IlllUlllliNlIZIJHIHlUlHHIIIIHIHHIIHIIIIHIIlllllllll W

31293 10382 2593

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ABSTRACT

THE USE OF SELECTED ASPECTS OF FUNCTIONALISM
IN DEVELOPING PROPOSITIONS RELEVANT
TO ADMINISTRATIVE LEADERSHIP

by Geoffrey W. Gibson

This study is about administrative leadership.
It is concerned with some of the first steps in the
construction of a theory - the fashioning of tools
consisting of an adequate vocabulary and an analytic
scheme, which will make it possible to analyze the
nature and tasks of administrative leadership.

It was felt that a clear understanding of the
tasks of leadership is frequently lacking. Hence, a
conceptualization and analysis of administrative
leadership is basic since all enterprises require the
performance of administrative functions in the achieve-
ment of specified purposes. The study endeavors to pro-
vide this by a summary and synthesis of what are con-
sidered relevant concepts and ideas that have developed
to date; notably those of Parsons on social systems,
Easton on political systems and Selznick on adminis—
tration.

It is based on the assumption that a formal or-

ganization is a social system. Accordingly, a study of

Geoffrey W. Gibson

the nature of social systems may be expected to yield
insights as to the tasks of leadership.

The study examines an organization as an open—
ended system of interactions existing in a changing
environment. It is capable of responding to internal
and external pressures in the interests of achieving
specified purposes and of survival. The functions re-
garded as essential to the fulfillment and persistence
of a system are identified as goal attainment, pattern
maintenance, adaptation and integration. It indicates
that administration is concerned with the consequences of
,social activity which make for the preservation or ad-
justment of a given system. It is the system of inter—
actions through which critical decisions are made and
implemented. It is not merely the quantity of decisions
plus the efficiency with which they are put into effect.
It includes also the ends of those decisions considered
both as purpose and as process. ‘

The administrator's job, then, is seen as one in
which primary concern with policy is manifested in the

organization and coordination of a complex and dynamic

system to carry out policy decisions. This includes —

Geoffrey W. Gibson

. definition of purpose of group existence
. design of an enterprise adapted to these ends
. realization of this design through

. communication of purpose

. infusion of purpose

. defense of integrity
. adaptation to internal and external pressures

The value of such studies is seen in the fact that

change can be planned and structured through well directed

innovative organizations.

THE USE OF SELECTED ASPECTS OF FUNCTIONALISM
IN DEVELOPING PROPOSITIONS RELEVANT

TO ADMINISTRATIVE LEADERSHIP

by

«I LN

Geoffrey WfinGibson

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

Department of Secondary Education and Curriculum

1966

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

My special thanks go to all those who were so
willing to give of their time, knowledge and experience
to make this study a profitable one — particularly Drs.
Brembeck and Leu. Their personal interest and encourage-
ment served as a guide and stimulus throughom: a unique
opportunity to read, discuss and examine under congenial
conditions some of the basic problems of administrative

leadership.

Those rules of old, discover'd, not devis'd,
Are nature still, but nature methodis'd.

Pope

ii

PREFACE

This study is merely the tangible result of a
program of study at Michigan State University College
of Education and I count myself fortunate to have had
an Opportunity to study under such congenial conditions.
A study of the nature of the theory and pract-
ice of administrative leadership has two definite ad—
vantages. It provides many new ideas and leads to a
re—examination of procedures that have been taken for
granted. Too often we become so immersed in the
routine activities of our occupations that we neglect
to consider the reason behind it all - the foundations.
This study has provided time to consider the
former in relationship to the latter. The real benefit
must necessarily be a personal one. However, in the
hope some aspects may be of special interest to others,
whoare genuinely concerned about administration and
about leadership, I have endeavoured to detail ideas and
concepts relevant to the tasks of administrative leader—
ship. The principles are more important than the details
which vary greatly according to specific conditions and

circumstances.

iii

The study makes no claim to be exhaustive in
treatment nor is it intended to be comprehensive in
scope. It covers what are considered to be some im—
portant ideas and the application of these to the
practical situation will provide a fruitful field for
initiative and enterprise. If it develops, even to a
limited degree, a greater awareness of what is involved
in practical problems, stimulates discussion of the
nature of, and a rethinking of possibilities concern-
ing the tasks facing administrative leadership, then
its primary purpose will have been fulfilled. So long
as a continuing examination of ends and means goes on,
problems will be more clearly defined and hence more likely
to be solved.

Nor could it be claimed that the ideas expressed
in this study are original except in the sense that they
are one person's synthesis of what has been gleaned from
wide reading. Where not expressly stated it will be
apparent to those familiar with the subject that much
of what is covered is the result of the thoughts and
labors of others and toail these I gratefully acknowledge
my indebtedness. This will be readily apparent to any-
one acquainted with the works of Parsons, Barnard, Simon
Easton, Selznick and others, for example, whose ideas
have been analyzed, used, adopted, adapted, summarized
and extended as seemed desirable and necessary. Chapter

iv

III is basically a summary of Parsons and Chapters IV
and V of Barnard, Fromm, Easton and Selznick. A num-
ber of the ideas and concepts have been recognized for
some years, although applied with varying degrees of
effectiveness. However, a comprehensive synthesis needs
to be attempted and if this study assists towards this
it will be regarded as worthwhile.

The topic was chosen because I believe it to be
of the utmost importance. Leadership is essential if a
. more effective use of human resources is to be achieved
and the failure of leadership in large scale organizations
when it occurs, is largely due to lack of understanding.
Leadership fails because it does not recognize or deal
with the basic sources of vulnerability.

Any studycf leadership in large scale organiza-
tions needs to consider the nature of such enterprises
and the characteristic problems that arise within them.
This can usefully be based on an understanding of those
activities essential to the survival of a social system
(called in sociological language, functional imperatives)
since there is a close connection between these and the
key functions of leadership. The objective of this
study then is to indicate the possible contribution of
an analysis of an enterprise as a social system, to ad—

ministrative leadership.

The first section outlines the problem and
questions the validity of such conventionally accepted
elements as efficiency being the prime concern of
leadership. In the second a review of relevant liter—
ature indicates the need for a comprehensive theory
of administrative leadership. This is followed by a
short summary of the functional imperatives of a social
system as applicable to large scale organizations and
a summary collation and more detailed development of
ideas and concepts considered of value. Section five
applies these more specifically to significant aspects
of leadership in large scale organizations. The final
section summarizes the ideas developed on the nature
of administrative leadership and points to an approach
which, if put into operation, might contribute towards
more effective and efficient leadership in the interests
of a better use of human resources.

Conventional approaches to administrative lead—
ership will not do and a new approach needs to be made.
This will necessitate much expenditure of thought and
energy. Will the required expenditures be forthcoming?
It seems so, and although there is no commonly accepted,
comprehensive theory of administration or administrative
leadership, the subject is receiving increasing attention.
It is hoped that this study makes a contribution in some

vi

way to the solution of the problems faced by those
interested in administrative leadership.

Over time it can be expected that,as the body
of empirical research provides more than general guide-
lines for decision and action and as theoretical studies
become more explicit in interrelating and integrating
administrative functions and processes, an attempt
will be made to develop a comprehensive theory of ad-
ministrative leadership which will receive general sup-

port. Success in this attempt is still in the future.

vii

CHAPTER

I

II

III

IV

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A PROBLEM AND SOME PRELIMINARY CONSIDER-

ATIONS. I O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

Beginning and Inquiry . . . . . . . .

A Problem - The Importance of Leadership. 2

Generalizations in Social Science . .
The Value of Theory . . . . . . . . .
This Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A Social Systems Approach . . . . . .
Leadership. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

REVIEW OF LITERATURE. . . . . . . . . .

The Nature and Value of Functionalism
Sociology . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The Present State of Administrative
Theory. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Administrative Leadership in Education. . 45

Current Trends. . . . . . . . . . . .

SOCIOLOGICAL BACKGROUND . . . . . . . .

Administration—A Universal Phenomenon
Functional Approach— An Overview. . .
Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Parsonian Theory Weaving. . . . . . .
A Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

SYNTHESIS OF CONCEPTS . . . . . . . . .

The Environment of a System . . . . .
System Persistence . . . . . . . . .
Environment and Linkage Variables . .
The Responding System . . . . . . . .
Feedback. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

THE TASKS OF ADMINISTRATIVE LEADERSHIP.

Types of Decisions. . . . . . . . . .
The Character of an Organization. . .
Policy and Critical Decisions . . . .

viii

Page
. . 1
. . 1
. . 6
. . lO
. . l6
. . 17
. . 18
. . l9
. . 22
in
O O 22
. . 36
. . S3
. . 6O
. . 6O
. . 63
O O 65
. . 71
. . 83
. . 88
. . 88
. . 92
. .104
. .111
. .117
O .121.
O .124
O .124
. .129
O .13].

CHAPTER

The Functions of Leadership.
The Definition of Purpose.

Infusion of Purpose.
Defense of Integrity

VI SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS .

Summary. . . . . . . .
Some Generalizations .
Value of Study . . . .

Suggestions for Further Study

APPENDIX A.

INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF THE DEPART-

MENT OF EDUCATION AT THE UNIVERSITY OF

NIGERIA. . . . . . . .

BIBLIOGRAPHY. . . .. . . . . . .

ix

Page

134
136
139
145

147

147
155
159
162

165

174

LIST OF DIAGRAMS
DIAGRAM Page

1 The Functional Imperatives of a Social
System. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84

2 The Responding Social System. . . . . . . 107

CHAPTER I

A PROBLEM AND SOME
PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS

Beginning an Inquiry

 

What is the first thing to do when one initiates
an inquiry? Textbooks on methodology do not help very
much and even the authorities, the classical experts
in science and philosophy disagree on the procedure to
be followed at the very beginning of an inquiry as
Northrupl and Hearn2 indicate so clearly.

Is there any way of determining what is a correct
approach at the initial stage of any inquiry? The answer
is clearly that inquiry starts only when something is
unsatisfactory; when traditional beliefs are inadequate
or in question, when the facts necessary to resolve un—
certainities are unknown, and when the likely relevant
hypotheses are not even imagined.

The positive thing to do at the beginning of an

inquiry, after doubting traditional approaches, is to

 

1F.S.C. Northrup, The Logic of the Sciences and
the Humanities (New York: Macmillan, 1947).

2G. Hearn, Theory Building in Social Work
(Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1958).

1

2

concentrate attention on the character of the problem.
It is the problem and its characteristics as revealed
by analysis which leads to the relevant facts and then,
once these are known, to the relevant hypotheses. The
analysis of the problem which initiates inquiry is a
different procedure from the act of imagination which
proposes a hypothesis to solve the problem, after it has
been analyzed and the relevant facts have been determined.

The analysis of the problem is of some import-
ance and requires special attention. After outlining
the problem with which this study is concerned, the
nature of administrative leadership, it will be profit-
able to consider the nature of generalizations in the

social sciences and the value of theory.

A Problem — The Importance of Leadership

 

A pluralist society which is composed of many
influential and largely autonomous groups -- both
governmental and private -- whose leaders are respons-
ible for the well being of increasingly large segments
of the entire community emphasizes the need for leader—
ship. . . for administrative leadership.

What is the nature and quality of leadership?

Do we possess an adequate understanding of leadership
in both public and private organizations?

This is an elusive theme but an important one

if a better use of human resources and a more adequate

3
understanding of administrative leadership is to be
achieved and there is a constant search for fresh ways
of looking at organization and administration and new
"models" to help in achieving such understanding.

Much of this interest is practical and based on
the assumption that overall efficiency must be the guid-
ing criterion in administration. The typical concern
is expressed or implied in such questions as:

1. How can the organization be made more effi-
cient?

2. In what ways can incentives, communications,
and decision making be improved so as to achieve a
smoother running operation?

3. How can the job be done most surely and at
the least cost?

This is evidenced even in the more authoritative
works such as Simon3 where it is stated that:

The theory of administration is concerned

with how an organization should be constructed
and operated in order to accomplish its work
efficiently.

Elsewhere it is stated that efficiency is a def—
inition of what is meant by "good" or "correct" ad-
ministrative behavior. It does not tell how accomplish-

ments are to be maximized, but merely states that this

 

3H. A. Simon, Administrative Behavior (New York:
Macmillan, 1950), p. 38-39.

