Summary 165
Th e postmodern methodological perspective also includes the logic of alterity,
or a forthright concern for the “moral other” on the part of public administrators.
Postmodernists rightly claim that all administrative acts directly or indirectly
aff ect others and that traditional public administration hides, overlooks, gener-
alizes, or rationalizes these eff ects. In public administration, according to post-
modernists, the concern for others needs to be shift ed from the abstract idea of
nonspecifi c “others” to concrete, live, actual “others.” Th erefore, the postmodern-
ist research agenda has oft en to do with ground-level considerations of bureau-
cratic functioning and the consequences of that functioning on others. It is the
postmodernists who appear to have inherited the mantle of research on street-
level bureaucracy, and to have considerably advanced that research (Lipsky 1980;
Maynard-Moody and Musheno 2003). One interesting contemporary example is
the issue of the “collateral damage” associated with war.
Th e critiques of postmodern theory have been well documented. For posi-
tivists, the question is about how to evaluate the methodology, particularly as it
relates to foundational concepts, such as effi ciency. Democratic concepts, such
as equity and responsiveness, become even more nuanced and problematic un-
der a postmodern framework. More generally, public administration is plagued
by a problem of a lack of a unifying theory; postmodern theory does nothing to
resolve this debate, nor does it see this as necessary. Postmodern theory does add
to the discussion and practice of public administration, but as yet off ers little in
the way of an agreed-upon methodology or means to determine the eff ectiveness
of an institution. Postmodern public administration is perhaps best viewed as
adding a tool to the public administration toolkit, but is not redefi ning the use of
existing tools as will be suggested by recent work on decision theory and rational
choice in Chapter 7 and Chapter 8. Finally, although postmodern research has
certainly contributed to our understanding of public administration obligations
to each citizen, it is only fair to point out that such issues have been a part of the
subject and a part of the research agenda for many years.
Summary
Postmodern theory in public administration clearly deviates from existing the-
ories in public administration and those presented in this primer. Postmodern
theory rejects positivist research methodologies, at a minimum stressing the use
of qualitative methods, such as case-studies and narratives, and relying on the
self-refl ection of the individuals being studied. Despite what may seem like an
unsystematic approach to bureaucratic phenomena, postmodern theory has a
rich history in public administration, going back to Chester Barnard. Postpos-
itivist research methodologies are also best suited for investigating and under-
standing the subjective meaning of relationships and the “active-social” nature
of people as described by Harmon (1981). Postmodern public administration re-
jects modernist public administration based on positivist science, administrative