Board and Bureau Types of Organisation | Public Administration

After reading this article you will learn about the advantages and disadvantages of board and bureau type of organisations.

Advantages of Board Type:

The board type is considered appropriate in the following cases:

(i) Where the duties are of a quasi-legislative or quasi-judicial character;

(ii) Where the duties call for the exercise of wide discretionary powers or are of a general control character;

(iii) Where it is desirable to have a number of different interests represented;

(iv) Where an attempt is to be made to eliminate, or to reduce to a minimum, the factor of party politics in the conduct of the affairs of certain services;

(v) Where the administration is required to be saved from any kind of external pressures; and

(vi) Where the policies and techniques are not yet fully settled and deliberations are neces­sary to discover the right course of action.

L.D. White favours a Board or Commission type:

(i) If the discovery and formulation of policy is desired;

(ii) If it involves the exercise of wide discretionary or controlling powers affecting impor­tant private interests of property or powers;

(iii) If the exercise of coercive power in controversial areas is desired; and

(iv) If the protection of administrative integrity against hostile outside pressure is vital.

Disadvantages of Board Type:

The disadvantages of the Board type are the following:

(i) It leads to disintegration and lack of responsible directorship. When many persons head a department, there cannot be any unity of command.

(ii) When many persons work collectively, individual responsibility cannot be fixed. Everybody’s responsibility is nobody’s responsibility.

(iii) The board decisions are generally compromise decisions among different interests. The compromise decisions are not always rational. It may be a compromise among the selfish inter­ests of all the members.

(iv) It leads to delay in action. It cannot act promptly. Time is lost in consultation and discussion.

(v) It may lead to party politics among the employees.

(vi) Dissensions and lack of team spirit among the Board members may lead to indiscipline in the organisation.

(vii) The board is generally constituted of mediocre personnel or is packed with safe indi­viduals.

Alexander Hamilton states, “Boards partake of a part of the inconvenience of larger assem­blies. Their decisions are slower, their energy less, their responsibility more diffused. They will not have the same abilities and knowledge as an administration by a single man. Men of the first pretensions will not so readily engage in them; because they will be less conspicuous, of less importance, have less opportunity of distinguishing themselves. The members of Boards will take less pains to inform themselves and arrive to eminence because they have fewer motives to do it.”

Advantages of the Bureau Type:

John M. Pfiffner prefers single head of department under the following circumstances:

(i) The single head is necessary in those activities which require discipline of a semi- military type;

(ii) Those activities, which involve the exercise of practically no discretion, should be headed by a single officer;

(iii) Single head would do well

(a) Where quick decisions and quick actions are essential;

(b) Where lay confidence in well-developed technology is desirable;

(c) Where work to be done is essentially of an administrative character;

(d) Where cost of administration is to be taken into account;

(iv) Under bureau type, responsibility is clearly defined and easily located;

(v) In this system there remains a unity of purpose in the organisation; and

(vi) It will lead to effective, efficient and quick administration.

Alexander Hamilton writes, “A single man, in each department of the administration, would be greatly preferable. It would give us a chance of more knowledge, more activity, more respon­sibility, and, of course, more zeal and attention.”

Disadvantages of Bureau Type:

The Bureau type runs the following risks:

(i) It may lead to one man’s despotism;

(ii) It may introduce party politics;

(iii) The single head may not be able to resist the political pressure;

(iv) He may not be able to cope with semi-legislative and quasi-judicial functions.

Conclusion:

In view of the advantages and disadvantages of both the Board and Bureau types of organisation it is difficult to pass any general and final judgment on the desirability of the one as against the other type. Much depends on the conditions to be met.

In a general way it may be said that where the services do purely administrative work, the bureau type of organisation should be adopted, but if they do purely semi-judicial or semi-legislative work the board type would be better.

In point of fact, however, the problem is not as simple as it appears to be because there are a number of branches of administration where the duties to be performed fall in both fields, for example, the Police, Education and Public Health departments.

These depart­ments are concerned not only with purely administrative work but some authority to make rules and regulations is also delegated to them by the legislature. In such services a mixed system of bureau and board type should be followed. For example, in the Education Department the law may provide for a Board of Education as well as for a Director of Public Instruction.

Here the problem that arises concerns mainly with the relative jurisdiction of the two authorities and their relations to each other. It is of great importance that the powers and duties of the two should be clearly indicated. The Board should be granted no administrative authority; all such authority should be vested in the Director to an extent that he may be held responsible for the actual conduct of affairs.

Upload and Share Your Article: