ADMINISTRATIVE MANAGEMENT IN GOVERNMENT AND BUSINESS*

(I) The Art and Science of Management

ROSS D a d s o n

It has long been apparent, particularly to members of the opposition at any given time, that government should be run on a business-like basis, Those of us who have had some acquaintance with the efforts of public administrators at various levels are, of course, well aware of the accomplishments that they have made in this field. Nevertheless, it is a subject well worth spending time on, since the problems of govern- ment and business and the means through which they are overcome are not so divergent that lessons learned in one have no application to the other. There are some businesses that would be a lot better off if they were run on a government-like basis.

A popular gambit, particularly on subjects such as this, is to start by quoting the dictionary meaning of key words in the title. I have never found this to be particularly effective, possibly because I have only a small dictionary. Small though it is, however, it still gives six definitions of the word “administration” and four definitions of the word “manage- ment.” I should point out, of course, that the latter figure is far below the record established by Colonel Lyndall F. Urwick who, in an article that appeared about a year ago, came up with 21 definitions of the word “management.”

These statistics serve to emphasize the need for a clear understanding of just what we are talking about. I propose to spend my time on this phase of things and leave to the other contributors the discussion of how the science or art of management is being, or should be, applied in government and business.

The use of the phrase “art and science of management” perhaps re- quires a word of explanation. It has long been a matter of debate as to whether management is an art or a science. There were those in the eariy part of this century who put forth somewhat extravagant claims with respect to what could be done with a scientific approach to management. The general idea was that the whole subject could be reduced to some-

“This paper was presented to the Thirteenth Annual Conference of the Institute of PubIic Administration of Canada at Ste. Foy, Quhbec, September 6 to 9, 1961.

374

ADMINISTRATIVE MANAGEMENT IN GOVERNMENT AND BUSINESS 375

thing like Newton’s Four Laws of Motion. Although these claims were received with the skepticism they deserved, they nevertheless did spark a lot of interest and research which proved fairly conclusively that in some areas of management responsibility there are, if not laws, at least principles that have fairly general application. They also proved that the use of the basic tools of science, namely measurement and analysis, could yield very worthwhile results in certain types of management problems. Thus there are today aspects of management that could properly be called scientific. There are also large areas that are still in the realm of the arts and some of them even border on the esoteric. For this reason I believe that any discussion of management must include both its art and science aspects.

To get back to the problem of defining “Administrative Management,” I offer the following: Administrative Management is the process of plan- ning, organizing, directing and controlling the various activities of an enterprise to the end that the objectives of that enterprise are, and will continue to be, accomplished. Thus, Administrative Management has four phases-planning, organization, direction and control. In addition it has an operating and maintenance aspect. I shall return to this point later. Administrative Management is the process that follows what might be termed the “policy formulation” process-that is, the law-making process in government, and the policy and objective setting process in business.

Let us consider briefly each of these four elements included in my definition.

( 1 ) . Planning It is difficult to conceive of any action that takes place without at

least some degree of advance planning. The planning may be of a very rudimentary type such as that scratched on the back of a cigarette box, or it may be extremely elaborate such as that done by the Allied Forces prior to the Normandy landings in 1944. In general, I think it can be stated that the chance of success of any venture is proportional to the care that goes into the planning stage, There is such a thing as over- planning, of course, though it is not nearly as common or as dangerous as underplanning.

Sound planning requires facts, and it is here that the scientific side of management comes to our aid. With a certain amount of research and sound data collection techniques it is possible nowadays to amass a great many facts that will be of value in planning any given action. One diffi- culty, however, is that the same process of research and data collection can sometimes produce a lot of fiction along with the facts. There is always the problem of sorting out fact from fiction, and while the scien- tific approach does this for us, it is surprising how often the “artist” manager, using little besides experience and a certain native “savvy,”

376 CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

can spot inconsistencies that have survived rigorous scientific examination. Planning also involves predictions. Great strides have been made in

recent years in developing more accurate methods of predicting the future, Most of these are based on refinements in statistical sampling techniques and trend analysis, and on new methods of analysing data with the help of computers and advanced mathematics. Notwithstanding these improved methods, however, predicting the future is still a very chancy business, and no matter how fancy our techniques get, there is still a very important role for the manager who can supply the judgment that is necessary to determine whether a prediction looks right or not. A notable example of the kind of thing that can happen even with the best of management science available is the Ford Motor Company’s experience with the Edsel.