 

4
maximization is the aim of administrative activity and
that administrative theory must indicate under what
conditions the maximization takes place.
Although this is a necessary and reasonable
quest, since there is evidence that many organizations
operate at levels well below their potential capacity,

it is not an easy one.

Analysis of the Problem

 

It is suggested, however, that preoccupation
with administrative efficiency to the virtual ex—
clusion of others matters may not contribute as much as
is commonly supposed to an understanding of the most
significant problems of leadership in large scale or-
ganizations.

. Is efficiency getting the basic element in
the experience of institutional leaders?

. Does concentration of efficiency help to
improve the self—knowledge, and the skill
of men charged with the responsibilities
of leadership?

. Can the development of managerial skills
be linked to the larger problems of policy?

This study will attempt to deal with such ques-
tions by exploring the nature of leadership in large
scale enterprises and the tasks it is called on to
perform. The latter are generally considered to be in
the realm of decision making and the significant ques-
tion is f— Decisions about what?‘ Decisions concern

purposes or processes and before proceeding it is

5
desirable to prepare the ground for a worthwhile ap—

proach by some preliminary clarification of terminology.

Ambiguities in Terms

 

As Simon4 has pointed out, purposes may be de-
fined broadly as the objective or end for which an
activity is carried on, process as a means of accom—
plishing a purpose. Processes, then, are carried on in
order to achieve purposes. However, purposes themselves
may generally be arranged in some sort of hierarchy and
it follows that the same activity may be described as
purpose or process.

It seems clear that there can be no such thing
as a purpose, or a single purpose institution. PurpoSes
then form a hierarchy, each sub—purpose contributing to
some more final and comprehensive end, and this helps
to clarify the relation between purpose and process.

The difference, then, between a purpose and a
process is essentially a distinction of degree rather
than kind. A process is an activity whose immediate
purpose is at a low level in the hierarchy of means
and ends, while a purpose is a collection of activities
whose orienting value or aim is at a high level in the
means—end hierarchy. Decisions are made about purposes

and processes.

 

402. cit., p. 30.

6

As one ascends in the administrative hierarchy
the analysis of decision making becomes more difficult
as Selznick5 points out, not merely because the decisions
are more important or complex but because the logic of
efficiency applies most clearly to subordinate units which
tend to have:

. clearly defined operating responsibilities

. limited discretion

. set channels of communication, and

. a sure position in the command structure

It tends to lose force, however, at the upper
levels of administrative responsibility where problems
are less amenable to the procedures of management ex—
perts and it has been suggested that an overemphasis or
neat organization and efficient techniques obscures the
interrelation of policy and administration (of purpose
and process) with the result that critical aspects of
organizational leadership may be overlooked.

What then are their real problems of leadership

and how do they affect its nature?

Generalizations in Social Science
6 . . . .
As Northrup pOints out, soc1al SCience is no

exception tothe rule that science does not begin with

 

5P. Selznick, Leadership in Administration
(New York: Row Peterson and Co., 1957), p. 3.

602. cit., p. 14.

7
facts, with hypotheses, or even with a method, but with
a specific problem.

This is more important in the field of social
science than any other field because, unlike natural
science, social science faces two fundamentally dif-
ferent kinds of problems.

In natural science the problems are mainly of
fact and the normative problem of what should be does
not arise initially.

But social institutions and processes, being in
part at least man made, present two different questions --
1) What is the character of social institutions in
fact? and 2) How ought social institutions to be?

The first of these two questions is factual,
the second is normative. In contrast to natural
science then, which faces primarily problems of fact,
social science is confronted with problems of fact and
with problems of value. This does not mean an abdication
of responsibility on the part of the natural scientist.
It simply means that values do not play a large part in
the observation, description and explanation of natural
science facts.

The generalizations appropriate for these two
types of problems and the methods used to determine
these generalizations, are different. To distinguish

between the two types of theory in social science it seems

8
appropriate to use different names and Northrups?
classification into factual social theory and normative
social theory seems appropriate.

A factual social theory is in accord with what

 

is the case,and describes existing conditions as they
are. It will go beyond this and involve hypotheses but
its unique characteristic is that it is in accord with
the facts.

A normative social theory indicates what ought

 

to be rather than what is and does not correspond per—
fectly to any de facto state of affairs anywhere. It
points to possible ideals rather than the actual.

This means that the method for determining norm-
ative social theory is not that of natural science applied
to social facts although the latter is appropriate for
factual social theory. Moreover, even with respect to
factual theory in any one science there are two stages
and each has its unique scientific methods.

. The natural history stage

. The stage of deductively formulated theory

It should be noted that factual social theory
can include norms in its subject matter as factual data.
However, this does not make it normative. A social

theory becomes normative when it restricts itself to

 

7 .
Op. Cit.

9
the normative and passes judgement on its norm as
compared with other normative theories.

Thus, a method for determining normative social
theory is a method which enables, out of all possible
normative theories constructed or possible of construc-
tion, the scientifically correct one to be determined.

The achievement of deductively formulated theory
in social science involves the key concepts in terms
of which,any and all of the factual data of the natural
history type are to be analyzed. A deductive theory can
be verified in various ways. However, it is the pre-
dictive element, the deduction of the future state of
a system from its present state, that is likely to be
of most value. Determinism is possible at a1 only in
a deductively formulated science since factual science
at the natural history stage can establish no necessary
connections.

This study is not concerned with normative social
theory, but with the deductively formulated area of
factual social theory. It does not claim to develop
theory but merely to point to key concepts important
in the ordering of data and essential to an adequate
understanding of leadership.

Perhaps it is a mistake to attempt to seek for
a prediction of the future state of a social system in

factual social theory,Yather than normative social theory.

10
Since social institutions are partly man made, and
normative social theories define the ends of human
action, they may throw more light on the future state
of a social system than factual theory.

It is likely that a science of administration
is impossible without both factual theory and normative
theory since the administrator must think and operate
in two worlds. He must know things as they are and he
must also know things as ought to be.

To expect more of the normative in fact, than
possible changes in the factual will allow, may result
in the defeat of one's ideals, whereas to require less
than perfection may be to achieve more.

Scientifically based, wise administrative lead—
ership consists in possessing scientifically verified
factual administrative theory concerning what is the
case, and scientifically verified normative theory of
what ought to be the case and then achieving as much of

the ideal as possible changes in the factual will allow.

The Value of Theory

 

While it is readily admitted that theory is
helpful to the physical scientist dealing with non-
human material it is not so widely recognized that
theory can be very useful tothe practitioner in the
field of social sciences. Prevalent beliefs are that

it is too "difficult," "unpractical," or "useless" and

11
this is pointed out by numerous writers on the subject
as evidenced in Coladarci and Getzel's8 work on the
value of theory in educational administration.

The practicality comes from the ability gained
from a knowledge of theory which enables action to be
taken in a specific situation based on knowing the
generality of situations. In the administrative field,
for example, it would be poor theory that could not pro—
vide guidance for the administrator when he needed to
act. The assistance he receives would be in terms of
what would happen if he did a certain thing and is
related to the consequences of actions if . . . then.
Intelligent action needs some guiding principles tentat—
ively held. Theory can provide these as a tool and guide
to practice enabling observation and comprehension
of what is going on. Moreover, it gives greater flex-
ibility in response than does following tradition or a
precedent since it opens up a wider range of relation—
ships, possibilities and opportunities. In the physical
sciences theories are the basis of working concepts and
there is no reason why this should not apply in other
fields. It is assumed that they do enable a person to
collect and consider relevant facts and deal with them

successfully.

 

8A. P. Coladarci and J. W. Getzels, The Use of

Theory in Educational Administration (Stanford Univer-
sity Press, 1955).

 

 

12

The Nature of Theory

 

Theory is a set of assumptions from which prin-
ciples may be derived. They are not laws. They are
not of eternal validity and they cannot be proved by
direct experimentation.

They are, as Griffiths9 points out, general as-
sumptions which seem to predict or account for events
with more than chance accuracy so that we say they are
"true." A theory enabling better than chance decisions
to be made is not easy to formulate as it is:

. induced from common events

. it must be tested by making deductions from

it. Its validity is judged by results, by

the degree to which it can maximize practical
predictions and understanding

Theory and Practice

 

There is, then, no real distinction between
theory and practice since the former is always present,
even if implicitly, in human behavior. Whenever we
make choices and judgements we have reasons for our
actions based on assumptions and generalizations. If
we do this subconsciously we are likely to make poor
decisions.

It is maintained that a more explicit concern
for theory is necessary to successful practice since

in its absence practice can only be accidently successful.

 

9D. Griffiths, Administrative Theory (Appleton—
Century—Crofts, Inc., 1959), Chapter 2.

 

13
Moreover, it is easier to see where a difficulty exists
if the basis for decisions are made explicit and examin—

able.

Further Uses of Theory

 

Apart from the more obvious uses of administra-
tive theory as a guide to action there are other values
and advantages which have been pointed out in numerous
works:

1. Adequate theory could contribute to adminis—
trative training by helping prepare students for change.
Administration seen as a process based on variables
rather than a specific set of techniques would lead to
the theory which would explain why current practices
work (rather than describe them) and why they might not
work, if and when the context changes.

2. Adequate theory might advance a system of
thinking which would enable the amalgamation of inter-
disciplinary knowledge into a coherent whole which
would serve to provide administrators with a realistic
guide so that they could alter their behavior in the
light of changing circumstances. This is a systematic
way of thinking that will lead to a continual reexam-
ination of structure, of processes and procedures.

3. An adequate theory would also provide for
further growth in the light of experiences by provid—

ing an efficient way of ordering that experience. The

more explicit the system for generalizing specific

events the greater the use.

14
In summary, an adequate theory would direct at—
tention to processes and relationships rather than to
techniques and provide a framework for future findings

in the social sciences.

Theoryyin Educational Administration

The assumption that jobs in education are being
done properly is not necessarily valid. It is possible
to go wrong with confidence. In fact, the inadequacies
of present practice and the complexity of the jobs to
be done necessitate better and more explicit theoreti-
cal orientations. Because of the influence of educa-
tional leadership in deciding the nature of the total
educative enterprise it is considered that this provides
the most strategic target for attack. It is important
because of its relevance to the improvement of educa-
tional practice.

In this study it is proposed to consider the
nature of administrative leadership as it relates to
social systems on the assumption that what is true for
social systems generally will be true also for the ed—
ucational enterprise in particular. It is suggested
that a realistic approach to the problems facing ed-
ucational leadership requires an understanding of the
social context within which it operates and it is main-
tained that many insights may be gained from a study of

relevant sociological theory.

15
Administrative Theory - Criteria

A useful and adequate theory it seems then should
display certain characteristics.10

1. It should be based on operational and logical
accuracy rather than common sense.

2. It should be generalizable. The wider the
range of specific events which can be explained the
more useful the theory. An adequate theory should be
of universal validity and not limited by time or place.

3. It should regard values as variables rather
than part of the theoretical system otherwise they
limit the theory.

4. It will be grounded in the basic social and
behavioral sciences since administration is accomplished
through the behavior of administrators in interaction
with others.

5. It will focus on processes since the behavior
which contributes to administration is a series of re-
actions rather than a cause and effect relationship.
Showing that a particular pattern of relationships is
correlated with performance is part of the task, ex—
plaining how the relationship occurs is the remainder.

Thus, structural concepts indicating "what" must

be supplemented by functional concepts indicating "how."

 

10A. W. Halpin (ed) Administrative Theory In
Education (Midwest Administration Center, 1958), pp. 29-39.

 

 

16

This Study

 

The reason for an extended outline of method
in the social sciences and the value of theory is two-
fold:

l. The need to indicate clearly the method to
be followed in this study—-what is, and what is not,
being attempted.

2. The necessity to show how this approach
fits into the framework of scientific method as con-
ceived for the purpose of this study.

The purpose is not to attempt to develop a new
deductive theory of administrative leadership. It is
to take a specific aspect of sociological theory and
examine it to see what can be ascertained that would
be of value of those interested in the phenomenon of
administrative leadership. It may then be possible
to consider the implications of these propositions for
leadership in the field of education.

In terms of the method outlined the main crea—
tive aspect ofthe study will be to outline concepts
by postulation that seem to provide insights into the
nature of administrative leadership. For this purpose
the concept of a social system and its functional
imperatives, as detailed in Parson's sociological theory

are accepted as an appropriate starting point.

