Politics-Administration Dichotomy

This paper discusses the concept of politics-administration dichotomy in public administration, its relevance, and implications for agency operations. It also explores the criticism against the model. The distinction between politics and administration is considered to be a crucial separation in government.

Running head: POLITICS-ADMINISTRATION DICHOTOMY
Politics-Administration Dichotomy
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author note:

1POLITICS-ADMINISTRATION DICHOTOMY
Introduction
Politics-administration dichotomy is considered to be one of the significant issues in
the subject of public administration and is also among the most crucial theoretical constructs
in the same. Woodrow Wilson first raised it, and it continuously generated robust debates
among the different scholars of public administration in the modern world (Chohan, 2018).
According to Georgiou (2014), politics-administration dichotomy” has an extraordinary
history in the field of public administration-"It expands and contracts, rises and falls, but
never to go away". Although some several scholars and researchers had made significant
efforts for stating their thesis for why and why not the administration and politics should be
kept differentiated from each other, it is also to note that there is no any single universal
consensus on the same.
This paper shall elaborate on presenting a discussion paper on the relevance of
politics-administration dichotomy. It shall discuss on where the concept of politics-
administration dichotomy is a crucial separation or a useless abstraction.
Discussion
The concept of Politics-administration dichotomy in Public Administration
It is to note that public administration is all about the different activities of the
administrative or bureaucratic agencies of the government that implement programs and
policies (Feiock, Moon & Park, 2017). The argument on politics-administration dichotomy
can be traced back to the founding fathers of public administration like Frank Goodnow and
Woodrow Wilson, as well as the reforms during the era progression. It is to mention that
Woodrow Wilson was historically considered to be the author of “Politics-administration

2POLITICS-ADMINISTRATION DICHOTOMY
dichotomy”. His idea on the same is presented in "The Study of Administration", published in
the year 1887 (Alford et al., 2017).
According to Wilson, “administration is a part of political life only as the methods of
the counting-house are part of the life of society; only as machinery is part of the
manufactured product”. He claims that administration lies outside a proper political sphere,
and this is why the administrative questions cannot be termed as political questions. It is to
mention that Politics-administration dichotomy is a theory that develops the different public
administration boundaries, and it construct a normative relationship between the
administrators and elected officials in a democratic society. As per Rosser and Mavrot
(2017), it is the separation or distinction of administration and politics in government.
However, this concept of politics-administration dichotomy differs from one writer to
others based on the historical period in which they wrote and the context about which they
were writing. According to Woodrow Wilson, Politics-administration dichotomy is a
theoretical model that emphasized the different features of political administration in politics
(Wamsley et al., 2015). He defined political administration as "a detailed and systematic
execution of public law". He has divided the different government institutions into two
distinct sectors, and they are- politics and administration.
The relevance of the concept
According to Rosser (2014), the model of politics-administration dichotomy has
provided different norms for the officials and is considered to be the starting point for the
research on the unusual behaviour of the elected officials and administrators, especially in the
local government. It differs from one writer to others based on the historical period in which
they wrote and the context about which they were writing.

3POLITICS-ADMINISTRATION DICHOTOMY
Although being rejected on the political ground daily, it is very commonly considered
as traditional statement of how the different officials must relate that could be traced to the
"founders" of the subject. As claimed by Shields, Whetsell and Hanks (2015), there are some
significant advantages of having the politics-administration dichotomy. The very first lies in
the fact that it ensures the sustainability of a reliable yet productive government. With the
same, it provides a solution, which effectively counteracts the majority of the incumbent
voters.
As per Nhema (2015), one of the other advantages of this dichotomy is that it helps in
shaping and improving the condition for persuading the public opinions by means
philosophical leaders. Also, Kettl (2015) have opined Politics-administration dichotomy as
the most pre-dominate systems of democratic accountability as it has been used for shaping
the government. It is to mention that the usage of Politics-administration dichotomy in the
modern world as a way for advancing the field of study is very advantageous as it helps in
proving the value in sustaining government accountability. For instance, leading political
neutrality is a dichotomy.
Wilson, in this context have claimed that politics-administration dichotomy could be
considered for sustaining a powerful and productive political agency. The difficulty level,
ample multiplication and complexity of the governmental functions could be considered as a
significant element in the cause for implementing the concept of politics-administration
dichotomy (Alford et al., 2017). According to Rosser (2014), Wilson had not faith in the then
republican self-government and because of this lack of confidence and the high amount of
stubborn, selfish and ignorant individuals whom the majority can vote, this model of politics-
administration dichotomy could provide a solution that would counteract the maximum
number of existing voters.