(2) Organization For many years the first assignment given to students of administration

has been to learn by heart the ten principles of sound organization. “Thou shalt have but one boss”, “Thou shalt delegate authority along with responsibility”, and so forth. It is surprising how well these prin- ciples have stood up, considering how long it is since they were formu- lated. On the other hand, it is perhaps not so surprising since they embody a great deal of accumulated experience gained through man’s long history of organizing himself into groups for one purpose or another. When one actually comes to organizing something, however, it is usually found that the principles of organization leave a lot unsaid. Once again, it is at this point where skill in the art of management becomes all im- portant. Sound judgment is necessary in getting the right balance be- tween specialist positions and coordinating positions. In addition, the problem of predicting how specific people will react to a particular organizational arrangement and to what extent that arrangement should be altered to accommodate a “personality” requires insights for which there are as yet no scientific formulae. These are the human problems, but they are in many ways the most important, for in the last analysis it is the people who do the work.

(3) Direction In its simplest form, I suppose, direction is merely the stage of issuing

the necessary orders to set in motion the various plans laid previously. However, orders can take a number of forms. For example, they can be oral, delivered at a staff meeting or over a phone. They can be written instructions dealing with a specific thing that the recipient is to do. They can be manuals of procedure issued to all who are concerned with a given procedure. All of these means of communicating directions have their proper place depending on the type of direction and the particular circumstances.

ADMINISTRATIVE MANAGEMENT IN GOVERNMENT AND BUSINESS 377

The important thing about direction is not so much the form as the amount and the clarity. There is not likely to be much argument on the need for clarity in giving directions, though I venture to say that all of us have been guilty in the past of issuing orders that could have been clearer.

The question of amount, however, is worth exploring. Obviously there should not be too little, but can there be too much? I rather think so. Unless managers are careful about this they run the risk of doing their subordinates’ work for them. This is wasteful of the manager’s time and the subordinates’ talents. It can also make subordinates angry if they feel they are being given more direction than they need and are not being allowed to do their own thinking. How one determines how much is too much is again a matter of feel, and knowing your people. The objective is, of course, to develop and train your people so that the minimum amount of direction is necessary.

(4 ) controz Control is that phase of determining whether things are going accord-

ing to plan. If they are, we can relax. If they are not, we have to issue whatever directions are necessary to get them back to the plan, or per- haps we have to review the plan to see if it is still realistic.

This sounds simple but the actual mechanics of control can be compli- cated and expensive. In addition there are organizational factors that must be considered. For example, when something diverges from planned performance we have to know who is responsible so that corrective directions can be given to the right person.

The scientific managers have been of some considerable assistance in giving us techniques that will provide the basic information necessary for control purposes. In fact, in some fields, notably inventory control, we are well on the way to having fully automated control systems with computers doing practically the whole job. Cost control techniques have also advanced apace. However, the scientific managers have still not been able to supply a formula that will tell us how far a boss can trust a subordinate when it comes to committing the enterprise to an action on his own, without the boss’ prior approval.

The prevailing feeling is that quite a lot of trust should be placed in subordinates, even to the point of allowing them to make some mistakes if, by so doing, the subordinates’ judgment, and therefore his value, will be increased. Again, however, there are no hard and fast rules about this, and the application of management “sense.” subjective though it is, seems to be the only way issues of this sort can be resolved.

Earlier I pointed out that the process of administrative management had an operating and a maintenance aspect. So far I have been discussing only the operating aspect-planning, organizing, directing and controlling to the end that the objectives of the enterprise are accomplished.

378 CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

But all this requires people, machines and buildings, all of which must be maintained, Maintaining machines and buildings do not present great problems but “maintaining” people is a constant source of concern to the manager. He must worry about selecting new employees, training them, finding them office space, promoting them, and above all, paying them. He may also have to worry about keeping on good terms with a union. In addition he must be thinking not just of immediate needs but of the future as well.

Again the scientific approach has come to the manager’s assistance in dealing with at least some of these problems. Tests have been de- veloped to sort out good employment prospects from bad ones; training techniques and aids have been developed; rules with respect to office and plant layout have been developed; job evaluation techniques have been developed; and work measurement techniques have been developed for use in both plant and office.

All of these tools will serve the administrative manager in dealing with the problems of keeping his organization fit for the work it is designed to do. However, none of them will completely eliminate the need for him to apply them with large quantities of judgment.

To summarize, then, Administrative Management involves planning, organization, direction and control. It also involves “keeping the team in shape” for the work it has to do and for future demands that will be placed upon it. To do this the manager has at his disposal many principles and techniques developed from the application of scientific methods to management problems. However, these will only take him so far. He must still be somewhat of an artist to get the rest of the way successfully.

Perhaps the most important part of the management art lies in that difficult-to-define area known as leadership. Some of the elements of leadership are included in the things discussed earlier. Others seem to be mystical qualities that defy definition but are nonetheless real. Whatever these qualities are, success in administrative management seems to de- pend quite a lot on whether they are present or absent in the manager.