Collegial State Administration: Design for Today?

Abstract

IT IS COMMONLY believed that contemporary public administration is technically more demanding than ever, and more expected than ever to engage in "rational" behavior. At the same time, the political and social environment of present-day public bureaucracy seems more turbulent and conflict-ridden than previously, a setting that is perhaps perfectly unsuited for advanced technical rationality. What, if anything, can be done to accommodate an increasingly technological task core and its increasingly turbulent context? These pages may be viewed as an empirically based attempt to stimulate consideration of one possible option. The proposal being advanced is perhaps unique and certainly unusual for contemporary public administration circles, in that the basic idea is not new at all. No attempt is even made to invent a new name or repackage a prior notion. Instead, I am proposing frankly that we revive a very old concept in administration, namely the use of appointed multimember boards or commissions to direct bureaucratic activity. Such "collegial" administration (Weber's term) is commonly used in some sectors of American society, such as economic regulation, public and higher education, and corporate business. But it has declined drastically in use and reputation with respect to line departments of state government, the field to which the present discussion is directed. The argument herein made is that traditional debate on this subject has centered on the wrong issues, and that meanwhile new conditions have arisen that justify revival of the device at the present time.