Traditional Management Th eory Th rust Forward 103
of those involved with the Texas Education Excellence Project. Th e contributions
of this literature are reviewed later.
Further, a revitalization of scientifi c management has started, with new empir-
ical attention to Simon’s critique of Gulick’s POSDCORB-derived management
principles. Kenneth Meier and John Bohte (2000) off er and test a theory that links
span of control (the number of subordinates managed by a single supervisor)
to bureaucratic performance. Interestingly, Meier and Bohte conclude that both
Simon and Gulick were right. Simon’s critique that there is no single correct span
of control was supported, but so was Gulick’s principle that smaller spans of con-
trol are preferable when the authority has more information and skill than the
subordinates. Meier and Bohte (2003) followed this study with another that ex-
amined diversifi cation of function, stability, and space, which Gulick viewed as
the three important determinants of span of control. Gulick’s hypotheses were
supported, but Meier and Bohte found that span of control needs to be thought of
within the context of organizational hierarchy: What matters for span of control
at one level of an organization may not matter at another. Th is research suggests
that the insights and utility of Gulick’s management principles are far from over.
Group Th eory
Th eories of groups are primarily theories of organization rather than theories
of management, but group theory has important implications for public man-
agement. Most of these implications have to do with contrasting approaches to
managerial control. In classic management theory, control is exercised by policy,
rules, regulations, and oversight. In group theory, the eff ective group will de-
velop shared goals and values, norms of behavior, customs, and traditions (Ho-
mans 1950; Shaw 1981). Eff ective management in the context of group theory
nurtures, cultivates, and supports group goals and norms that are compatible
with and supportive of institutional purposes and missions. Table 5.1 is a com-
parison of traditional forms of managerial controls and forms of control based
on group theory.
Most aspects of group theory are now embedded in the public management
literature, and many public managers seek to develop the kinds of group goals,
motivation, and commitments that support public institutional goals. John DiIulio
Jr.’s research (1994) on the characteristics and management of the Federal Bureau
of Prisons (BOP) demonstrates the power of group theory in public administra-
tion. In attempting to account for the behavior of BOP employees, DiIulio found
principal-agent theory and rational choice theory weak. He turned to a version of
group theory sometimes called the strong-culture organization, mixed with theo-
ries of leadership, to explain employee behavior:
Rational choice theories of bureaucracy are neither illuminating nor helpful.
In eff ect, rational choice theorists of bureaucracy are half-baked Barnardians.