17 Iulian Pinisoara

8/13/2019 17 Iulian Pinisoara

1/8

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Litere i tiine Sociale, Nr. 2/2008

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Series Letters and Social Sciences, No. 2/2008

171

Modelul birocratic al lui Max

Weber.

Pinisoara Iulian, preparator

universitar

Universitatea Constantin Brancusi

To be able to see to what extent

bureaucracy influence the development of amodern society must have a clear vision of

what bureaucracy means.

Most people think that bureaucracy

is a negative area, which should not exist in a

world and a perfect democracy. Policy

analysts and citizens of line associated most

often with the term bureaucracy phrases

express inefficient and personal interest.

Birocratia system is an organization engaged

in the theory of law, that function

specifically and is hierarchically structuredway, with the aim to manage a certain

volume of resources through a personnel

system, which besides responsibilities and

powers available and of a bureaucratic

authority

Max Weber, sociolog i economistgerman, este cel care a teoretizat pentru primadata principiile organizrii birocratice, oferind

un model birocratic pe bazele cruia s-aconstruit sistemul administraiei publicemoderne.

Max Weber sustine ca birocratia aaparut n evul mediu, odata cu dezvoltareadomeniilor regale si a societatii n general.Extinderea si complexitatea crescnda adomeniilor din societate, au determinat lideriidin acele vremuri sa apeleze la anumite

persoane care sa i ajute n lupta de mentinere aautoritatii si a controlului asupra tuturor

Max Webers Bureaucratic

Model.

Pinisoara Iulian, teaching assistant

University Constantin Brancusi

To be able to see to what extent

bureaucracy influence the development of a

modern society, one must have a clearvision of what bureaucracy means.

Most people think that bureaucracy

is a negative area, which should not exist in

a world and a perfect democracy. Policy

analysts and citizens of line associated most

often with the term bureaucracy phrases

express inefficient and personal interest.

Bureaucracy system is an organization

engaged in the theory of law, that function

specifically and in a hierarchically

structured way, with the aim to manage acertain volume of resources through a

personnel system, which besides

responsibilities and powers available and of

a bureaucratic authority

German sociologist and economist,Max Weber is the first to theorize the

principles of bureaucratic organisation,offering a bureaucratic model, based on which

the modern public administration system wasbuilt.

Max Weber states that bureaucracyappeared in the Middle Ages, with thedevelopments of royal domains and thesociety in general. The expansion and growingcomplexity of domains in society determinedthe leaders of those times to turn to certain

persons to help them in the struggle tomaintain authority and control over all societyaspects. These persons received various


2/8



172

aspectelor societatii. Aceste persoane primeausarcini administrative diferite. Odata cudezvoltarea societatii, tot mai multe persoaneau primit sarcini n administratie. n prezent,aceste persoane se numesc functionari si sunt

organizati ntr-un sistem birocratic. Scopurilelor sunt aceleasi, si anume administrarea unorresurse si ndeplinirea unor atributii primite dela cei din conducerea statului. Weber identific, in condiiile n carestatul se bazeazpe un raport de dominaie, treitipuri de autoritate1:

1. autoritatea traditionala reprezintaceltip de autoritate bazat pe credina ncaracterul sfnt al tradiiilor, normelor icutumelor, precum i pe superioritatea moral

i spiritual a celor ce exercit aceastautoritate.

2. autoritatea carismatic bazat petrsturile excepionale i comportamentulexemplar al liderului.

3. autoritatea raional-legal realizatprin legi scrise, raional concepute.

n mod evident, autoritatea raional-legal este cea mai reprezentativ pentruactualul stadiu de dezvoltare social ieconomic, pentru orice stat modern, pentrumodelul birocratic propus de Max Weber.

n opinia lui Weber, birocraiareprezint idealul organizaional datoriturmtoarelor caracteristici:

- structurde autoritate impersonal;- existena unei ierarhii n cadrul unui

sistem al carierelor n care exist sfere decompetene specificate;

- libera alegere bazat pe realizrileobinute n urma respectrii anumitor reguli;

- organizaia este o structur separat,independent de viaa personal a angajailorsi;

- remunerarea cu bani pe baza unorcontracte clare;

- disciplin i control n conducereabiroului.

- specializarea printr-o diviziune claramuncii;

- structura ierarhic autoritar, ntr-oorganizaie funciile fiind ordonate dup

principiile ierarhiei i ale nivelurilor de

administrative tasks. With the development ofthe society, more people received tasks inadministration. Currently these persons arecalled clerks and they are organised in a

bureaucratic system. Their aims are the same,

namely the administration of resources andfulfilling attributions received from those ingovernment of the state.

Weber identified, in the conditions thatthe state relies on a domination relation, threetypes of authority8:

1. the traditional authority representsthat type of authority based on the belief in theholiness of traditions, norms and customs, aswell as on the moral and spiritual superiorityof those exercising this type of authority.

2. charismatic authority based on theexceptional traits and the leaders exemplary

behaviour.3. rational-legal authority achieved

through written laws, with rational concepts.Obviously, the rational-legal authority

is the most representative for the current stageof social and economic development, for anymodern state, for the bureaucratic model

proposed by Max Weber.In Webers opinion, bureaucracy

represents the organisational ideal due to thefollowing characteristics:

- structure of impersonal authority;- existence of a hierarchy of a career

system with specified spheres ofcompetencies;

- free choice based on theachievements obtained following certain rules;

- the organisation is a separatestructure, independent from the personal lives

of its employees;- remuneration with money based onclear contracts;

- discipline and control in officemanagement.

- specialization through a clear labourdivision;

- authoritarian hierarchical structure, asthe functions in an organisation are orderedaccording to the principles of hierarchy andgradual authority;

- the system of formal rules and


3/8



173

autoritate gradat;- sistemul de reguli i reglementri

formale, organizaiile birocratice acceptndregulile privind mijloacele coercitive, fizice,sacerdotale sau de alt gen, care se afl la

dispoziia funcionarilor;- impersonalitatea i imparialitatea,autoritatea fiind dependent de regulileorganizaiei, impersonal i corespunztoarenivelului ierarhic al unei persoane;

- promovarea n carier urmeaz, pernd, regula vechimii i a competenei dovediten activitate;

- eficiena organizaiei rezult numaidin respectarea acestor caracteristici.

Eficiena birocratic nu poate fi

considerato simplfuncie a structurii formalea biroului dar depinde n mod esenial descopurile exprimate de ctre birocrai i demijloacele de realizare a acestora. Modul deoperare al birourilor va depinde de mult maimuli factori dect cei specificai n model.Conform modelului, organizaiile formal

birocratice fac ca birourile sfie doar capabilede a avea cel mai nalt grad de eficien.

Ceea ce lipsete n modelul lui Weberse regsete sub form de vocaie. Weber iargumenteaz modelul dintr-o perspectivistoric comparnd birocraia modern cu altetipuri de guvernare sau autoritate. Judecat nrelaie cu alte tipuri de autoritate, birocraiamodern este mult mai eficient, dar asta nu

presupune c birocraia modern este eficienti din alte puncte de vedere.

Astfel, afirmaia lui Weber cbirocraiaeste capabil de cel mai nalt grad deeficien nu este susinut n ntregime de

realitate. Ideea de bazeste ctranziia de la orelaie personal la una impersonaldeterminapariia unui concept al unui birou n care

birocratul este cea mai dedicatpersoan(eticameseriei). Acest lucru ar putea conduce la oeficien sporit, ns nu confer birocraieimoderne eficienn sens absolut.

