James Q. Wilson looked at the bureaucracy from a practical and systematic perspective, not to focus on the control and dominant structure based on the abstract notion or values such as power and authority. That is, Wilson considered the bureaucracy as a managerial system to run the government and affiliated agencies effectively. Hence, he analyzed most parts of the government in relation to constructive roles and responsibilities, in particular, with keen interest toward individual agencies. His microscopic viewpoint to the bureaucracy is intimately linked with Astley and Van de Van (1983)’s categorization regarding organization and management, especially, “System-Structural View,” which is directed to the fulfillment of the role of the agencies
…show more content…
He explained organizational culture deeply and was heavily interested in the relationship of co-workers and their cooperation. Flexible and communicative organizational culture and working environment have been described as important variables to have a decisive effect on the organizational performance or effectiveness, hence many researchers have carried out empirical studies and presented evidence to support the relation. I think that is the reason why he may highly regard peer expectation and prior experiences as well as organizational goals and roles. In particular, Wilson’s book provides a highly detailed and excellent analysis of the organizational goals and innovation. Like many contents Wilson clearly mentioned, these two elements make a difference in how American government executes and oversees well in the bureaucracy.
When it comes to organizational goals, it would be interesting for me to see the agency’s contextual goals by connecting with the effect of constraints. Wilson pointed out that contextual goals functioned like the constraints to make managers such as police and school administrators, and leaders in FBI take a risk-averse position by taking care of the extra works instead of their main jobs, or by being astute in dealing with people’s requests. I believe that Wilson kept at least two points in his mind with the logic …show more content…
I believe that public managers are still holding the core power and adjusting and coordinating their policy with key customers because even if the new initiative to impose limitations is implemented, it is difficult for the public to have a wider choice in decision-making. To be specific, Obama and the U.S. government adopted “Open Data Plan” based on FOIA, and the new policy is extensively in progress by leaving out procedures and processes to access the governmental information. However, as the American government has decided the problem which information will be opened to the public or not, people should wait for the answers from the government without any right in choosing the information. Given these problems, this chapter regarding contextual goals gives us ample insights and policy implications about the distribution of right in decision making around people and public managers as well as managerial forms.
Meanwhile, Wilson’s book serves as a convenient first step in our understanding of “Innovation.” One of the Wilson’s main message is that the government accepts inventions or technologies without contemplating the current situation. Especially, Wilson’s approach to innovation provides me with an impetus for thinking about “Open Data
He explained organizational culture deeply and was heavily interested in the relationship of co-workers and their cooperation. Flexible and communicative organizational culture and working environment have been described as important variables to have a decisive effect on the organizational performance or effectiveness, hence many researchers have carried out empirical studies and presented evidence to support the relation. I think that is the reason why he may highly regard peer expectation and prior experiences as well as organizational goals and roles. In particular, Wilson’s book provides a highly detailed and excellent analysis of the organizational goals and innovation. Like many contents Wilson clearly mentioned, these two elements make a difference in how American government executes and oversees well in the bureaucracy.
When it comes to organizational goals, it would be interesting for me to see the agency’s contextual goals by connecting with the effect of constraints. Wilson pointed out that contextual goals functioned like the constraints to make managers such as police and school administrators, and leaders in FBI take a risk-averse position by taking care of the extra works instead of their main jobs, or by being astute in dealing with people’s requests. I believe that Wilson kept at least two points in his mind with the logic …show more content…
I believe that public managers are still holding the core power and adjusting and coordinating their policy with key customers because even if the new initiative to impose limitations is implemented, it is difficult for the public to have a wider choice in decision-making. To be specific, Obama and the U.S. government adopted “Open Data Plan” based on FOIA, and the new policy is extensively in progress by leaving out procedures and processes to access the governmental information. However, as the American government has decided the problem which information will be opened to the public or not, people should wait for the answers from the government without any right in choosing the information. Given these problems, this chapter regarding contextual goals gives us ample insights and policy implications about the distribution of right in decision making around people and public managers as well as managerial forms.
Meanwhile, Wilson’s book serves as a convenient first step in our understanding of “Innovation.” One of the Wilson’s main message is that the government accepts inventions or technologies without contemplating the current situation. Especially, Wilson’s approach to innovation provides me with an impetus for thinking about “Open Data