Introduction: Developments in Public Management Th eory 97
research specialists of many types. In practice, then, scientifi c management is still
very much a part of public administration.
Scientifi c management theory, in its original Taylorist sense and its mod-
ern TQM sense, is generally in the family of decision theory. Th e purposes
and characteristics of decision theory are essentially problem defi nition and
problem solving—how to control air traffi c, how to operate an effi cient sanitary
sewer and treatment system. Sophisticated decision theoretic models deal with
goal ambiguity, resource limitations, incomplete information, and satisfi cing.
We cover these topics in Chapter 7. Management theory may have elements of
problem solving, but it is ordinarily understood to have to do with the study and
description of directing ongoing routine activities in purposeful organizations.
With the separation of public works from public administration and Herbert
Simon’s assault on “the principles” in the 1950s, and the emphasis on policy anal-
ysis and policymaking in the 1980s and 1990s, the subject of management lost
cachet and fell off the public administration radar screen. A few blips lingered. In
the 1960s and 1970s, there was some interest in generic administration, meaning
essentially that management is management wherever practiced; several generic
schools of business and public administration were established on the strength of
this logic (Cornell, California at Irvine, California at Riverside, Ohio State, Mis-
souri at Columbia and Kansas City, Brigham Young University, Yale) (Litchfi eld
1956). Most generic schools have now been discontinued or have evolved small
separate and essentially autonomous departments of public administration in
large business schools. Th e generic schools had virtually no eff ect on actual public
administration practices or theories.
Th e 1960s and 1970s saw some interest—particularly in the New Public
Administration—in theories of democratic administration, including fl at hier-
archies, worker self-management, project management, matrix organizations,
and the elimination of competition as an incentive for work (Marini 1971;
Frederickson 1980). Th ese theories have had some eff ect on practices and are
commonly found in contemporary “good public management” models.
Th e social equity theory found in the New Public Administration of the 1960s
and 1970s has also had a long shelf life. It came along at a time of high concern for
fairness in the workplace, equal employment opportunities, affi rmative action,
and comparable worth. Many of these concepts became statutory, organizations
and procedure to adopt these values appeared, and social equity is now widely
practiced. In their assessment of the eff ects of the social equity aspects in New
Public Administration, Jay Shafritz and E. W. Russell (1997) write this:
From the 1970s to the present day [public administration scholars] have pro-
duced an endless stream of conference papers and scholarly articles urging
public administrators to show a greater sensitivity to the forces of change, the
needs of clients, and the problem of social equity in service delivery. Th is has
had a positive eff ect in that now the ethical and equitable treatment of citizens