Dei ageniile guvernamentale nu sedovedesc a fi eficiente n sensul prevzut deWeber n modelul su, relevana modelului nu

poate fi afectat de lipsa de legtur dintre

model i realitate. Ca model ideal, ar putea

regulations, the bureaucratic organisationsaccepting the rules regarding coercive,

physical, sacerdotal and other types of means,available to clerks;

- impersonality and impartiality, the

authority depending on the rules in theorganisation, impersonal and adequate to thehierarchical level of a person;

- promotion in a career follows, in turn,the rule of seniority or competence proven inactivity;

- the efficiency of the organisationresults only from respecting thesecharacteristics.

Bureaucratic efficiency cannot beconsidered a simple function of the formal

office structure, but depends essentially on theaims expressed by the bureaucrats and themeans to achieve them. The operation ofoffices will depend on more factors than theones specified in the model. According tomodel, the formal bureaucratic organisationsmake the offices only capable of reaching thehighest efficiency degree.

What is missing from Webers modelcan be found as vocation. Weber argues hismodel from historical perspective bycomparing the modern bureaucracy with othertypes of government and authority. Judged inrelation with other types of authority, themodern bureaucracy is much more efficient,

but that doesnt mean that modernbureaucracy is efficient from other points ofview too.

Thus, Webers statement capable ofthe highest degree of efficiency is not fullysupported by reality. The basic idea is that the

transition from a personal to an impersonalrelationship leads to the emergence of aconcept for an office where the bureaucrat isthe most dedicated person (work ethics). Thiscould lead to an increased efficiency, butdoesnt invest modern bureaucracy itefficiency in an absolute sense.

Although governmental agencies dontprove to be as efficient as provisioned byWeber in his model, the relevance of themodel cannot be affected by the lack of the

relation between model and reality. As an


4/8



174

direciona reforma din sectorul public, dacntr-adevr identificeficiena mecanismului defuncionare a autoritilor publice2.

Principala diferen ntre modelul luiWeber i modelele anterioare de administraie

este nlocuirea administraiei personale cu unsistem impersonal bazat pe reguli. Oorganizaie i regulile sale e mult maiimportantdect orice individ din interiorul ei.Sistemul birocratic trebuie sfie impersonal nceea ce privete funcionarea sa i n relaiile cuclienii3.

Modelele anterioare de administraie sebazau pe relaii personale loialitatea fade orudsau un patron, fade liderul partidului inu fa de sistem. Administraia se vedea

adesea ca un bra al politicienilor i a claseiconductoare dect a cetenilor. Dar n acelaitimp era i o administraie arbitrar, nedreapt,mai ales cu cei care nu doreau sau nu puteau sse implice n jocurile politice. Sistemulimpersonal prevzut de Weber, nlturcomplet arbitrarea, sau cel puin n cazul ideal.

Weber a elaborat i principiile de bazale autoritii raional-legale:

1. delimitarea sferelor de competen2. organizarea pe principiul ierarhic, i

exercitarea controlului superiorilor asupra celorce au poziii inferioare

3. organizarea birourilor sefundamenteaz pe autoritatea raional-legal,autoritate impersonal ce presupune existenalegilor si normelor scrise

4. toate actele administrative, deciziile,regulamentele, normele, au forma scrisa.

n viziunea lui Max Weber organizareabirocratica reprezinta un tip de dominatie

rational-legala, n care autoritatea estefondata pe un statut legal, adica norme juridicedefinind de o maniera abstracta, obiectiva sideci rationala modul de exercitare a puterii.Weber crede ca birocratia are un rol esential nreglarea si controlul societatilor moderne.Pentru el, birocratia este imperios necesaramentinerii civilizatiei n societatea moderna. Aadar, autoritatea raional-legal arecaracter impersonal, ea nu este subjugatintereselor unei persoane sau grup de persoane,

ci interesului public. Autoritatea nu aparine

ideal model, it could set the direction of thereform in the public sector, if it identifiesindeed the functioning mechanism for the

public authorities9.The main difference between Webers

model and the previous administration modelsif the replacement of personaladministration with an impersonal system,

based on rules. An organisation and its rulesare more important than any individual insideit. The bureaucratic system must beimpersonal regarding its functioning and therelationship with the customers10.

