In his article published in the Public Administration Review, “What Makes Public Administration a Science? Or, Are Its “Big Questions” Really Big”, Francis S. Neumann (1996) discusses flawed research questions posed by Robert Behn (1995) in his essay, “The Big Questions of Public Management”, where Behn (1995) identified three major subject areas, micromanagement, motivation, and achievement measurement, to be addressed in the field of public administration research for it to be aligned as a science, as he stated “any field of science is defined by the big questions it asks” (Behn, 1995, p.314). Neumann (1996) challenges this position on the premise that the physical sciences have experienced a paradigm shift which requires public administration
…show more content…
411), thereby laying the foundation for his theory. He examines two possibilities for the lack of research into the field’s basic origins: first, there are no big questions in which to research thus removing public administration from a discipline of science, and second, researchers believe all the big questions have been asked and answer so there is no need to revisit. These two assumptions result in what Neumann (1996) refers to as the “three cardinal sins” in scientific research: ignorance, fear, and pride (p. 411), with the latter occurring when researchers believe prior researchers satisfactorily tested all the theories relevant to the field and there is nothing left to study. Fear occurs when researchers anticipate criticisms from outside sources if they attempt to explore new theories that develop, therefore, they choose to leave these theories unrequited rather than to subject themselves to ridicule. The final cardinal sin of ignorance is where Neumann (1996) believes the unanswered questions of public administration lie if the field is to accept Behn’s (1995) application based questions …show more content…
The first is an “inferiority complex”, as they beseech inclusion to an academic, scientific discipline distinction (Neumann, 1996, p.414). Secondly, there is a possibility of a miscalculation that all relevant research has been conducted and all that remains the application of the principles prior research divulged (p.414). Lastly, the partisan’s unwarranted fear that there are no “big questions”, only matters of practice, thereby leaving public administration to be perceived as a mediocre discipline at best (Neumann, 1996, p.414). Contributing to these limitations is the absence of a requirement for a singular academic background in the field, as a student of any academic genre can seek a master’s or doctoral degree in public administration (p.414). Conversely, Neumann (1996) views this a unique potential for public administration in as much that if public administration is to be studied in the light of nonlinear and chaos theories, a wealth of academic and professional backgrounds are invaluable, e.g. wildlife biologist who is also administrator from state natural resources department, mathematician who is from a department of management and budget, and a sociologist from social services, as these colleagues can collectively “unlock secrets of organizational dynamics in this complex nonlinear world” (p. 414). In his
411), thereby laying the foundation for his theory. He examines two possibilities for the lack of research into the field’s basic origins: first, there are no big questions in which to research thus removing public administration from a discipline of science, and second, researchers believe all the big questions have been asked and answer so there is no need to revisit. These two assumptions result in what Neumann (1996) refers to as the “three cardinal sins” in scientific research: ignorance, fear, and pride (p. 411), with the latter occurring when researchers believe prior researchers satisfactorily tested all the theories relevant to the field and there is nothing left to study. Fear occurs when researchers anticipate criticisms from outside sources if they attempt to explore new theories that develop, therefore, they choose to leave these theories unrequited rather than to subject themselves to ridicule. The final cardinal sin of ignorance is where Neumann (1996) believes the unanswered questions of public administration lie if the field is to accept Behn’s (1995) application based questions …show more content…
The first is an “inferiority complex”, as they beseech inclusion to an academic, scientific discipline distinction (Neumann, 1996, p.414). Secondly, there is a possibility of a miscalculation that all relevant research has been conducted and all that remains the application of the principles prior research divulged (p.414). Lastly, the partisan’s unwarranted fear that there are no “big questions”, only matters of practice, thereby leaving public administration to be perceived as a mediocre discipline at best (Neumann, 1996, p.414). Contributing to these limitations is the absence of a requirement for a singular academic background in the field, as a student of any academic genre can seek a master’s or doctoral degree in public administration (p.414). Conversely, Neumann (1996) views this a unique potential for public administration in as much that if public administration is to be studied in the light of nonlinear and chaos theories, a wealth of academic and professional backgrounds are invaluable, e.g. wildlife biologist who is also administrator from state natural resources department, mathematician who is from a department of management and budget, and a sociologist from social services, as these colleagues can collectively “unlock secrets of organizational dynamics in this complex nonlinear world” (p. 414). In his