17

A Social Systems Approach

 

The search for a fresh approach to administra—
tion has led to many different lines of inquiry. One
of the most prolific has been studies on leadership.
More recently, this has centered on a considerable inter-
est in human relations which has been useful in under—
standing why and how people get along together.

However, in large enterprises one needs to look
beyond personal relations and human problems of par—
ticipation in organizations to the more comprehensive
patterns of institutiomfl.development. Yet no social
process can be understood except as located in the be—
havior of individuals, in people's perceptions of
themselves and others.

The problem is to link the larger view to the
more limited one, to determine how institutional change
is produced by and in turn shapes, the interaction of
individuals in day—to—day situations. The greater the
concern with far reaching decisions, the greater is
the need for a more comprehensive understanding of social
organization.

It is maintained that the executive becomes a
leader as he makes the transition from administrative
management to institutional leadership. This means
that he must reassess his own tasks and the needs of the

enterprise, become concerned with the development of the

organization as a whole, including its changing aims and

Capabilities.

18
Leadership
To know about the work of leaders it is necessary
'tC) know something about the social situations they are
czalled on to handle. This suggests a wide range of
eactivities associated with leadership. Although leader—
ship is specific to a given situation it does not follow

that the tasks of leadership vary with Specific situa— 5.

I" ’
tions. It is assumed that significant leadership pat-
terns are relatively few and that they are related to
types of social situations. Thus certain general
activities of leaders reflect general characteristics
of human groups and the functions of leadership will
best be understood as we develop some understanding of
the main types of groups and the recurrent problems they
face. A theory of leadership is dependent on a theory
of social organization since leadership patterns are re—
lated to types of social situations.

Leadership, then as Selznickll indicates, is not
a familiar everyday idea and what leaders do (or do not
do) is not always self-evident. The common idea of the
leader as displaying aggressive self—confidence, intuitive
sureness , and ability to inspire provides little assist—

ance in understanding the true tasks of leadership. It

is likely that inadequate understanding results in the

1 failure of much leadership.

 

1109. cit., p. 22.

19
It becomes important then to identify and analyze
nuore specifically the chief functions of leadership,
uflnether it be termed organizational,[administrative or
ijistitutional leadership. This is necessary in the in—
‘terests of improved performance and the development of
Inore effective trainingfor leadership.

Summary — Administration

and Administrators

What is meant by administration?

Some see it as an art, some as a science. In—
dividual approaches within these broad fields are each
one of many, all of which tend to make uncertain just
what is involved in administration, and conflicting
views are held by recognized authorities.

Tead12 sees administration as the necessary
activities of those individuals in an organization who
are charged with ordering, forwarding and facilitating
the associated efforts of a group of individuals brought
together to realize certain defined purposes.

This provides an adequate starting point and dif—

fering approaches relevant to this study will be outlined

in Chapter II.

 

12O. Tead, The Art of Administration (McGraw—
Hill, 1951).

20

Recent approaches tO'me administrative process
ad:tempt to synthesize all activity into the three areas
cxf the man, the job and the social setting, and ident—
jxfy the three contexts within which administration
:Eunctions —- the social, the institutional and the
professional. This indicates thexather obvious fact
that administration cannot be studied in a vacuum and
there is need for a broader scope and wider aim in studies
of administrative leadership.

Administration is regarded as the total of act-
ivities through which appropriate human and material
resources are made available and made effective for ac-
complishing the purposes of an enterprise. Essential
to this is administrative leadership. The administrative
manager's effectiveness is based on efficiency and de—
pends upon his understanding of the techniques of ad—
ministration and such processes as planning, organiza—
tion, coordination, evaluation, communication and so
on. The administrative leader on the other hand, while
possessing a knowledge and understanding of adminis-
trative processes is more interested in the effective-
ness of an enterprise in achieving objectives, the
necessity to change orafl.ter objectives in light of

changed circumstances and appropriate overall strategies

for accomplishing ends.

21
The administrative leader is an agent of institution-

aLLization, providing guidance to a process that would
cytherwise occur more haphazardly. As indicated, no in-
svtitutional leader can avoid concern for the minimum
<:onditions of continued organizational existence but

lie must not allow organizational achievement in resources,
stability, or reputation, to become the criterion of
success. It seems as though one of the most effective
ways to accomplish this is to build social values and

a distinctive competence into an organization.

The chief function of administrative leadership
then is seen as defining the ends of group existence,
designing an enterprise distinctively adapted to those
ends and seeing that that design becomes a living reality.

This view of administrative leadership is further
explored in Chapters III and IV, through a summary of
relevant ideas from Barnard, Easton and Selznick fol—
lowing a survey of relevant studies in the fields of

administrative theory and sociological functionalism.

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Before commencing an examination of the sociol-
<3gical background to this study it will be of interest
to review the relevant literature to outline trends
and developments in functionalism in sociological theory,
in general administrative theory, in administrative
theory in education and in educational leadership.

The Nature and Value of
Functionalism in Sociology

Functionalism is conceived as a doctrine which
asserts that all recurrent social activities have the
function of maintaining a social system. It studies
social phenomena as operations within, or effects of,
specified social structures.

Support of this usage is found in such function-
alists as Radcliffe—Brown, Malinowski and others.

Theirs tends to be a descriptive inquiry into whole
societies and this is evident in the works of many other
famous anthropologists such as Sanders, Pitt—Rivers,

Arensberg (see bibliography).

22

23

"Individual human beings," says Radcliffe—

Brownl

are connected by a definite set of social re-
lations into an integrated whole. The con—
tinuity of the social structure . . . is not
destroyed by changes in the units. Individuals
may leave the society . . . or . . . enter it.
The continuity is maintained by the process of
social life, which consists of the activities
and interactions of the individual human beings
and of the organized groups into which they are
united. The social life of the community is
here defined as the functioning of the social
structure. The function of any recurrent
activity . . . is the part it plays in the social
life as a whole and therefore the contribution
which it makes to the maintenance of the struc-
tural continuity.

Malinowski's2 statement of functionalism was in
terms of needs.

Function means, therefore, always the satis—
faction of a need from the simplest act . . .

to (one which) is related to a whole system of
beliefs determined by a cultural necessity . . .

These needs are, however, in the final analysis
defined in terms of maintenance of the social system.

. . . the cultural satisfaction of primary bio-
logical needs imposes upon man secondary or de-
livered imperatives . . . . The functional ap—
proach to the comparative study of cultures thus
postulates that the study of systems of production
distribution and consumption must be garried out,
even in the most primitive societies.

 

1A. R. Radcliffe-Brown, Structure and Function
in Primitive Society (London: Cohen and West, l952),p.
180.

 

 

28. Malinowski, A Scientific Theory of Culture

(New York: Oxford University Press, 1960), p. 159.

3B. Malinowski, The Dynamics of Culture Change
(Yale University Press, 1945).

 

 

24

However, it is in the broader theoretical gener—
ajlizations of the larger social units that this study
j_s primarily based. Theorists in this field exist in
Eblenty, although their writings are not always easily
xread. Some of the better known advocates of functional
analysis are Marion J. Levy, Jr., Talcott Parsons,
Kingsley Davis and Robert K. Merton.

Those who appear to have had the most influence
on sociological theory are Parsons and Merton. Parsons
stems to have had the greater impact through his frequent
but obscure writings and as the center of a group of
sociological thinkers. His work has been entirely
theoretical and any attempt to assess his contribution
will find much of assistance in the series of essays
written by members of the faculty of Cornell-University.4

Parson's detailed analysis is contained in 222
Social System.5 He details a structural functional
analysis and sees society as a "large—scale persistent,
self—sufficient system of social interaction which
must train its own members since it lasts longer than
the individual."

In reducing the social system to essentials he

takes up the analysis of "status roles" which govern

 

4T. Parsons, The Social System (Glencoe, Illinois:
The Free Press, 1951).

5M. Black (ed) The Social Theories of Talcott

Parsons. A Critical Examination (New York: Prentice—
Hall, 1961).

25

tide relationships between actors, who are themselves
cpoverned by normative beliefs. The exercise of the
rwoles is dependent upon a personal hierarchy of grat-
jgfications, comprising "self—orientation" and "col—
ILectivity-orientation." He claims that in terms of
these five exhaustive dichotomies that society can be
defined. I

This formulation was somewhat modified later

. . 6 . .

on in studies where he 18 concerned With problems
of goal attainment, adaptation, integration and of
pattern maintenance and tension management.

Homans' work is easier to understand and more
empirical than most of the theoretical functionalists
and is based on studies by Firth and Whyte.

Homans emphasizes the system, which may be of
varying size, and which, having been defined, is to be
analyzed in terms of its elements —— activity, inter-
ction, sentiment and norms. He makes a distinction
between "external" and "internal" systems which together
comprise his unit "the human group" although the exact

structure of this relationship is somewhat obscure.

 

6T. Parsons, R.F. Bales and E.A. Shils, Working

Papers in the Theory of Action (Glencoe: Free Press,
1953) and Family Socialistiation and Interaction Pro-
cess (Glencoe: Free Press, 1955).

7G. C. Homans, The Human Group (Harcourt, Brace

& Company, Inc., 1950).

26

Homans deals with both large and small units
51nd believes them to be subject to the same basic
:sociological laws.

Merton8 who is one of the clearest and most
gorecise of the functionalists is also considered by
Inany observers to be the most useful. He does not
accept the definition of function as system—maintain—
ing, as a totality, and leaves room in his formulation
for motives as not precisely equatable with functions.
He makes a useful distinction between manifest func—
tions, which are the objective consequences of social
or cultural activity as recognized by the participants,
and the latent functions which are neither intended
nor recognized by participants but which can never—
theless be observed. Merton also formulated the con—
cept of dysfunction both in connection with the parts

of the total system and for the system as a whole.

Criticisms of Functionalism

 

To establish the value of this approach it is
worth considering some of the principal criticisms

levelled against functionalism in sociology.

 

8R. K. Merton, Social Theory and Social Structure
(Glencoe: Free Press, 1957).

27

1. One of the most pertinent is that of Barber
who states that the theoretical functionalists tend
to orbit at too abstract a level with little reference
to practicalreality. He admits, however, that such
"typologizing is procedurally essential before analyz—
ing concrete situations of change and conflict."9

2. He repeats another oft mentioned criticism
of functionalists-—that they tend to deal with static
closed systems rather than with change. This tends
to be more true, however, of the functionalists in-
terested in descriptive inquiries rather than the
"holistic" theoretical functionalists interested in a
social system over a period of time and the factors
relevant to its survival.

3. Finally, he mentions the criticism of con-
servatism, suggesting that they seek to justify the
maintenance of the status quo through the doctrine of
functional connections. This is not a valid applica-

tion to many, however, who have a strong and liberal

political philosophy.

 

9B. Barber, "Structural-—Functional Analysis:
Some Problems and Misunderstandings," American
Sociological Review, Vol. 21, 1956, p. 133.

 

 

28
As Martindalelo points out this is an annoying
but easily rectifiable characteristic. By regarding
the social system as a prior social reality to its
parts, and by identifying it with the status quo,
functionalism was well adapted to the postwar milieu,
in which it developed, and in which there was naturally
a desire to consolidate and return to normal after the
upset of war.
4. Davis11 considers that the problems of func-
tionalism are those of all sociology ——
. . . functionalism is most commonly said to do
two things: to relate the parts of society to
the whole, to relate one part to another . . .
simply describe what any science does. Every
science describes and explains phenomena from
the standpoint of a system of reasoning which
presumably bears a relation to a corresponding
system in nature . . . . Given its subject the
least (Sociology) could do is to relate the
parts to the whole of society and to one another.
Although this criticism has some validity it
should be pointed out that when the majority of non-
functional social theorists encounter fields of social

phenomena, which cannot conveniently be included within

their frames of reference, they are conveniently

 

10D. Martindale, "Limits of and Alternatives to
Functionalism in Sociology," Monograph 5, American
Academy of Political and Social Science, Feb., 1965,
p. 157.

11K. Davis, "The Myth of Functional Analysis as
a Special Method in Sociology and Anthropology,"
American Sociological Review, Vol. 24, 1959, p. 758.

 

 

29
dismissed as belonging to other disciplines. The func-
tionist cannot dispose of data in this way and this
prevents the dismissal of empirical data without con—
sideration which leaves little ground for a further
criticism mentioned by Davis-—that they are opposed to
empiricism.

