Most of the people who keep tabs on the workings of the federal government, no matter what the reasons for their interest, seem to take for granted the power and autonomy of the chiefs of the bureaus that make up the executive branch. Because so much is taken for granted, there have not been many studies of what the chiefs actually do day by day. Of all the participants in the governmental process who wield--or are thought to wield--great influence, bureau chiefs are among the least examined. Believing that he could narrow this gap in the materials on the federal government somewhat, Herbert Kaufman set out to report his observations of six bureau chiefs at their jobs in the course of a year. The group consisted of the commissioners of the Internal Revenue Service, the Customs Service, the Food and Drug Administration, and the Social Security Administration; the chief of the Forest Service; and the administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service--a set diversified enough to include a wide variety of organizational situations and experiences, yet with enough in common to allow comparison and generalization. The objective of his research was to describe the chief's activities so as to explain how they exercise their power. And he hoped to find out whether they are as powerful as they are said to be. From his efforts emerges a detailed picture of the work of the bureau leaders and of their role in their agencies and in the government generally. The picture reveals that some of the common beliefs about these officials, and perhaps about the system as a whole, are not altogether accurate. Kaufman traces the implications of his findings for organizing the executive branch, for training administrators, and for organization theory.

Most of the people who keep tabs on the workings of the federal government, no matter what the reasons for their interest, seem to take for granted the power and autonomy of the chiefs of the bureaus that make up the executive branch. Because so much is taken for granted, there have not been many studies of what the chiefs actually do day by day. Of all the participants in the governmental process who wield--or are thought to wield--great influence, bureau chiefs are among the least examined. Believing that he could narrow this gap in the materials on the federal government somewhat, Herbert Kaufman set out to report his observations of six bureau chiefs at their jobs in the course of a year. The group consisted of the commissioners of the Internal Revenue Service, the Customs Service, the Food and Drug Administration, and the Social Security Administration; the chief of the Forest Service; and the administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service--a set diversified enough to include a wide variety of organizational situations and experiences, yet with enough in common to allow comparison and generalization. The objective of his research was to describe the chief's activities so as to explain how they exercise their power. And he hoped to find out whether they are as powerful as they are said to be. From his efforts emerges a detailed picture of the work of the bureau leaders and of their role in their agencies and in the government generally. The picture reveals that some of the common beliefs about these officials, and perhaps about the system as a whole, are not altogether accurate. Kaufman traces the implications of his findings for organizing the executive branch, for training administrators, and for organization theory.

The central role that bureaucracy plays in the policy process is played by individuals, namely, by subject matter experts and managers we call political executives. The context in which these executives play their roles is defined by three key forces--the organizational environment of bureaucracy itself; our governing philosophy stressing responsiveness, respect for individual rights, and accountability; and the demands of the people and the institutions those people have created to govern themselves. This book provides an in-depth look at each of these forces, with chapters specifically devoted to how bureaucrats interpret their role in the policy process, how the organizational environment influences their ability to play that role, and most of all, to the interactions between bureaucrats and the institutions of what we call the Constitutional government--the President, the Congress, and the Courts.

How do we fit bureaucracy into a democratic political system? No other question has received--or deserved--more attention from those who study public administration. While this question might receive slightly different responses, there is one common thread, the notion that bureaucrats must be subject to external controls. Who possesses the ability to influence the government from the outside? How do these people use their influence? Is their influence used to promote democratic values? Dennis Riley assesses the effect congressional committees and subcommittees have on government agencies as well as the influence of clientele groups and professional associations. The author also explores the impact the President, the courts, and the critics of bureaucratic agencies--such as the Sierra Club or Ralph Nader's consumer watch-dog groups--have on bureaucracy. This book forces us to realize that many of our controlling influences on federal agencies only serve to reinforce the narrowness and isolation that plagues contemporary bureaucracy, where the general public interest and even competency are sacrificed in the belief that existing agency policies are the only sound and workable policies around. Author note: Dennis D. Riley is Professor and Chairman of the Political Science Department at the University of Wisconsin, Stevens Point.

The Problem with Survey Research makes a case against survey research as a primary source of reliable information. George Beam argues that all survey research instruments, all types of asking-including polls, face-to-face interviews, and focus groups-produce unreliable and potentially inaccurate results. Because those who rely on survey research only see answers to questions, it is impossible for them, or anyone else, to evaluate the results. They cannot know if the answers correspond to respondents' actual behaviors (objective phenomena) or to their true beliefs and opinions (subjective phenomena). Reliable information can only be acquired by observation, experimentation, multiple sources of data, formal model building and testing, document analysis, and comparison. In fifteen chapters divided into six parts-Ubiquity of Survey Research, The Problem, Asking Instruments, Asking Settings, Askers, and Proper Methods and Research Designs-The Problem with Survey Research demonstrates how asking instruments, settings in which asking and answering take place, and survey researchers themselves skew results and thereby make answers unreliable. The last two chapters and appendices examine observation, other methods of data collection and research designs that may produce accurate or correct information, and shows how reliance on survey research can be overcome, and must be.

Whether it's the Internal Revenue Service or the local police department, every person's life is affected by how public organizations handle information. New technologies are inundating us with data-agencies collect, store, analyze and disseminate information. How organizations manage this information is crucial to their effectiveness, efficiency, and accountability. It is becoming more difficult for public organizations to formulate clear messages. Political pressure from elected officials and public scrutiny make the task of managing communication even more daunting. By helping students see how communication networks must be treated within larger psychological, cultural, and mechanical contexts, Graber presents ways to construct effective channels so information is transmitted to the appropriate audiences, linking policy decisions and feedback from citizens. Blending the best of theory and practice, The Power of Communication helps both students and practitioners turn a flood tide of information into an asset, rather than a menace, to good government.

PUBLIC AFFAIRS AND POLICY ADMINISTRATION SERIES Edited by Donald Kettl How should a manager handle different accountability expectations? While a commonplace term in government lexicon, accountability has escaped precise definition, leaving managers at a disadvantage when trying to monitor the performance of their programs. Including more than 300 programs, over 60,000 employees, and a budget of over $400 billion, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is an ideal canvas for starkly illustrating competing accountability demands. With a bird's-eye view of the agency's inner workings, Radin tackles big issues such as strategies of centralization and decentralization, coordination with states and localities, leadership, and program design, while using the apt analogy of a juggler to show how managers must keep in the air disparate demands and developments.