The previous administration modelsrelied on personal relationships the loyalty toa relative or an employer, to the party leader

and not to the system. The administration isoften seen an arm of the politicians and theruling class than of the citizens. But at thesame time, it was an unjust, arbitraryadministration, especially for those who didntwant or couldnt be involved in politicalgames. The impersonal system foreseen byWeber supersedes totally the arbitration, or atleast in the ideal case.

Weber has also drawn the basicprinciples for the rational-legal authority:

1. delimitation of competence spheres2. organisation on hierarchy principle,

and exercise control by the superiors overthose with inferior positions

3. organisation of offices is founded onthe rational-legal authority, an impersonalauthority that implies the existence of writtenlaws and norms

4. all administrative acts, decisions,regulations, norms are in written form.

In Max Webers vision, thebureaucratic organisation represents a type ofrational-legal domination, where theauthority is founded on legal grounds,meaning juridical norms defining in anabstract manner, objective thus rational theway power is exercised. Weber believes that

bureaucracy plays an essential role inregulating and controlling the modernsocieties. For him, the bureaucracy isimperatively necessary for maintaining

civilization in modern society.


5/8



175

niciodat unei persoane ce ocup o anumitfuncie, ci aparine funciei n sine. Ea nu poatefi exercitat dect n legtur cu obligaiile isarcinile de serviciu, i trebuie separattotal deviaa privata unui funcionar public.

n exercitarea atribuiilor de serviciu,funcionarul public trebuie s dea dovad deprofesionalism i imparialitate. Pentru a seasigura ndeplinirea acestor condiii,funcionarii publici sunt numii pe criterii decompeten, i urmeaz o carier nadministraia public. Funcionarii publici intrn administraie pe o poziie inferioar, urmnds promoveze pe criteriul vechimii,considerndu-se c o parte a dezvoltrii lor

profesionale s-a realizat n interiorul instituiei.

Remunerarea birocrailor se va face nfuncie de poziia pe care acestia o ocupa nierarhie. Funcionarii publici nu pot ficoncediai dect n cazul unor grave abateri dela normele n vigoare.

Weber art c birocraia (cndfuncioneazi nu este deturnatpolitic, cum sentmpl n comunism) este o maina decolectat i procesat date, unde fiecare membrueste un element cu un set de competene,responsabiliti i privilegii unice. Jurnalistul

birocrat (profesionist), dei poate avea o viafoarte aventuroas, este limitat n competene iresponsabiliti. tirile sale sunt culese folosindun anume ndreptar profesional (toate fapteletrebuie verficate din dou surse), sunt din nouverificate de editor, care le contextualizeaz

prin adugare de relatri sau chiar prinrescriere, n funcie de cererile fluxului de

producie de tiri.El a prevzut, de asemenea,

posibilitatea apariiei unor consecine nefaste ncazul modelului birocratic propus, consecinece nu au ntrziat saparn practic.

Principalele efecte negative sunt:caracterul maximizator, disfunionalitatea,tendina birocraiei de a se transforma ntr-ooligarhie, precum i faptul cadesea, birocraiascap de sub controlul politic. Cea maiimportant problem este faptul c birocraiaservete n primul rnd scopurilor proprii i nucelor sociale, acordnd prioriti diferite

scopurilor n funcie de interesele proprii, cu

Therefore, the rational legal authorityhas an impersonal character, it is not tributaryto the interests of one persons or group of

persons, but to public interest. The authoritynever lies with one person placed in a certain

function, but to the function itself. It can onlybe exercised in relation with the workobligations and duties and must be totallyseparated from the private life of a publicservant.

