Public Administration Journal
Theoni
A Century of Progress title of the 1933 Chicago World 's Fair
Science Explores, Technology Executes, Mankind Conforms motto of the 1933 Chicago World 's Fair
Enthraled with Modernity: The
Histori(2il Context of Knowledge and Theory Development in Public
Administration
Guy B. Adams, University of Missouri-Columbia
What impact has the "culture of modernity" had on the field of public administration? Guy B. Adams contends that the American cultural preoccupation with modernity has shaped the study of puhlic administration into an ahistorical and atemporal field that stresses technical rationality and has limited capacity to address critical questions facing society. This approach to public administration puts its emphasis on professionalism and the "scientific" and "rigorous" study of the field.
Adams calls for greater attention to history that produces a "genuinely open inquiry" in the field.
Much has been written in the last decade on knowledge and theory development in the field of American public administration (White, 1986; Ventriss, 1987;
Hummel, 1991; Box, 1992; McCurdy and Cleary, 1984;
Perry and Kraemer, 1986). Although beneficial, none of these analyses has taken a self-consciously historical approach to questions of knowledge and theory development in public administration, ' This article seeks to place this discourse in its historical context.
The most important aspect of the historical context is the culture at large within which American public administration is practiced, researched, and taught.
Today, the culture at large may be characterized as one of modernity (Turner, 1990; also Bernstein, 1985;
Bauman, 1989; and Rabinbach, 1990). Modernity is the culmination of a centuries-long process of modernization. Intellectual strands of modernity reach back to the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, but as the defining characteristic of our own culture, modernity coalesced only within the past century. Modernity describes a social, political, and
A Century of Progress title of the 1933 Chicago World 's Fair
Science Explores, Technology Executes, Mankind Conforms motto of the 1933 Chicago World 's Fair
Enthraled with Modernity: The
Histori(2il Context of Knowledge and Theory Development in Public
Administration
Guy B. Adams, University of Missouri-Columbia
What impact has the "culture of modernity" had on the field of public administration? Guy B. Adams contends that the American cultural preoccupation with modernity has shaped the study of puhlic administration into an ahistorical and atemporal field that stresses technical rationality and has limited capacity to address critical questions facing society. This approach to public administration puts its emphasis on professionalism and the "scientific" and "rigorous" study of the field.
Adams calls for greater attention to history that produces a "genuinely open inquiry" in the field.
Much has been written in the last decade on knowledge and theory development in the field of American public administration (White, 1986; Ventriss, 1987;
Hummel, 1991; Box, 1992; McCurdy and Cleary, 1984;
Perry and Kraemer, 1986). Although beneficial, none of these analyses has taken a self-consciously historical approach to questions of knowledge and theory development in public administration, ' This article seeks to place this discourse in its historical context.
The most important aspect of the historical context is the culture at large within which American public administration is practiced, researched, and taught.
Today, the culture at large may be characterized as one of modernity (Turner, 1990; also Bernstein, 1985;
Bauman, 1989; and Rabinbach, 1990). Modernity is the culmination of a centuries-long process of modernization. Intellectual strands of modernity reach back to the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, but as the defining characteristic of our own culture, modernity coalesced only within the past century. Modernity describes a social, political, and
References: Adams, Guy B., Pdscilla V. Bowerman, Kenneth M. Dolbeare, and Camilla Stivers, 1990 Adams, Guy B. and Virginia Hill Ingersoll, 1990. "Culture, Technical Rationality and Organizational Culture." American Review of Public Allen, William H., 1907. Efficient Democracy. New York: Dodd and Mead. Arendt, Hannah, 1954. Between Past and Future. Cleveland: World Publishing. Aronson, Sidney H., 1964. Status and Kinship in the Higher Civil Service. Barley, Stephen R., Gordon W. Meyer, and Debra C. Gash, 1988. "Cultures of Culture: Academics, Practitioners, and the Pragmatics of Normative Barrett, William, 1979. The Illusion of Technique. Garden City, NY: Anchor Doubleday. Bauman, Zygmont, 1989. Modernity and the Holocaust. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Bernstein, Richard, ed., 1985. Habermas and Modernity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Bendix, Reinhard, 1956. Work and Authority in Industry. New York: Harper and Row. Box, Richard C, 1192. "An Examination of the Debate Over Research in Public Administration." Public Administration Review, vol Caiden, Gerald E., 1984. "In Search of an Apolitical Science of American Public Administration." In Jack Rabin and James S Caldwell, Lynton K., 1976. "Novus Ordo Seclorum: The Heritage of American Public Administration." Public Administration Review, vol Chandler, Ralph Clark, ed., 1987. A Centennial History of the American Administrative State Crenson, Mathew A., 1975. The Federal Machine: Beginnings ofBureaucracy in Jacksonian America Croly, Herbert, 1909. The Promise ofAmerican Life. New York: Macmillan. Cuff, Robert D., 1978. "Wilson and Weber: Bourgeois Critics in an Organized Age." Public Administration Review, vol Daneke, Gregory A., 1990. "A Science of Public Administration?" Public Administration Review, vol Denhardt, Robert B., 1981. In the Shadow of Organization. Lawrence, KS: Regents Press of Kansas. EUul, Jacques, 1954. The Technological Society. New York: Vintage. Ely, Richard, 1982. "Report of the Organization of the American Economic Association, 1886." In Michael B Faulconer, James E. and Richard N. Williams, 1985. "Temporality in Human Action: An Alternative to Positivism and Historicism." American Psychologist, vol. 40 (November), pp. 1179-1188. FoUett, Mary Parker, 1918. The New State. New York: Longmans. Forester, John, 1989. Planning in the Face of Power. Berkeley: University of California Press. Frederickson, H. George, 1980. The New Public Administration. University, AL: University of Alabama Press. Furner, Mary O., 1975. Advocacy and Objectivity: A Crisis in the Professionalization of Social Science Graebner, William, 1987. The Engineering of Consent: Democracy and Authority in Twentieth Century America Green, Richard T., 1990. "Alexander Hamilton and the Study of Public Administration." Public Administration Quarterly, vol Guerreiro-Ramos, Alberto, 1981. The New Science of Organization. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Gulick, Luther and Lyndall K. Urwick, eds., 1937. Papers on the Science of Administration Haber, Samuel, 1964. Efficiency and Uplift: Scientific Management in the Progressive Era, 1890-1920 Hanson, Russell L., 1985. ne Democratic Imagination in America: Conversations with Our Past Hegel, G.W.F., 1965, ohg. 1807. "Preface to the Phenomenology of Mind." In Walter Kaufmann, ed and trans., Hegel: Texts and Commentary Heidegger, Martin, 1977, ohg. 1926. Basic Writings, trans. David Krell. New York: Harper and Row. Henry, Nicholas, 1990. "Root and Branch: Public Administration 's Travail Toward the Future." In Naomi Lynn and Aaron Wildavsky, eds. Higgs, Robert, 1987. Crisis and Leviathan: Critical Episodes in the Growth of American Government Hofstadter, Richard, 1955. The Age of Reform. New York: Vintage Books. Horkheimer, Max, 1947. The Eclipse of Reason. New York: Oxford University Press. Houston, David J. and Sybil M. Delevan, 1990. "Public Administration Research: An Assessment of Journal Publications." Public Administration