5. Buckley's12 main point of argument with the
functionalists is this lack of empirical data to sub—
stantiate the theory-~particular1y what he calls
"Parsonian theory weaving."

6. He also calls to attention the danger of
overstressing integration to the extent that the dys—
functional may be unrecognized. This has led to some
preoccupation with conflict theory by functionalists
studying societies undergoing great transformation
and drastic social change.

7. Mills13 charges a lack of methodological
clarity relating to a preference for telelogical con-
structions of social life. It is a form of grand

theory which somehow never seems to get down to the

 

12W. Buckley, "Structural-Functional Analysis in
Modern Sociology," Modern Sociological Theory in
Continuity and Change, (Ed. H. Becker and A. Boskoff)
(Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1957), p. 244.

13C. W. Mills, The Sociological Imagination
(Ohio University Press, 1958), pp. 25—50.

 

30

facts; and persons concerned with factual studies never
rise to the level of theory. However, Merton has pro—
posed the elaboration of middle range theories to bridge
the gap between global theorizing and grass roots em-
piricism. Moreover, as Hempell4 points out in his
critique--

. . . functional analysis is a modification of

teleological explanation, i.e. of explanation

not by reference to causes which 'bring about'

the event in question, but by reference to ends
which determine its course . . .

Rex15 also mentions the common accusation that
functionalism has strong teleological overtones and
disposes of it. He agrees that the functionalists do
not properly cope with the concept of change but more
importantly criticizes the distinction between the social
and the individual determinants of human behavior. He
thinks this merely an attempt to produce an obscure
definition of social. He asks,

Does not the true distinction lie in the fact
that the former is the product of social inter-
action and is this concept not closely akin to,

though much more complex than, the concepts in
terms of which individual action is explained?

 

14C. G. Hempel, "The Logic of Functional
Analysis," L. Gross (ed) Symposium on Sociological
Theory (Row, Peterson, 1959), p. 227.

15J. Rex, Key Problems of Sociological Theory
(Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1961), p. 75—76.

31

8. This seems a fair point as does his argument

that—-

the needs of the system cannot be so decisively

demonstrated as functionalism supposes, be-

cause of the difficulty of demonstrating that

any activity is vital for the system's survival.
However, it should be emphasized that what the theoret-
ical functionalists are discussing is a speculative
scheme based onanalytical abstractions but pointing to
an empirical field. From this point of View then such
criticisms as the difficulty of demonstrating function-
alism and the lack of empirical data to substantiate
the theory point the way to further research and more
refined theorizing rather than a renunication of the
field.

This is not the place for a detailed discussion
of the properties and values of the various functional—
ist positions, the available alternatives to them or
the lines along which various of these theories may,
eventually, be consolidated. It is appropriate to ob-
serve, however, that sooner or later a consolidation,
synthesis, and elimination of alternative theoretical
positions will be attempted, and that if methodological
differences (based in the body—mind problem) are ever

overcome, this will have major consequences for the

development of theory.

32

9. There are difficulties in treating change
since the whole system, as itself the prior cause of
all more limited social realities, can consistently
account for change in only one of two ways-—

a. by modifying the idea of an autonomous
system sufficiently to provide for the pressure of
extra social phenomena on the system and the adaptation
of the system to them. This has been provided for
particularly in that early sociological holists pro-
vided for such external influences inthe idea that)
demographic factors may bring about social change.

b. by postulating the existence within the
social system of forces which bring about immanent
development.

Neither of these expedients has been popular
with sociological functionalists. However, Parsonsl6
has taken the Step although there is no indication
that the majority of functionalists are prepared to fol—
low him.

The principal charges against functionalism may
be summarized as its——

1. verbal obscurity

2. lack of reference to objective reality

 

16T. ,Parsons, Theories of Society, Foundations
of Modern Sociological Theory, 2 Vols. (Glencoe, Ill:
Free Press, 1961).

33

3. teleological overtones

4. faulty distinction between individual and
social determinants of behavior

5. use of static models which do not permit
the analysis of change

6. conservatism through stressing the functional
to the exclusion of the dysfunctional

7. inability to prove that an activity is es—
sential to the survival of the system

8. claim to be unique in relating all social
phenomena into one system of thought

The first two points may be true of some function-
ists but are certainly not applicable to all. Although
the next five points have some degree of cognizance the
last cannot be used to detract from the strength of the
doctrine. To the non—functionalist the four main limit-
ations in sociological functionalism then are-—

l. a conservative ideological bias in favor of
the status quo

2. a lack of methodological clarity relating
to its preference for teleological constructions of
social life

3. an unwarranted emphasis on the significance
and role of closed systems in social life, and

4. a comparative failure to handle adequately

the problem of social change

34

These limitations are of variable seriousness.
The first two are annoying but not insurmountable.

The last two are the more serious since they concern
the definition of social reality and capacity to handle
it.

The functionalists would say that the infinitely
varied acts of individuals and pluralities which rarely
and only temporarily act as a closed system, as reality
in social life, is an immersion in the details of social
life which loses from sight the primary explanation--
the role of the system.

It should be recognized that there are definite

 

advantages to the functionalists point of view--

 

1. It reintroduced the concept of system at a
time when sociological analysis was being directed into
an analysis of individual behavior.

2. It has excluded speculation about human
motives and introduced objectively determinable factors
maintaining social systems.

3. By its emphasis ofthe organic social system
it has brought much nearer realization of a natural
science of society.

4. It makes unnecessary any speculation about
the origin of particular institutions, or the processes
Iby which they change.

5. It does, even if not in a unique way, relate

all social phenomena into one system of thought.

*M—~.~-.»._._l A

<—-...4_‘

35

These are important steps forward in an under-
standing of society and it is maintained that highly
suggestive insights may be gained from considering
social systems from a functionalist point of View
that are valuable to any realistic appraisal of the
tasks of administrative leadership.

Whether social science is yet ready for the kind
of theory Parsons and associates are endeavoring to
construct, an integration of the social sciences in the
form of the development and propagation of a "general
theory" in the science of action, is another question.

As indicated previously, itis proposed to focus

......-—~—- -~—.._._, .~.— \ _ v

on leadership so far as those activities are concerned

\~‘>«-.-u.~_~..u-.4.. - -. wk-..> 9 ~-..

which are essential to a system's survival. For this

.- mad”. -. . .. ..., «H- 7.”. .,. ..-._........-. wave-”In”? ._ .,.,..~_‘,_,_

purpose functions are regarded as those obServed con-
sequences of social activity which made for the adapt-
ation or adjustment of a given system. The parts of

a social system are regarded as interdependent and, in
balance, contributing to the maintenance and integration
of the whole system. Social systems seek to maintain
their own equilibrium but this equilibrium may be viewed

either in static or dynamic terms.

36

The Present State of
Administrative Theory

Historically, says Thompsonl7 there are four main
sources of administrative theory and this is obvious in
any survey of the literature. The first two are
traditional and long established and the last two reflect
more recent developments. These are-—

. the comments and reports made by practicing
administrators

. the survey research of "scholars" and others
. the deductive reasoning of scholars
. the adaptation of models from other disciplines
It is not possible to summarize all attempts at
theory building in the past, nor if it were would such
a summary be very useful in the context of this study.
Many works18 contain such summaries and a selection
has been made which indicate different approaches that

have received serious consideration by others.

The Traditional Approach
Theorizing may be implicit in what an adminis—
trator does but his theories only become important

when recorded and passed on tocmhers.

17A. W. Halpin, Administrative Theory in Education
(Ddidwest Administration Center, 1958), p. 24—29.

18D. E. Griffiths, Administrative Theory (Appleton—
C:'~‘31'1tury--Crofts, Inc., 1959), Chapter 3.

37

Much of what has been written on administration
has resulted from an attempt by administrators to gener—
alize from their experience. While they do have creative
insights and much can be learned from what they say and
what they do, their advice tends to be of the "rules of
success," or "three easy lessons" type rather than
reflective critical thought. The danger in such so-
called theorizing is that the voice of the practitioner
tends to become accepted as the voice of authority.

It was found necessary to supplement what the
practitioners say and systematize their advice by a
pattern of research which generally tends to be of the
descriptive survey variety. This is combined with
"scholarly" research which surveys, collates and compares
the efforts of distinguished writers in an endeavor to
distill the essentials or develop a comprehensive list
of administrative categories or processes.

These approaches rarely result in new knowledge
but simply new forms for the same old sayings and any
survey of the theoretical literature on administration
indicates that the greater part is what has been called
the "grass roots" variety. Such descriptions and ex-
.planations have done little more than consider what has

lDeen. They have not faced the future adequately.

38

The most damaging criticism that can be made
of any theory is that it does not generate new know-
ledge and the descriptive categories of traditional ad—
ministrative theory have neglected the dynamic relation-
ships among such categories that is likely to lead to
new knowledge. Because they are weak in developing
relationships they do not raise new questions to be
answered.

A further criticism of the "grass roots" variety
of theory is its inability to use new knowledge by
incorporating it into what is already known and develop-
ing a synthesis.

Finally, such theories are more specific or
special than general — theories of educational, milit-
ary, business, hospital or public administration rather
than just administration.

Although differences between systems being or—
ganized and administered are likely to lead to differ-
ences in administrative behavior similarities may exist
that have been obscured by too narrow a framework that
has focused on the unique and distinctive.

figgward Partial Theories —
gecent Deve lopments

The sources of modern developments in adminis-
1Irative theory, particularly since the second world war,

are

39

. the deductive reasoning of scholars

. the adaptation of models from other disciplines

Griffiths19 contains a useful summary and points
out that although it is difficult to identify theories
as having been derived exlusively from one of these
sources it is possible to identify those belonging pre—
dominantly to one or other of these approaches.

The two most important deductive approaches to

general administrative theory have been those of Barnard20

and Simon.21

Barnard's book, The Functions of the Executivel

 

contains many insights into the nature of administra—
tion and his postulates and assumptions anticipate
many modern theories, particularly those based on the
individual and his relation to an organization; on in—
formal organizations and their relation to formal or-
ganization; and on decision making.

Simon's most recent studies deal with concepts
and mathematical formulations rather than theory as

such. In Administrative Behavior he was interested

 

190p. cit., p. 47.

 

20C. I. Barnard, The Functions of the Executive

(Harvard University Press, 1960).
21

1950).

 

H. A. Simon, Administrative Behavior (Macmillan,

 

40
in how the rationality of organizational decisions could
be increased, whereas inlater works he used Homans
postulates on group interaction as a basis for developing
mathematical formula relevant to administration.

Argyris and Bakke22 of the Yale Management and
Labor Center generated a set of assumptions from which
organizational processes are derived. The most import-
ant, and obviously influenced by Barnard, is that the
develOpmental processes and goals of the individual and
his organization are, at important points, essentially
different and antagonistic. The fusion process,shereby
both the individual and the organization fulfill their
needs and achieve their goals is necessary and receives
emphasis.

Later, Argyris23 developed a dependency concept
of organiZational leaderShip based on the assumption
that a work group is concerned only with the "work—
flow process" - the behavior required by organizational
purposes. The leader, in order to blend his work group
into the formal organization, supplies such things as

authority, rewards, penalties, and communications.

 

22E. W. Bakke, Organization and the Individual

(Yale Labor and Management Center, 1962).

23C. Argyris, Executive Leadership (Harper and
Brothers, 1953).

 

41

Litchfield24 suggested a series of propositions
on the assumption thatedministration is based on un—
iversals relevant to whatever is being administered,
that administration should make use of all disciplines
for useful information and that the role of variables
is important.

His propositions on the process of administra—
tion covers ground similar to those of Simon and of
Griffiths although placed in the perspective of a
larger action system, the ecology within which both
the individual and the enterprise function.

Attempts at theorizing in the field of educa—
tional administration have tended to concentrate on the
effectiveness of the performance of those in positions
of leadership and this will be taken up after a pro—

gressive summary.

Summary

Early theorists analyzed administration into a
number of parts or functions and authorities such as
Gulick, Urwick and Follett (see bibliography) described

it in such terms as planning, organizing, staffing,

 

24E.H. Litchfield, "Notes on a General Theory

of Administration," Administrative Science Quarterly
Vol. 1, No. 1, June, 1956.

 

42
directing, evaluating and reporting. This taxonomic
approach is still popular with many. Later emphass was
laid on the group approach, or human relationships and
interactions and the term "democratic leadership" was
much employed. Simon stated that all administration
could be designated in terms of decision making.