In exercising the work attributions, thepublic servant must prove professionalism andimpartiality. In order to ensure the fulfilmentof these conditions, the public servants areappointed based on competency criteria, andfollow a career in public administration. The

public servants start in administration from aninferior position, following to promote onseniority criteria, considering that part of their

professional development was achieved insidethe institution.

The remuneration of bureaucrats willbe done depending on the position theyoccupy in the hierarchy. Public servantscannot be fired unless in the case of seriousdeviations from the norms in force.

Weber points out that the bureaucracy(when it functions and it not politically turned,as it happens in communism) is a machine forcollecting and processing data, where eachmember is an element with a set of uniquecompetencies, responsibilities and privileges.Although his life can be very adventurous, the(professional) bureaucrat journalist is limitedin competencies and responsibilities. His newsare collected using a certain professional guide(all facts must be verified from two sources),

are verified again by the editor, whocontextualizes by adding narratives or evenrewriting, depending on the requirement of thenews productions flux.

He also foresaw the possibility of ill-fated consequences in the case of the proposed

bureaucratic model, consequences that didntdelay to appear in practice.

The main negative effects are: themaximization character, lack of functionality,the tendency of bureaucracy to be transformed

in an oligarchy, as well as the fact that often


6/8



176

att mai mult cu ct scopurile publice sunt demulte ori ambigue i foarte greu cuantificabile.

Incapacitatea birocraiei de a soluionaanumite probleme, a fost evideniat de catresociologul american Robert K. Merton, care

observa c modul n care sunt acordatestimulentele financiare ctre funcionariipublici, i determin pe acetia s seconcentreze exclusive asupra aplicriinormelor, pierznd din vedere scopurile.criteriile de meninere n funcie, precum i celede promovare, nu i determinpe funcionari s

pun accentul pe ceea ce reprezint finalitateabirocraiei ca model de administraie, i anumescopurile publice.

n ceea ce privete caracterul

maximizator al birocraiei, teoreticienii alegeriisociale (public choice), aratcbirocraii au invedere fie consumarea unei cantiti de resursemai mare dect cea prevzut iniial(maximizarea bugetului), fie creterea ndimensiuni a birourilor. Astfel, se considercbirocratul va realize c oportunitile de

promovare cresc, puterea, influena i respectul,se consolideaz, i chiar condiiile fizice delucru se mbuntesc, atunci cnd biroul ncare lucreazcrete n dimensiuni 4.

n lucrarea Inside Bureaucracy(1967), Anthony Downs a dezvoltat o teorie aalegerii publice privind birocraia n carerigiditatea este explicat pe larg. Downsidentificdousurse de rigiditate n birou, unadesemnatca normal i una considerata fianormal. Va exista ntotdeauna o cretere arigiditii n cadrul unui birou pe msur ceacesta crete n vrst i dimensiune. Dar nacelai timp ar putea aprea o rigiditate

anormal cnd biroul intr ntr-un ciclu rigid,exemplificat desindromul de osificare5.Tendina inerent de extindere a

biroului este, conform lui Downs, contratde oforopus efectul de decelerare. Pe msurce noul birou se maturizeaz, extindereaacestuia devine din ce n ce mai dificildatorit

pierderii funciei originare, datorit creteriiostilitii provenind de la alte birouri, datoritdificultii de meninere a unui rezultat eficient,datorit problemelor interne de recrutare a

personalului talentat i a rezolvrii conflictelor6

.

bureaucracy escapes political control. Themost important problem is the fact that

bureaucracy serves firstly the differentpurposes depending on own interests, evenmore so as the public aims are most times

ambiguous and difficult to quantify.The bureaucracys lack of capacity tosolve certain problems was highlighted by theAmerican sociologist Robert K. Merton, whonotices that the way financial stimulants aregranted to public servants determines them toconcentrate exclusively on applying thenorms, loosing sight of the goals. The criteriafor maintaining in function, as well the

promotion ones, dont determine the publicservants to concentrate on what is the finality

of bureaucracy as administration model,namely the public goals.