4POLITICS-ADMINISTRATION DICHOTOMY
Employing some elite philosophical leaders for improving, conditioning, shaping and
swaying the public opinion, this concept, if carried out selflessly, leaves absolutely no room
for error (Shields, Whetsell & Hanks, 2015). It is also to mention that this model has
developed one of the very first concepts of balances and checks and this is one of the most
powerful systems of the democratic accountability that is used for the government of United
States.
The implication of the Politics-administration dichotomy for the agencies operations
It is to note that the agencies of Social Security Administration (SSA), Department of
Labour (DOL) and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) are the three agencies that
have certain everyday things in them in terms of staff composition and organisational
structure. In each of these agencies, a percentage of positions are restrained for the
presidential appointment while the other part comprises of the different career-service
employees as well as the temporary personnel (Chohan, 2018). This is why the staff
composition of the mentioned 3 agencies indicates the consonance that prevails among the
administration and politics that support the thesis that two inseparable in a practical manner.
Both GAO and SSA are independent agencies.
Notwithstanding this fact, this does not showcase that these two are insulated from all
the affect of politics and political leaders (Connaughton, 2015). Once the change in the party
government is no end of tenure, they could attain the program of their objective before
leaving the office. With the same, it is also to mention that some of the activities of these
agencies are often influenced by the decisions taken by the Congress or the president. For
example, at the time of interactions with the staffs of SSA, it was seen that there were
different instances when the federal government spent good funds in the trust fund of SSA

5POLITICS-ADMINISTRATION DICHOTOMY
(Feiock, Moon & Park, 2017). With the same, the GAO activities can be significantly
influenced by the mandates of Congress.
Furthermore, it is also to mention that the present situation of Department of Labour
was the position of Secretary is empty and this is influencing the agency in such a manner has
made it the strictest argument for the administration and political dichotomy unfounded. Lack
of presidential appointee further has brought in with a shortage of direction of policy in the
agency. The political leader of the agency is considered to be a direct relation among the
political arm and agency of the government. They understand the administrative policies and
at the same time, perceive that the agency work is occupied towards the attainment of the
procedures for improving the American lives.
Criticism against the model
Dwight Waldo, a political scholar, is usually cited as one of the scholars to dispute
the notion of “politics-administration dichotomy”. As per him, the idea of Politics-
administration dichotomy is impractical (Gatchair, 2015). Garrett (2015) in this context has
claimed that if politics include all of what is known to be policy makers, the dichotomy will
bar the administrators and the city managers from participation. Politics-administration
dichotomy is a conceptual difference that underlies a theory of the democratic accountability.
Rather than intending to guide the behaviour, politics-administration dichotomy actually
meant as a behavioural prescription that is directed against the modern practices of the
machine politics.
As per the statement by Wilson that claims- "government should be run like a
business", it is clear that he has opened up several loopholes for the capital society for
exploiting the government for the things that they did not have. It is the statement that ends in