Most recent works see administration as inter—
action and consideration and as a social process. Help—
ful models have been constructed, such as those of
Getzel's?5 Guba and Halpin, that might be validated
through experiment and research. Indeed this approach
seems to provide more possibilities for insights than
alternatives. Others have attempted to define adminis-
tration in mathematical terms.

By some administration is referred to as a
science and by others as an art. As Lipham26 points
out, during the past few years there has been less

theorizing about theory and considerably more application

 

25J. W. Getzels, "Administration As a Social

Process," Administrative Theory in Education, A. W.

Halpin (ed) (Chicago: Midwest Administration Center,
1958).

26J. M. Lipham, "Organizational Character of
Education," Review of Educational Research, AERA,

 

 

43
of behavioral science theory to administration. How—
ever, Griffiths27 would add that interest in the con—
struction of a theoretical framework is developing and
that this is fortunate since—-
. . . improved understanding of administrative
behavior depends upon the progress that can be
made in the development of a theory. Research
without sound theory has little meaning and it is
unfortunate but true that research in the field
of educational administration has been so char—
acterized in the past.

Just as the task of science was to impose an order
on the universe, so the development of a framework of
theory will result in the unification of what are now
separate acts into a set of principles and concepts with
a defined terminology so different to that which has
been acquired piecemeal, and with consequent confusion,
from other fields. Thus, while there is a definite trend
toward the development of a science of administration
the theoretical basis of such a science has yet to be
adequately established.

As Hencley28 points out at least four definitions

of administrative function have been current over the

past fifteen to twenty years-—

 

27J. M. Griffiths, "Toward a Theory in Adminis—
trative Behavior," Campbell and Gregg, Administrative
Behavior in Educatin (Harper, 1957).

28Donald J. Leu and H. C. Rudman (eds) Prepara-
tion Programs for School Administrators (East Lansing,
Michigan: Michigan State University, 1963), p. 62.

44
. the inclusive type, which includes every—
thing for which administrators may be held
accountable
. the exclusive or restrictive type, which em—
phasizes organizational maintenance and
separates administration from policy making
. the standardized or division—of—labor type,
which impersonalizes administrative operation
through job descriptions, bureaucratic work—
ing patterns and so on
. the integrative type, which sees the adminis—
trator's task as that of developing, managing
and maintaining decision making with respect
to goals and purposes, operations, intra and
extraorganizational interactions and adjust-
ments
Each definition is based on different, though
overlapping, sets of assumptions concerning the nature
and purposes of administration. Each leads to an em-
phasis on different types of functional interrelationships
considered appropriately the concern of leadership.
Such, then, are some of the conflicting views
held by recognized authorities on administration in
general. The question arises as to whether there is
such a thing as educational administration. There are
certain characteristics that give the service of ed—
ucation a unique appearance. However, in addition to
its unique characteristics, educational administration
has much in common with other areas of public and bus-
iness administration. It is now time to consider more

specifically approaches to administrative leadership

in education.

45

Administrative Leadership
in Education

 

 

The Traits Approach

Early twentieth century studies on administra-
tive leadership in education centered on leader traits
to explain the effectiveness of administration on the
assumption that leaders could be made and that leader—
ship was not exclusively the province of those born to
it.

That this approach is still popular is evidenced
by current literature on the topic such as a recently

published 1965 volume titled Staff Leadership in Public

 

Schools - A Sociological Enquiry and advertised as a
way of finding out how the principal's personal traits
affect his professional leadership.

The traits approach concentrated on knowledge
and intelligence, physical characteristics and on
sociopsychological factors as an explanation of per-
formance. An advantage of this early research was that
it led to thedevelopment of leadership training courses.
However, although it has received considerable atten—

tion the results have been largely negative or

46

. . 29 .
inconcluSive. Weaknesses include such factors as

those mentioned by Bird30 and Gouldner:31

. the difficulty of common agreement on char—
acteristics regarded as relevant

. lack of indication as to the relative im—
portance of characteristics

. the difficulty of defining qualities or
traits so that they are mutually exclusive

. lack of indication as to whether different
traits are required for obtaining and main—
taining positions of leadership and as to
whether there is a difference between status
and leadership

. descriptive lists of traits are of little
value in explaining how they were acquired and
may infer that they are inherent

. emphasis on the specifics of particular lead-
ership has not led to useful generalizations

A later development of this approach is person-
ality theory as evidenced in the works of Bills and

Hopper32 of the S.S.C.P.E.A. They generalize that there

 

29W. O. Jenkins, "A Review of Leadership Studies
with Particular Reference to Military Problems,"
Psychological Bulletin, 1947, Vol. 44, p. 54-77.

R. Stogdill, "Personal Factors Associated with
Leadership: A Survey of the Literature," Journal of
Psychology, 1948, Vol. 25, pp. 35-76.

 

 

 

3OG. Bird, Social Psychology (Appleton-Century-
Crofts, Inc., 1940).

31A. W. Gouldner (ed) Studies in Leadership
(Harper and Brothers, 1950),

32R.L. Hopper and R.E. Bills, "What's a Good
Administrator Made Of?" The School Executive, Vol. 74,
March, 1955, pp. 93—95.

 

 

47
are three types of administrators based on broad
personality groupings differentiated in terms of at—

titudes held towards oneself and other people. These

are--
the + + group
the + — group
the — + group

Implicit in the personality type of:fiudy is the
notion thatthe main factor in administrative effective—
ness is the leader's personality and that to control
the latter is to control the former.

Other studies, as indicated by Jenkins33 state
that although leadership is specific to a particular
situation who becomes the leader and what the leadership
characteristics are in a given case are a function of
the specific situation (including the measuring in-
struments employed).

Stogdill34 clarifies the matter still further--

. the evidence suggests that leadership is a

relation that exists between persons in a
social situation, and '

. persons who are leaders in one situation may

not necessarily be leaders in another situa-
tion

 

330p. cit.

340p. cit.

48

This does not mean to say that leadership is
incidental, haphazard or unpredictable — it means that
leadership patterns of behavior are persistent and
relatively stable. This is in line with current con—
cepts in political science in which a pluralistic view
of community power is receiving increasing attention
as evidenced in works such as Polsby's Community Power

and Political Theory35 as compared to the more trad-

 

itional approach Of Hunter's Community Power Structure.36

The Situational Approach

Limitations of the traits approach led to a
reaction and investigation of situations in which lead-
ership was exercised for a further appreciation of
leader effectiveness. This situation approach to a
wide variety of activities associated with and affect—
ing administrative leadership in education is a fore-

runner of later field theory.

 

35N. W. Polsby, Community Power and Political
Theory (Yale University Press, 1963).

36F. Hunter, Community Power Structure. A
Study of Decision Makers (Doubleday and Co., 1963).

 

 

 

49
As indicated by Campbell37 it seems to point to
a number of generalizations resulting from the unique-
ness of communities, differences in the organization
of education systems and schools and conflicting ex—
pectations.

. the administrator is seen in a different light
by different interest groups

. within interest groups there are variations
in perceptions

. leadership tends to reflect community values

. leadership is faced with conflicting ex-
pectations

And, most relevant of all is the generalization

that——

. situational variables which affect adminis-
trative behavior have not yet been fully
documented

The value of this approach to understanding ad-

ministrative leadership lies in the fact that it has
emphasized factors, in addition to leadership traits,
which are considered of importance to leadership per—

formance and are likely to lead to a better apprecia-

tion and, perhaps understanding, of what leadership is.

 

37R. F. Campbell, "Situational Factors in Educa-
tional Administration," Administrative Behavior in
Education, R. F. Campbell and R. T. Gregg (eds) (New
York: Harper and Brothers, 1957), p. 54.

 

50

An Integrated Approach

 

This approach endeavors to overcome the limita—
tions of the approaches previously outlined and bridge
the gap between traits and situations to explain more
effectively administrative performance. The value of
an integrated approach is that it sought to explain
leadership in terms of individuak3(with unique per-
sonal qualities) operating in social situations (once
again with unique characteristics). It was an attempt
to conceptualize about administrative leadership which
was regarded as a "totality" comprising personalities in
situations and sought to explain leadership in terms of
responsibility to a specific organization as well as to
society as a whole.

Several theoretical approaches worthy of mention
are those of the Middle Atlantic Co—operative Program in
Educational Administration Center and the Southern
States Co-operative Program in Educational Administration

Center.38

 

38CPEA Center, Albany, A Developing Concept of

the Superintendency of Education, Resource Manual 1.
(Albany, New York: Co—operative Development of Public
School Administration, State Education Department,
1955).

 

 

51

The former39 sought to include all essential
elements of educational administration into a three
dimensional concept - the job, the man and the social
setting. The job included all thetasks and respons-
ibilities relevant to the administration of schools.
The man brought to this his beliefs, values, be—
havior, energy and skills, which helped mold the job
while it was molding him.

The social setting covered the pressures and
compulsionscf society which established the bounds of
the job, influenced the thinking of the man and set

values by which he adjusted himself and was judged.

The Criterion Approach

 

Criterion measures of leader performance have
been based on checklists of agreed upon effective leader
practices and the Southern States CPEA project40 is
one of the best known, perhaps because it is distin-
guished from other theoretical approaches by a value

oriented approach to a definition of theory. In many

 

390p. cit.

4OCPEA Center, Nashville, Better Teaching in

School Administration (George Peabody College, 1955).

 

 

52
ways it seems to be related to the earlier integrated
approach.

The main theme of this approach is known as the
competency pattern or concept. This particular measure
of successful practice is comprised of three basic ele—
ments——the job, the theory and the know how. It was
developed through the use of empirical methods, was
tested in group discussions and substantiated by the
judgments of numerous competent individuals. The job
is analyzed into critical areas and effective performance
assessed on the basis of an acceptable theory of educational
administration. Know—how consists of what is required
(in the way of operational beliefs, knowledge and skills)
to perform tasks, as enumerated in accordance with
directions based on the theory of educational adminis-
tration. It can be seen that behavior which enables
a particular task to be performed in the most desirable .
manner emphasizes what ought to be - or values.

Halpin41 worked on a series of school community
studies at Ohio State University which classified ad-
ministrator performance according to two dimensions-

initiating structure and consideration.

 

41A. W. Halpin, The Leader Behavior of School
Superintendents (SCDS Series, Ohio State University,
1956).

 

 

53
Subsequently, he developed a model for research
into administrative behavior with four basic elements——
. the organization task
. administrator behavior
. variables associated with (2)

. criteria of administrator effectiveness

Current Trends

 

Some of the more promising approaches to the
formulation of administrative theory have been attempt
to—-

l. Clarify administrative functions and roles
e.g. deliberative, policy making, consultative,
adjudicative and conflict-resolving.

2. To have other disciplines contribute to
the development of a general theory.

Clarification of
Administrative Roles

 

Role theory seems to be related to earlier studies
of situational variables that affect administrator per—
formance. Campbell42 outlines the nature of this theory
of leadership and implications for administrator effect—

iveness. He suggests that the situational variables

 

420p. cit.

54
establish an area of tolerance within which relevant
action takes place. It becomes necessary then, for the
administrator toiind some way of developing more unity
among the perceptions of individuals and groups involved
in specific situations.

The Midwest C.P.E.A. Center proposed an approach
based on the work of Getzels and described administration
as a social process in which behavior is seen as a
function of the institutional and individual dimensions
of the social system. Structurally, administration
is seen as a hierarchy of subordinate-superordinate
relationships within a social system and functionally
this hierarchy is the place where roles and facilities
are allocated and integrated to achieve the goals of
the social system. Three administrative dimensions
are postulated-—

. the authority dimension

. the roles and facilities dimension

. the affectivity dimension

From the model a series of hypotheses are developed
with emphasis on the nature of the human relationship
as the crucial factor in the administrative process.

The theory advances beyond the earlier work of Coladarci

55
43 . . . . .
and Getzels by contributing to a definition of the
problem of role conflict as a divisivefactor in ef—
fective administrative leadership.

Application of Models
From Other Disciplines

 

 

Increasingly popular are attempts to formulate
administrative theory on the basis of models derived
from other sources such as learning models, personality
models, decision making models, group dynamics models,
leadership models, game models, social systems models
and so on.