Regarding the bureaucracysmaximizing character, the theoreticians of

public choice show that bureaucrats considereither the consumption of a quantity ofresources higher than initially provisioned(budget maximization), of the increase ofoffice sizes. Thus, it is considered that the

bureaucrat will realize that the opportunitiesfor promotion increase, the power, influenceand respect consolidate and even physicalwork conditions improve, when the officewhere he works expands in size 11.

In his work Inside Bureaucracy(1967), Anthony Downs developed a theory of

public choice on bureaucracy where rigidity iswidely explained. Downs identifies twosources of rigidity in the office, oneconsidered normal and one abnormal.There will always be an increase of rigidity in

an office, as it increases in age and size. But atthe same time, an abnormal rigidity mightappear when the office enters a rigid cycle,exemplified with the ossification syndrome12.

The inherent tendency of officeexpansion is, according to Downs,counteracted by an opposite force thedeceleration effect. As the new office matures,its expansion becomes more and more difficultdue to the loss of its original function, giventhe increase of hostility from the other offices,

due to the difficulty to maintain an efficient


7/8



177

Reacia normal din partea biroului nperioadele de stagnare a creterii este de arecurge la diverse expresii de rigiditate nscopul meninerii status quoului i protejriiorganizaiei de teama dispariiei complete.

Efectul combinat a acestor tendine sprerigiditate este acela de a face birourileconservative, ceea ce nseamn c birourilelargi sunt adesea desfiinate i cbirourile maivechi vor disprea. Nu este nsclar dacacestmodel de rigiditate se refer i la rigiditateaanormal. Anumite birouri tind s ajungntr-un ciclu al rigiditii. Teoria despre ciclulrigiditii presupune c rigidizareacomportamentului birocratic poate fi att de

pronunat nct biroul nu mai produce nici un

fel de rezultat, astfel nct va aprea nevoia dereorganizare sau chiar de dizolvare. Conformlui Downs, rspunsul la ciclul rigiditii esteciclul reorganizrii.

Problema distinciei ntre politic iadministrativ este foarte veche. Ea a fost tratat,

printre alii, de ctre Woodrow Wilson, carenainte s devin preedinte al Statelor Uniteale Americii, a fost profesor de jurisprudenieconomie politicla Universitatea Princeton. nscrierile sale despre delimitarea celor doua sferede activitate, politici administrativ, Wilsonvorbea despre caracterul sfnt al funciei

publice. De aceea, ntre politic i administrativtrebuie stabilite limite precis determinate, ca ogaranie a eficientizrii serviciilor publice.Politicul trebuie doar s stabileasc sarcinileadministrativului.

n practic, cele doua domenii nu pot fiinsizolate.

Guy Peters7 enun cteva argumete

privind influenele reciproce dintre politic iadministrative:1. funcionarii dobndesc expertizntr-

un anumit domeniu, si, prin urmare, iformeazo ideologie, o viziune proprie, asuprasoluionrii problemelor publice, viziune ce seva reflecta n activitatea de implementare a

politicilor ministeriale;2. descentralizarea i deconcentarea

centrelor de decizie politica, precum ireformele din domeniul managementului,

mresc sfera de aciune politica funcionarilor

result, internal problems in recruiting talentedpersonnel and conflict resolution13.

The normal reaction from the office inthe period of stagnation of growth is to resortto various expressions of rigidity with the aim

to maintain status quo and protect organisationfrom the fear of complete disappearance.The combined effect of these

tendencies to rigidity is that of making theoffice conservative, which means that thelarge offices are often closed and the olderoffices will disappear. It is not clear thoughwhether this rigidity model refers also toabnormal rigidity. Some offices tend to reach arigidity cycle. The theory about the rigiditycycle assumes that the stiffening of the

bureaucratic behaviour can be so emphatic thatthe office no longer produces any results,resulting in the need for reorganising or evendissolving. According to Downs, the answer tothe rigidity cycle is the reorganisation cycle.

