible for bad things to happen because one person really messes up. (Even then there may
be systemic issues in the background.)
See http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/07/us/navy-submarine-lost/index.html
But in modern organizations, almost every outcome IS A PRODUCT OF A PROCESS that
includes multiple people, many of whom work across ORGANIZATION (and other)
BOUNDARIES to get things done.
HR (I think) tends to focus on individual employees rather than on TEAMS and PROCESSES.
SYSTEMS THAT REWARD INDIVIDUAL or DEPARTMENTAL performance may actually
hinder the performance and success of entire organizations.
BY ANALOGY – great sports teams may have no individual stars on them. They are great
because the good of the entire team takes precedence before the interests of any individual player
or subdivision of the team.
THAT KIND OF TEAMWORK IS NOT EASY TO ACHIEVE in bureaucratic organizations
and in situations in which doing what needs to be done requires LEADERSHIP AND
COORDINATION ACROSS BOUNDARIES.
The book THE CASE FOR BUREAUCRACY is a classic in the public administration literature.
It is in its third edition. The author is CHARLES GOODSELL. Here are some of the basic points
(with some personal interpretation).
Bureaucrats and bureaucratic organizations get bashed frequently.
When citizens are asked about their specific personal encounters with “bureaucrats,” their
responses are generally favorable.
Government employees are not substantially different from employees of corporations who do
similar work.
The things that we ask government agencies to do are very difficult things.
The MISTRUST of government agencies (by citizens and elected politicians) creates
DEMANDS FOR ACCOUNTABILITY that is the source of the RED TAPE which feeds
perceptions that government agencies are slow or incompetent.
---- The machine model of organization.
·
·
·
Specialization, scientific management, central control, defined processes
A “keep on trucking” mentality
Not much appreciation for the humanity of “human resources”
The brain/mind model of organization
·
·
·
Recognition that INFORMATION PROCESSING is a very large component of
everything governments do
Realization that our political structures are increditably dysfunctional from the viewpoint
of ADMINISTRATIVE VALUES
Realizing that while we must continue to “live” in the local hierarchical structures that
pay us, the key to actually getting things done is in the HORIZONTAL relationships that
cross agency and political jurisdictional boundaries.
Notice that even human brains have structures. It is not the presence of administrative structures
(departments) per se that is the issue. It is the degree to which the parts each contribute to the
needs of the entire entity. A good brain is internally well-connected and also externally wellconnected (through social relationships). I think the same can be said of government agencies
and other kinds of organizations.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_brain