The proliferation of models suggests increasing
dissatisfaction with traditional approaches and a
willingness to explore all possible sources of useful
information. It is likely that all models contain
an element of truth and they are helpful in broad-
ening the field of inquiry although none in its
present formulation is adequate. Game theory, for ex-
ample, emphasizes the interaction between two or more
organizations with similar or competing goals and thus
points to the necessity for strategies to deal with

external pressures and forces.

 

43A. P. Coladarci and J. W. Getzels, The Use of
Theory in Educational Administration (Stanford Un-
iversity Press, 1955.)

 

56
Parson's concept of a social system, as outlined

in his earlier works and the Administrative Science

 

Quarterly articles of 195644 indicates the importance of

 

an organization requiring "legitimization" or becoming
"institutionalized"——the necessity for objectives and
values to be socially acceptable (in terms of the
relevant socieities or publics).

This calls for a concept of authority that ex—
tends beyond organizational boundaries. Indeed it is
with a concept of administrative leadership developed
from aspects of the sociological theory of Parsons
that this study is primarily concerned. It is an
approach to administration based on those activities
considered necessary to the survival of a social sys—
tem, as contrasted with its maintenance, which in—
troduces a dynamic approach to the problem of survival.

Thus the search for a new approach has led to a
discernible shift of emphasis from the enumeration of
common sense rule of thumb exhortations through tax—
anomic classifications of the process of administration
to the study of models to determine the principles of
administration and the conditions under which the prin—

ciples are applicable.

 

44T. Parsons, "Suggestions for a Sociological

Approach to the Theory of Organizations," Administration
Science Quarterly, I, 1956, pp. 63-85, 225-239.

 

 

57
In spite of differences, most current approaches
to theory reveal similar underlying themes which may
be summarized as follows——

. a recognition that human behavior is a
result of persons in situation

. an attempt at operational definitions

. an approach which attempts to predict
human behavior under stated conditions so
thatwhen compared with actual behavior it
can be seen whether they were correct or
not.

. an attempt to develop general propositions
that can explain administration behavior in
a variety of specific situations

. an attempt to develop insights and models
that use culturally defined values (such as
democratic) as variable data rather than as
basic assumptions and which predict how ad-
ministrators will behave, if they happen to
be committed to one or another of these values.

. an attempt to explain the process of adminis-
tration. This is a sequence which involves
process concepts and is important so far as
the outcomes of administration activities are
concerned.

Thus, modern approaches to administrative theory
have further to go if the value of a scientific theory
can be regarded as its usefulness in adding to our
understanding. However, progress in the development
of concepts,of variables which can be defined opera-
tionally, which are generalizable and free from value

limitations, and which focus on the sources and con-

sequences of human behavior in groups can help to lay

58
the foundation for further progress in the direction

of a more complete theory.

Weaknesses

Apart from the use of values as assumptions
rather than as variables the main weaknesses in ad—
ministrative theory seem to be in the enumeration of
taxonomies dealing with a few aspects of adminis-
trative behavior in selected types of administrative
situations.

Moreover, there seems to have been an undue
emphasis on internal relations and structures to the
exclusion of a full realization of the significance
of external relations or the interaction between in-
ternal and external activities. This may well be
where the impetus for administrative change is generated.

A further weakness is the scarcity of testable
hypotheses.

As Griffiths45points out, theories seem to
take two forms-—molar or molecular. They attempt to
be all inclusive or stress a relatively narrow range
of phenomena. Of course, both are valuable with the
ultimate objective of the all-inclusive theory. How-

ever, this requires a foundation and current attempts

 

45Op. cit., p. 68.

59
at theorizing may do best to focus on the relation of
molecular theories to one another as a preliminary
move towards an all—inclusive theory.
It is hoped that this study will assist in some
small way in this process by synthesizing what is
appropriate in past studies with current concepts and

perhaps by developing a few insights of its own.

CHAPTER III

SOCIOLOGICAL BACKGROUND

Administration - A
Universal Phenomenon

 

The Universality of Ad—
ministrative Structure

There is no social system which maintains inter—
nal order and external relations which does not have
an administrative structure—-legitimate patterns of
interaction by means of which this order and these
relations are maintained. The interactions, or the
structures, may be differentiated and clearly visible
or less visible and intermittent but they exist.

This is not a verbal quibble but a matter of
theoretical and operational importance. A classifica-
tion which postulates systems that possess or do not
possess administrative structure may identify adminis-
tration with the existence of a specialized structure.

However, an adequate analysis of administrative
activities must locate and characterize all the rela—
vant functions and not simply those performed by a
specialized structure. An emphasis on specialized
structure is likely to lead to a stereotyped conception
of traditional administrative systems as static systems

60

61

concerned with routine management functions. If func-
tions are there, then it is reasonable to assume that
the structures are there too although the main concern
of this study is with the functions rather than with the
structures.
The Universality of Ad-
ministrative Functions

Structural comparison is of only limited utility,
like comparative anatomy without a comparative
physiology. It is possible to be misled by following
structural lines whereas a functional approach leads
to more accurate representation of a dynamic process.
Such questions as "How are interests articulated in
a social system?" open the way to a whole range of

interest phenomena in the system.

The Administrative System

If the concept of administration is to separate
out analytically the administrative functions in all
social systems regardless of scale, degree of dif-
ferentiation,and culture, it will be necessary to
specify what is meant by administration, administrative
functions and administrative system. If we consult the
literature, past and current, for adequate definitions

we find considerable variety and some help.

62

It is proposed that administration is a system
of interactions to be found in all social systems
which is concerned with critical decisions related
to system functions of integratinn, adaptation, pat—
tern maintenance and goal attainment. Although con—
cerned primarily with policy, the administrative
leader is interested also in the organization and co—
ordination of a complex and dynamic system to carry out
policy decisions. There are inputs into the system
and outputs from the system and with these concepts we
move from a definition of administration as a certain
set of interactions in a social system,as compared to
other sets, to administrative system since to this set
of intereactions is attributed such properties as:

. comprehensiveness

. interdependence

. existence of boundaries

The Administrative Process
as Concerned with Behavior

 

No one way of conceptualizing any major area
of human behavior will do full justice to all its
variety and complexity. Each particular type of
theoretical orientation tends to bring to light its
own set of problems, provide unique insights and

emphasis and thus makes it possible for alternative

63
and even competing theories to be equally and simultane-
ously useful, although often for quite different pur~
poses.

The conceptual orientation suggested in this
study--a social systems approach with particular refer-
ence to functional imperatives is one that originates
from a decision to View the administrative process as
a system of behavior, as concerned with those activities
of a social system essential to survival. It is based
on ideas developed by Easton (see bibliography) in con-
nection with political systems.

Functional Approach —
An Overview

It is built upon the following general premises:

1. System. It is useful to View a system as
an organized set of interactions for a specific pur-
pose.

2. Environment. A system is distinguishable
from the environment in which it exists and open to
influences from it.

3. Functional imperatives. Those critical
activities concerned with the survival of a social
system and identified as goal attainment, pattern,
maintenance, adaptation and integration. The taSks
of leadership are to make decisions in these areas in

the interests of system survival.

64

4. Response. Variations in the structures
and processes within a system may usefully be inter-
preted as alternative efforts by members of a system
to regulate or cope with pressures originating from
environmental as well as internal sources.

5. Feedback. The ability of a system to sur-
vive in face of pressures is a function of the presence
and nature of the information and other influences
that return to its actors and decision makers.

The approach of this study takes its departure
from the idea of a social system as a boundary main—
taining set of intereactions embedded in and surrounded
by other social systems to the influence of which it
is constantly exposed. A social system is an open
system, one that must cope with the problems generated
by its exposure to influences from other environmental
systems. But it may also include efforts to modify old
goals or transform them entirely as simple adaptation
may not be enough.

Efir conceptualizing a social system as an open
system distinct from its environment it is possible to
consider a range of matters otherwise difficult to pin
down. The kinds of exchanges that such a system has
with its environment and the way in which the members

of the system respond to these exchanges can be considered.

65

From this perspective an analysis of the func-
tional imperatives of a social system as a basis for
considering leadership in the administrative process
seems to develop most rewardingly when it is endeavored
to understand the processes through which a social sys—
tem is able to cope with the various pressures placed
upon it.

The essentials, then, by way of concepts that
need to be understood for the analysis of administra-
tive leadership in a framework of functional impera—
tives of a social system are system, environment, func-
tional imperatives, response and feedback, the latter
two particularly as administrative leadership is a dynamic

rather than a static process.

Systems

It is not proposed to raise the question, apart
from mentioning it briefly in passing, as to when any
set of interactions may be conceived as forming a sys-
tem.

Where selected aspects of social life are rele-
vant and show some degree of interdependence we can
say that we have a useful system from the point of View
of understanding the way in which social systems are

likely to operate.

66

While logically we are free to include within
the selected system any range of actions at all through
experience, insight and wisdom it has become apparent
that, given the kind of questions to which answers are
being sought, the observer will probably not be able
to resolve them without considering a specified set of
variables. It is likely that these will fall somewhere
within a range of phenomena with respect to the relev-
ance of which most students of the selected system would
agree. These comprise a natural system in the sense that
they appear to cohere significantly. Without them it
does not appear likely on a priori grounds that an
adequate explanation of the major aspects of the system
could be obtained. The interconnectedness of the var-
iables seems clear and obvious, at least until dis-
pelled by subsequent inquiry. Concepts then are neither

true nor false; they are only more or less useful.

Theoretical Status

Regardless of whether a social system is an
artifical construct of the mind or a symbolic repro-
duction of natural phenomena it cannot be taken for
granted that all systems share typical elements which
are readily known. It is not a matter of the char-
acteristics that differentiate one type of system from
another but rather of basic elements of which all sys—

tems are composed.

67

It is useful then to consider systems of behavior
as analytic. Some are more differentiated, specific
and integrated for a limited purpose; these can be
called organizations--systems of roles and structures
defined as corporate structures. Others are diffuse
and undifferentiated, enmeshed in other analytical kinds
of interactions. But regardless of the structural ex—
pression of behavior, all systems can usefully be con-
ceived as abstractions from reality, empirically rele—
vant but isolating only a part of the phenomenal world.

It remains to isolate the critical administra—
tive variables for inclusion within the range of in—

terest of this study.

The Identification
The premises adopted with regard to the char-
acteristics of systems are two—fold——

. any set of variables may be selected to
represent the system under consideration

. society, as the most inclusive social system
is the only one that covers all the social
interactions of the biological persons con—
cerned. Every other social system isolates
only some aspects of total behavior and must
therefore be analytic in nature

So far as this study is concerned the inter-

actions comprising any system less than the total
social system are interpreted as a system conceptually

distinct from other systems in a society. Those inter-

actions that fall outside a system may be designated

68
as the environment in which the system under discussion
exists. This implies that there is some kind of bound—
ary between different kinds of systems and their en-
vironment. This enables us to talk of exchanges or
transactions that take place between a system and its
environment. Any attempt at detailed theory would need
to identify these exchanges and account for the way in
which a system manages to cope with the problems they
create for its persistence.

It would be impossible to conceptualize an open
and self-regulating system unless itvere feasible
analytically and empirically to distinguish such a
system from its total environment. If a specified
system is to be distinguished from other kinds of systems
several questions require consideration:

1. What is included within the system and how
are we to identify it?

2. What is meant by speaking about a boundary
between analytic systems?

3. What is tote excluded from a system, to be
interpreted as part of its environment?

4. And, most important of all in terms of
this paper, are there any features common to all
social systems, that can be identified as constitut—

ing an administrative system and if so, what are they?

69

Criteria for Identification
of an Administrative System

 

 

Identifying those interacations in society which
are regarded as a component of an administrative sys-
tem is a critical step in examining the dynamics of
administrative life since this establishes the kinds
of behavior that will be omitted. It is important to
omit no essential elements that may help to account for
the way administrative systems function; otherwise the
purpose for isolating them will have been defeated.
Yet, as has been indicated, any attempt to study cannot
include all phenomena and a simplification introduces
the possibility that some important factors may have.
been excluded.

This is inevitable as there is no guide as to
what elements are to be included in an administrative
system apart from anticipated explanatory power. How—
ever, this is an "ex post facto" kind of test, provid-
ing little advance guidance.

Interactions as the
Units of a System

 

 

The traditional study of administration behavior
has characterized administration in many ways. These
are not rejected because they are wrong since it is

likely that they each contain an element of truth but

70
it is considered that they are less useful at our
present level of knowledge than the alternative pre—
sented.