The problem of the distinction betweenpolitical and administrative is very old. It hasbeen treated among other by WoodrowWilson, who, before becoming president ofthe United States, taught case law and politicaleconomy at Princeton University. In hiswritings about the delimitation between thetwo spheres of activity, political andadministrative, Wilson spoke about the hollycharacter of the public function. That is whyclearly determined limits must be drawn

between the political and the administrative, asa guarantee for making the political servicesmore efficient. The political must only set thetasks for the administrative.

In practice the two fields cannot be

isolated though.Guy Peters14 lists some argumentsregarding the mutual influences between

political and administrative:1. public servants gain expertise in one

field and consequently form an ideology, apersonal vision about the solving of publicproblems, vision that will reflect in the activityto implement ministry policies;

2. decentralisation and deconcentrationof centres for political decision, as well as

reforms from the management field, increase


8/8



178

ce dein funcii de conducere, crescresponsabilitatea acestora fa de politici,

precum i vizibilitatea lor public;3. lupta dintre instituii pentru obinerea

bugetelor este dublati de o lupta politicntre

acestea;4. concentrarea expertizei la niveluriinferioare, n dauna nivelurilor superioare, denaturpolitic;

5. funcionarii intervin decisiv nformularea normelor de aplicare i nimplementarea politicilor.

De asemenea, Peters individualizeazimecanismele pe care le dezvolt instituiile

politice, pentru controlul activitii autoritailoradministraiei publice:

- stabilirea unor indicatori deperforman, a unor standarde de calitate, attpentru autoritile administraiei publice nansamblu, ct i a celor ce dein funcii deconducere;

- strategia de rotire a funcionarilor ndepartamente diferite;

- exercitarea controlului politic asuprafunciilor de conducere administrativ;

- nfiinarea unor structuri de autoritateparalele, si concurente n acelai domeniu deactivitate.

the sphere for political action of servantsholding management functions, increase theirresponsibility for policies, as well as their

public visibility;3. the fight between institutions to

obtain budgets is doubled by the political fightbetween them;4. the concentration of expertise at

inferior levels, at the expense of superiorlevels, of political nature;

5. the public servants intervenedecisively in formulating the applicationnorms and the implementation of policies.

At the same time, Peters singles out themechanisms developed by politicalinstitutions, for the control of the activity in

the authorities of public administration:- establishing some performance

indicators, quality standards, both for theauthorities of public administration, and forthose holding management functions;

- the strategy for rotation of publicservants in different departments;

- exercising political control overadministrative management functions;

- setting up parallel authoritystructures, competitive in the same activityfield.

1Gorun A., Teorie politica, Presa universitara Clujena, p. 1562Lane, E.,The Public Sector. Concepts, Models and Approaches, SAGE Publications, 1995, SecondEdition3Hughes, O. E.,Public Management and Administratio., An Introduction, Second Edition4Tullock, G., The Politics of Bureaucracy, Public Affairs Press, Washington, 19655Downs, A.,Inside Bureaucracy, Little Brown, Boston, 19676 idem 57Peters, G., The Politics of Bureaucracy, editia a IV-a, Longman Publishers, Londra, 19998

Gorun A., Teorie politica, Presa universitara Clujena, p. 1569Lane, E.,The Public Sector. Concepts, Models and Approaches, SAGE Publications, 1995, SecondEdition10Hughes, O. E.,Public Management and Administratio., An Introduction, Second Edition11Tullock, G., The Politics of Bureaucracy, Public Affairs Press, Washington, 196512Downs, A.,Inside Bureaucracy, Little Brown, Boston, 196713 idem 514Peters, G., The Politics of Bureaucracy, editia a IV-a, Longman Publishers, Londra, 1999

17 Iulian Pinisoara

Documents

Transcript of 17 Iulian Pinisoara