6POLITICS-ADMINISTRATION DICHOTOMY
a high risk uncharted territory for the individuals now (Virtanen, 2018). On the basis of this
notion, the government can be run like a business in the market. Apart from this, it is also to
mention that there are several scholars who have countered that Wilson was well aware of the
fact that public administration was highly political in nature and also, he made the point very
clear claiming that Wilson was ambivalent regarding what public administration really was.
As per Glennnon et al. (2019), “Wilson failed to amplify what the study of
administration actually entails, what the proper relationship should be between the
administrative and political realms, and whether or not administrative study could ever
become an abstract science akin to the natural sciences”. Nevertheless, he has positioned an
explicit thesis in his work that had a long- lasting effect in the area of public administration,
which was worth taking into consideration for studying.
Conclusion
Hence, from the above analysis, it is to conclude that the distinction in between the
politics and administration, which is referred to as Politics-administration dichotomy is
highly practical and workable, and hence, is a crucial separation. Being rejected on the
political ground on a daily basis, it is very commonly viewed as a traditional statement of
how the different officials must relate that could be traced to the "founders" of the area. It is
due to the fact that both of the aspects of politics and administration are required in the area
of politics and government. However, it is the use of the diverse elements of politics and
administration that has made it possible for the governmental leaders to be able of performing
their duties in a way that it is commensurate with the facilitation of the best possible results
for common public. Also, though both these aspects of public administration have already
been a dichotomy, there are wide range of ways in which these aspects can be used in

7POLITICS-ADMINISTRATION DICHOTOMY
interactive way and that result in effective and efficient governmental operations and
leadership.
References:
Alford, J., Hartley, J., Yates, S., & Hughes, O. (2017). Into the purple zone: Deconstructing
the politics/administration distinction. The American Review of Public
Administration, 47(7), 752-763.
Alford, J., Hartley, J., Yates, S., & Hughes, O. (2017). Into the purple zone: Deconstructing
the politics/administration distinction. The American Review of Public
Administration, 47(7), 752-763.
Chohan, U. W. (2018). Independent Budget Offices and the Politics–Administration
Dichotomy. International Journal of Public Administration, 41(12), 1009-1017.
Chohan, U. W. (2018). Independent Budget Offices and the Politics–Administration
Dichotomy. International Journal of Public Administration, 41(12), 1009-1017.
Connaughton, B. (2015). Navigating the borderlines of politics and administration:
Reflections on the role of ministerial advisers. International Journal of Public
Administration, 38(1), 37-45.
Feiock, R. C., Moon, M. J., & Park, H. J. (2017). Is the world “flat” or “spiky”? Rethinking
the governance implications of globalization for economic development. In Debating
Public Administration (pp. 225-246). Routledge.

8POLITICS-ADMINISTRATION DICHOTOMY
Garrett, R. S. (2016). Administering Politics: Rediscovering Campaign Finance and Public
Administration. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 38(3), 188-205.
Gatchair, S. D. (2015). Ideology and Interests in Tax Administration Reform in J
amaica. Politics & Policy, 43(6), 887-913.
Georgiou, I. (2014). Seeing the forest for the trees: An atlas of the politics–administration
dichotomy. Public Administration Review, 74(2), 156-175.
Glennon, R., Ferry, L., Murphy, P., & Greenhalgh, K. (2019). But What Is Accountability?.
In Public Service Accountability (pp. 1-25). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
Kettl, D. F. (2015). The transformation of governance: Public administration for the twenty-
first century. JHU Press.
Nhema, A. G. (2015). Relevance of classical management theories to modern public
administration: A review. Journal of Public Administration and Governance, 5(3),
165-179.
Rosser, C. (2014). Johann Caspar Bluntschli's Organic Theory of State and Public
Administration. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 36(1), 95-110.
Rosser, C., & Mavrot, C. (2017). Questioning the Constitutional Order: A Comparison of the
French and the US Politics–Administration Dichotomy Controversies After World
War II. The American Review of Public Administration, 47(7), 737-751.
Shields, P. M., Whetsell, T. A., & Hanks, E. K. (2016). Pragmatism and public
administration: Looking back, looking forward. In American Pragmatism and
Organization (pp. 115-130). Routledge.

9POLITICS-ADMINISTRATION DICHOTOMY
Virtanen, T. (2018). Administrative Action and Administrative Behaviour: Some
Philosophical Underpinnings. In The Palgrave Handbook of Public Administration
and Management in Europe (pp. 1169-1186). Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Wamsley, G. L., Goodsell, C. T., Rohr, J. A., Stivers, C. M., White, O. F., & Wolf, J. F.
(2016). Public administration and the governance process. The Constitutional School
of American Public Administration, 98.