In its broadest context the study of adminis-
tration as compared and contrasted with economic, relig-
ious, political or other aspects of life, can be des-
cribed as a set of social interactions on the part of
individuals and groups. Interactionsere the basic unit
of analysis. This means that a study of particular
structures, formal or informal, through which adminis-
trative interactions manifest themselves is of second-
ary importance and will not receive systematic attention
on the assumption that there are certain basic adminis—
trative activities and processes characteristic of all
administrative systems even though the structural forms
through which they manifest themselves may, and do,
vary considerably from place to place and time to time.

This stress on the processes of administrative
interactions gives a dynamic character to administra—
tive behavior not evident in the study of forms on
patterns of administrative behavior. Furthermore what
distinguishes administrative interactions from all
other kinds of interactions is that they are predominantly

oriented towards the making of critical decisions

71
concerned with the survival of a system (either ex—
plicitly or implicitly).

Administrative research thus endeavors to under—
stand that system of interactions in any social system
through which critical decisions are made and implemented.
This is not merely the quantity of decisions, plus the
efficiency with which they are put into effect, as post-
ulated by some writers on administration. It includes
also the ends of these decisions considered both as pur—
pose and as process, with an emphasis on critical as

contrasted with routine decisions.

Summary

An administrative system is identified as a
set of interactions abstracted from the totality of
social behavior through which decisions (critical de-
cisions) relevant to the survival of a social system
are made. This conceptualization of administrative
behavior as a system necessitates the identification
of the general elements of the system and a description

of what lies outside it.

Parsonian Theory Weaving

 

Before proceeding, however, to a more detailed

consideration of concepts it will be advantageous to

72

outline Parson's approach to a theory of social sys—
tem within the framework of action since it seems to
provide one useful and comprehensive theoretical
background against which to consider the process of
leadership in administration and isthe point of de—
parture for this study. Thesystem with which Parson
is concerned is the social system at the societal
level. However, society as a whole is composed of in—
dividuals and groups. It is an aggregate of people
making up a given social body, interacting in groups
and associations, structured along the various social
and institutional lines, yet shaped by the force of
common understandings that have become accepted (i.e.
culture) to create a functional whole.

I The question which then arises (in terms of
such sociocultural morphology) is one of the mainten-
ance and perpetuation of the whole. It is argued that

the purpose of society is its own preservation. But

\‘_,..'-’

this is to anticipate. Parson's concepts are seen as
applicable to subsystems, such as organizations and
institutions within society, and it is with the develop-
ment of propositions from his concept of the functional
imperatives of a social system that this study is pri-

marily concerned.

73

What are the general truths about individual
and social behavior which Parsons takes to be established
and recognizes in his system? They may be stated
simply, as in Black's book1 as--

1. All human action is directed towards goals.

2. All human action is relational in the sense
of being a function of needs, acquired orientations
and a particular situation. Orientations are ac—
quired pre—dispositions to respond in certain ways
to given stimuli and these are largely the products
of the goals and standards of the social system to which
the individual belongs.

3. All human responses to stimuli has two dis-
tinct dimensions--the cognitive and what he calls the
cathectic. This is a distinction between thinking
or perceiving and feeling. The former involves truth
or falsity and the latter satisfaction or dissatis-
faction.

4. All human action involves selection between
alternative orientations and responses. Deciding is
called evaluation. 7

5. Selection involves the use of standards,

which are rules or prescriptions for making choices.

 

1M. Black (ed.) The Social Theories of Talcott
Parsons." A Critical Examination (New York: Prentice-
Hall, 1961).

74

6. All interaction involves complementarity of
expectations, which means that the action of each is
oriented to the expectations of the other.

7. Orientations and actions are organized in
systems which are boundary and structure maintaining.
This means that they resist external attack and exer-
cise internal control over components .

8. Action is particularly concerned with the
control and direction of behavior and the structure
’and processes through which that control is implemented.

9. These principles apply equally to social
systems of all levels of complexity, up to and includ-
ing total society, as well as to individuals.

As Black also points out, these may well appear
as laymen's concepts in the thin disguise of technical
terminology and would seem to receive general approval
when stated as such.

1. Whenever you do anything you are trying to
get something done.

2. What you do depends on what you want, how
you look at things, and the position you find yourself
in.

3. You can't do anything without thinking and
having feelings at the same time.

4. Human life is one long set of choices.

75

5. Choosing means taking what seems best for
you or what others say is the right thing.

6. When you deal with other people, you always
have to take account of what they expect you to do.

7. There is a lasting pattern to the way people
behave.

8. Action is directed towards the control and
direction of behavior.

9. Families, business firms and other groups
of persons often behave surprisingly like individuals.

Whether laymen's concepts or sociologists'
abstractions is of little concern here since they are
accepted as assumptions of a general theory of action
and form the background of the sociological theory on
which this paper is based. They provide a useful
starting point for a consideration of the functional
imperatives of a social system.

In essence, the functional approach does no
more than to effect an analysis of the components of
a society and to seek a description of the ways in
which these are interrelated. It seeks to determine
the place of a particular element of culture or societal
institutions in relation to others. The question may
then be posed as to whether this particular element
leads to or assists in the preservation ofthe social

entity in which it appears. The approach has been

76
refined over time and centered on the kinds of inte—
gration operative in a society and the building of models
of a given sociocultural system. This latter approach
has become known as that of structure—function.

Structure implies some form of integration or
cohesion and analysis of integration as a process pro-
vides an interesting aspect of contemporary research in
administration. Every social system possesses what
may be termed functional imperatives, forms necessary
to its preservation. Granted that a social system
succeeds in meeting these needs, and its existence is
witness to the fact that it has, he administrative leader
is interested in the improvement of integration in the
interest of effectiveness. But this is only one aspect
of the problem.

In a modern world and unquestionably through
time, every social system is confronted with the prob—
lem of change. This leads to the issue of the func-
tional as opposedto the dysfunctional. Change is an
important issue and it is likely that through the kinds
of analysis made possible by a functional systems approach
some answers may be provided. Functionalism then helps
to provide an approach by which problems and data can
be defined, ordered and possibly brought closer to

solution.

77

Not all phases of the structure and functioning
of social systems are considered. The primary concern
is with those activities of organized social systems
essential to survivalamd hence necessitating the at-
tention of leadership.

If a functional framework is to provide the basis
for useful description, explanation and approach, care

must be taken to define crucial concepts.

Some Definitions

 

Role is the normatively regulated behavior of
a member of a social system.

A structure is a pattern of interrelated roles,

 

and a corporate structure (Parsons collectivity) is a

 

structure that can be identified in terms of its member-
ship and which has a central decision making apparatus
that enables it to act purposively as a group. It is,
along with the role, one of the basic units of the
social system.

A society —— a type of organization —- is a sys—
tem of action that is —-‘

. composed of a number of interacting individuals
who are primarily oriented to this system

. theoretically self-sufficient for the actions
of the group

. is capable of existing longer than the life
span of the individuals

78
From any society there can be abstracted two
societal systems--a social system and a cultural system.

The social system is the system of interdependent

 

roles and corporate structures of the society and focuses
on the conditions involved in the interactions of indiv—
iduals in groups or collectivities with a specified
membership.

The cultural system is the system of interrelated
beliefs and values and focuses on patterns of meaning
(values, norms, organized knowledge, beliefs, etc.)

The basic conceptfor the integration of the two
is that of institutionalization. This is the process
of infusion with value. It is the integration of
cultural pattern elements at the level of norms and values
with elements of the motivational systems of individuals
in such ways as to define and support structured systems
of social interaction.

Functional reguisites or imperatives are oper-

 

 

ational conditions that must be satisfied if the sys-
tem is to continue to exist. They are activities es—

sential to the survival of the system.

Functional Imperatives
Essential to the approach of this study is the

postulation of the functional imperatives of the system

79
under consideration. Parsons states that any social
system has four functional imperatives and it is use—
ful to adopt this conceptualization. They are pattern
maintenance and tension management, goal attainment,
adaptation and integration. These are significant in

that they control the action processes of a social system.

Pattern Maintenance

 

Every social system exists in an environment
that has a nonhuman component, a cultural component
and a social component. “7 I I

WWW” One of the functional requisites of the social
system is the preservation of the values of the cultural
system through the maintenance of conformity to its
prescriptions. Thus, the focus of pattern maintenance
is in values and the essential function is the main—
tenance of values. There are two aspects to this--

. the character of this value pattern

. their state of institutionalization

Three major processes are involved in pattern
maintenance:

1. major values must be passed on from one

generation to another

80

2. a social control process is concerned with
the application of sanctions for violations of the
prescriptions of the value system.

3. a tension management process attempts to
prevent the development of situations that increase the
probability that large numbers of members will violate
basic norms.

So far as the individual in a social system is
concerned, pattern maintenance is his motivation to
act in accordance with certain value patterns. This
means their internalization in the structure of his
personality. A central problem of control, so far
as the motivation of the individual is concerned, is that
of the processes by which the values of a social system
are internalized in his personality. Of course, values
are subject to change and the important fact is that
potential disruption at this point is great even if it

is orderliness in the process of change.

Goal Attainment

 

The cultural system specifies a set of goals
for the social system as a whole. These goals are
sets of desired relationships between the system and
its environment. The environment relevant for goal

attainment includes aspects of the cultural system,

 

81

the material environment, and other societies. As

the environment is continually changing goals are not
terminal states of being that can be finally achieved
but rather a cluster of on-going activities. They

are specific to a situation and any complex system has
a series of goals and this necessitates some priority
to protect the integrity of the system.

A goal is a change which tends to reduce the
difference between the needs of the system and the
conditions in the external situation that are relevant
to the fulfillment of such needs.

Goal attainment becomes a problem insofar as
the gap between the tendencies of a system toward
stability and its needs resulting from interchange
with the situation is too great.

The focus of goal attainment lies in its relation-
ship to the personalities of the members of the system.
It does not concern commitment to the values of the
system but rather motivation to contribute what is
necessary for the functionhrgof the system.

In order to maintain desired relationships with
the environment it is necessary to have resources and
thus the most significant process related to goal at-
tainment is the process of mobilizing resources for a

cooperative effort.

82

Adaptation

 

Resources must be mobilized before they can
be used in support of system goals. They must be avail—
able to be mobilized. The adaptive function involves
the activities that provide these facilities and re—
sources. It is concerned with the relationships be-
tween the social system and its nonhuman environment--
relationships that are relevant to the supply of
resources which can be used to realize the goals of the
system as a whole or those of any of its sub-units.

The processes that are relevant to the satis-
faction of the adaptive function are those typically
associated with economics——processes of production,

resource allocation and resource management.

Integration

 

All of the activities necessary if the func-
tional requirements of a system are to be satisfied
cannot be carried on by each individual member of it.
There are differences in the role that various in—
dividuals occupy. Since differentiated roles are likely
to be interdependent provisions must be made for their
integration. Thus one of the functional requisites of
the social system is to provide for the integration of
interdependent units--roles and structures-—in it. This
is the mutual adjustment of the sub-units (individuals
and groups) within a system from the point of view of

their contributions to the effective functioning of the

83
system as a whole. This, in turn, concerns their
relation to the problem of pattern maintenance, as
well as to the external situation through processes
of goal attainment and adaptation.
The integrative function is the focus of a

system's most distinctive properties and processes.

A Model

The accompanying diagram adopted from Holt2 is
an aid to understanding this particular statement of
functional imperatives. It indicates that three of the
four requisites are specifically concerned with inter-
action between the social system and its complex en—
vironment.

The adaptive requisite is concerned with the

 

relations between the social system and its nOnhuman
environment.

The pattern maintenance requisite involves re—
lationships with the cultural environment-relevant
aspects of the cultural system.

The goal attainment rquisite is concerned with
relations with specific aspects of these two environ—

ments plus relations with other societies.

 

2The American Academy of Political and Social
Sciences, February, 1965, p. 96.

FUNCTIONAL IMPERATIVES OF A

SOCIAL SYSTEM

Other
Social Systems '
’\
/ \
Material ’ \ \ Cultural
, Goal
Environment / \ System

/ Attainment \

   
 
   
  

j ’ Integration \
F / \
/
/ Pattern \\
/ Adaptation Maintenance\
1— ______ _ _ __ _____ .3

ENVIRONMENT

 

 

An organization, considered as a small social system, within its environ—
ment.

