The Public Administration Theory Primer

139

Determinate

x

Indeterminate Classic Paradigm

The Weberian adjectives noted earlier define

the classic paradigm as determinate, e.g.,

precisely, unambiguously, clearly, shared.

And Weber’s reflections on the

characteristics of a bureaucratic system

included calculability; note from Weber,

bureaucracy is superior in precision, in

stability, in the stringency of its discipline,

and its reliability (Parsons 1947, 337).

New Paradigm

An interesting struggle has occurred on this

characteristic within the dominant paradigm.

Can one argue reasonably that no change is

discernable and still recognize contingency

theory, situational leadership, bounded

rationality? I think not. However, the

values held by those who work within that

paradigm suggest that precision, clarity,

calculability, and reliability are still what

the game is all about.

Linear causality

x

Mutual causality

Classic Paradigm

The rational, sequential characteristic of the

bureaucratic paradigm demands a distinction

between cause and effect; managers are

instructed not to think in circles; mutual

causality suggests that such circularity may be

the only route to improvement; a

bureaucratic paradigm is a rational sequential

paradigm.

New Paradigm

Guba (1985) commented in his paper that

the movement in inquiry on this

characteristic has been from a linear view to

Cook and Campbell’s activity theory.

That roughly matches the change in

organizational theory. Contemporary

theorists recognize multiple causality and

mutual causality, discuss feedback and feed-

forward loops, but finally deal with the issue

as a transitory limitation to our

understanding of organizations—a form of

bounded causality.

TABLE 6.1 (continued)