It will be seen that for purposes of analysis the environment can be divided
and that three of the four functional imperatives operate directly with it.

Adopted from Holt, R.T.
A Proposed Structural-Functional
Framework for Political Science. p.96.

85

The integration rquisite is primarily concerned
with the internal problem of coordination of different—
iated but interdependent roles.

This formulation specifically identifies the
different environments within which a social system
operates, and indicates the functional requisite that
is primarily concerned with changes occurring in one
or another of these environments.

As Blau and Scott3 point out in a summary of
Parsons working papers in The Theory of Action, this
schema has sufficient generality to be applicable to
all social systems and obvious relevance to organizations
as corporate structures.

all social systems must solve four basic problems:
(1) adaptation: the accommodation of the system
to the reality demands of the environment coupled
with the active transformation of the external
situation; (2) goal achievement: the defining of
objectives and the mobilization of resources

to attain them; (3) integratin: establishing and
organizing a set of relations among the member
units of the system that serve to coordinate and
unify them into a single entity; and (4) latency:
the maintenance over time of the system's motivat—
ional and cultural patterns. This scheme has

sufficient generality to be applicable to all
social systems . . . .

 

3P. M. Blau and W. R. Scott, Formal Organizatins

(Chandler Publishing Co., 1962) p. 38-39.

 

86

Each formal organization may be viewed as a
social system in its own right that must possess
its own setof subsystems concerned with the sol—
ution of the four basic problems. Accordingly,
each organization must have structures that
enable it to adapt to its environment and mobilize
the resources required for its continued function-
ing. Mechanisms are also required to enable the
organization to implement its goals, including
structures devoted to specification of objectives,
to allocation of resources within the organization
to "production,"and to distribution. To solve
its integrative problems the organization must
find ways to command the loyalties of its members
to motivate their effort,end to coordinate the
operations of its various segments. Finally, in—
stitutions must be developed to cope with the
latency problem, that is, to promote consensus
on the values that define and legitimate the or-
ganization's goals. All organizations are faced
with these problems. However, the particular
structures devised to meet them will vary with
the type of organization under consideration.

Summary

A social system is a going concern, an impersonal
system of coordinated human efforts and influences in
which a specific purpose provides the coordinating and
unifying principle. Its continuance depends upon its
ability to carry out its purpose. Its various parts
form an interdependent and interactive whole because
each is related to every other part included in it in a
significant way. Moreover, it is also related to its

environment.

87

Accordingly, any permanent and far-reaching
change, whether generated from internal or external
forces, is likely to have wider implications than for
the social system primarily affected.

Structurally, a social system is a pattern of
interrelated rolesand collectivities governed by accepted
social values and norms.

Functionally, it is within the patterns of act-
ivity required to coordinate and integrate the static
and dynamic activities of social systems that the adminis—
tration process operates to assist in achieving the goals
of a particular soCial system and that administrative
leadership is evidenced.

It is now proposed to consider a social system
within the context of its environment and the next
chapter summarizes relevant ideas developed by Easton

in his studies on political systems (see bibliography).

CHAPTER IV

SYNTHESIS OF CONCEPTS

The Environment of a System

 

An open-ended system means that there are
boundaries of some kind that distinguish the system
from whatever is not included in it. If this is so
it is useful to be able to indicate the nature of
the boundary, which is not always clearly distinguishable,
that tells us when something is happening in the en—
vironment and not the system under consideration. More—
over, once the idea of boundary maintaining systems is
introduced it is reasonable to assume that when something
happens in the environment it may influence the social
system. An exchange will have taken place across the
boundaries of the two systems.

The significance of system boundaries is that
it will aid in simplifying, interpreting and under-
standing the way in which changes in the environment
are communicated to a system and the way in which a
system seeks to cope with these influences. This
would mean that although many changes in a given sys-
tem may be owing to internal factors, other significant

88

89
kinds of stress may derive from the fact that a sys-
tem is open to influences from its environment. This
seems a more logical and obvious interpretation than
one which accounts for what happens in a system
solely in terms of its internal activities (as a closed
system).

Thus, once the idea of an open system is enter—
tained it requires a clarification of the meaning con—
veyed by the idea of a system as distinct from its
environment. To say that a system is open to outside
influences makes sense only if we can distinguish in-
side from outside and this necessitates an examination
of the properties of the assumed boundary that separates
the two. It necessitates also the development of con—
cepts that enables an analysis of the exchanges be—
tween a system and its environment. The idea of in—
puts and outputs seems valuable for this purpose and
this idea of exchanges or flows of effect would make
little sense a part from boundaries across which such
transactions took place.

Furthermore, the adoption of boundaries as a
concept will also help to simplify reality by provid-
ing a criterion for determining which important ele—
ments of the social system under consideration need
to be explored in depth as major dependent variables
and which may be accepted as given in the form of ex—

ternal independent variables.

90

For systems not defined by spatial or material
limits with regard to other systems, and in which
there may be considerable interlacing of behavior from
different systems other ways of describing and identify—
ing boundaries are required. They can then be ident-
ified by the criteria in terms of which we can deter—
mind for each interaction whether it falls inside or
outside the system.

For an administrative system the test is whether
the interactions are more or less directly related to
critical decisions concerned with the survival of a
social system.

A boundary once established is by no means fixed.
If lack of insight or mistaken interpretation requires
the inclusion of elements previously excluded to im—
prove understanding of the social system under con-
sideration then the system is simply redefined to meet
analytic needs.

Those aspects of society that fall outside the
boundaries of a social system can be categorized by
stating that they consist of all the other sub—systems
of the society. They constitute the environment of
the system and this embraces the social as well as the

physical environment. It should be noted that what

91
happens to a social system, its stability or change,
will in a large part be the function of the operation of
internal variables, an element in administration which
leaders have been concerned with understanding and ex-
plaining since they provide in a large measure what
have been seen as the critical concerns of leadership.
However, the way in which they function, the stresses
imposed upon them and the behavior that occurs as a
.response to such stress will also be a product of what
takes place in the total environment of the system.
It is desirable then to try and systematize the relation-
ships between a system and its environment, since sys-
tems are open in the sense that they are exposed, in
varying degrees, to the events that occur in their en—
vironment. The concepts boundary and environment help

to order an analysis.

Progressive Summary

 

To date then it has been possible to specify
the nature of a system, identify functions essential
to survival and call attention to the easily neglected
setting in which a system must exist. It is now neces-
sary to consider the social system as a responding

system.

92

Persistence in a World of
Stability and Change

 

 

As indicated a social system is an open—ended
system, which exists in an environment and is exposed
to what happens there. It is a responding system and
this has important implications for administrative
leadership. It consists of a set of behaviors through
which positive action may be taken to cope with the in-

fluences operating on it.

System Persistence

 

A social system through responding actions is
capable of persisting even in a world of rapid change.
It is important then for administrative leadership
to examine the way in which the life processes of social
systems are protected. This is broader than the question
of specific systems being able to cope with problems
and survive.

How is it that in spite of continuing pressure,
from within or without, cooperation, commitment of
resources and energies and obedience to authority are
possible?

Without these conditions binding decisions could
not be formulated or put into effect and no social

system could persist no matter what particular structure

93

or form it might take. Of interest then are such ques—
tions as: How does a social system operate? What are
the forces determining the nature and outcomes of the
various processes and structures through which policy
decisions are formulated and put into effect? Of more
interest, however, are such questions as the persistence
of the policy making processes and structures themselves.
What are the life processes of any and all systems?

This involves an examination of general processes,
common to all social structures, through which threats
to the integrity of the system might be handled. It
directs attention to the life processes ofsocial sys-
tems rather than to the specific structures or processes
that make a particular kindcf system viable. Such
matters are significant to an understanding of adminis-
trative leadership. They suggest that if we are to
understand the way in which a system persists over time,
one of the legitimate concerns of leadership, we must
consider what is meant by persistence, stress and re-

sponses to it.

Sources of Stress

 

Stress is just as likely to stem from the con—
stant daily pressures of social life as from special
crises. There are internal strains to which any sys-
tem is typically and normally subjected and external

changes that need to be absorbed.

94

The most significant and recurring internal
sources of strain concern control over political in-
strumentalities—-an effective voice in establishing
the basic policy arrangements or the particular ob—
jectives and goals within an already existing structure.

The nature and range of external problems that
have been thrust upon social systems is likely to al-
ter radically over the years. It is not the nature of
these problems that is of most concern but the fact
of their existence and the necessity for leadership
to recognize problems arising from an accelerated
rate of change and take appropriate action. Upon
their skill in devising policies and structures to
cope with it depends effective survival. Conflict
in a social system generated by environmental influences
usually concerns such problems as the nature of the
system, the personnel who are to hold positions of

authority or the policies they ought to pursue.

Meaning of Persistence

 

An examination of the problem of how some social
systems have managed to persist while others have dis-
appeared leads to a consideration of the fundamental
life processes of social systems. Before this, how—

ever, an understanding of what is meant by persistence

95
is useful. Briefly stated, persistence includes change,
but a continued existence in some form. It does not
mean absolute stability, continued existence without
any change at all. This might be possible if the en-
vironment showed no changes or if the system could
protect itself from every disturbance in its environ-
ment aswell as from internally generated pressures on
its structures and processes. In the long run, both
possibilities are unlikely and persistence is not
incompatible with change. Even in the short run, in
most cases, if a system is to persist it must be able
to change or adapt to fluctuating circumstances.

Thus, persistence by virtue of change, is not
as puzzling as may appear at first sight. It means
that the cost of survival of some means for dealing
with pressures may require the acceptance of change in
one or all of the significant aspects of a social
system, depending upon the circumstances. The members
must be capable of modifying their system, as neces-
sary, with respect to its scope, membership, structure
and processes, goals, or rules of behavior or they
must be able to manipulate their environment so as
to relieve the stress. A system then, needs the

capacity to adapt through self-transformation or

96
manipulation of the environment. The persistence of
patterns of interaction capable of meeting fundamental
commitments requires that the members engaging in this
activity be able to adapt, correct, readjust, control
or modify the system or its parameters to cope with
the problems created by internal or external stress.
Obviously, there are variable means at hand for this
purpose, limited only by the resources, the traditions,
the ingenuity of its members and their available skills.
Self—regulation by the members of a system, including
even self-transformation in structure and goals, re-
presents a critical concern of leadership.

The actual transformations that do occur, and
are successful in ensuring the persistence of a sys—
tem, may also be of various types since various
policies, structures and innovations are available.

The capacity to adapt does not indicate that a specific
successful way of doing so is normally better Or worse

than any other.

Persistence Vs. Maintenance

 

Since persistence includes the idea of change
it is worth differentiating this concept from that of

the maintenance of a system.

97

Maintenance, as normally used, is associated
with the idea of stability andis somewhat alien to
the idea of change. It seems to be associated with
the idea of salvaging the existing pattern of relation—
ships and directs attention to their preservation.
Persistence emphasizes the importance of the life
processes of a system rather than any particular
structure or pattern. This study is more interested
in an explanation of the capacities of a system to
persist, since the maintenance of a particular kind
of system so far as a set of structures and processes
is concerned, is far less important to leadership
than perpetuation of the basic functions of the system.

Persistence is wider than system maintenance.
It is concerned with exploring change as well as
stability. Of course, it may be more necessary for some
systems than others to behave adaptively, and more im-
portant at certain times than others. Moreover, all
systems are not equally successful in doing so. It is
maintained that leadership is most effective where it
comes to expect change even though it is unpredictable
and indeed in a modern social system specialized atten—
tion to the elements involved in persistence is one of

the critical concerns of leadership.

98

Disturbance and Stress

 

Disturbances may be regarded as all those act-
ivities in the environment or within a system that
can be expected to, or do, displace the system from
its current pattern of operations and threaten to
prevent it from functioning. They will vary greatly
in number, variety and consequence——only being stress-
ful to the extent that they affect the chances of the
social system to persist.

It is assumed that for a specific type of sys-
tem there is a normal pattern of operation and that
stress is variation from this normal range of opera—
tion. Implied in the idea of a system operating within
a normal range, beyond which stress may push it is
the idea that there are certain essential variables
that are being displaced beyond their normal range.
The significant point is the essential variables that
characterize a social system.

In examining the identifying variables of a
particular type of system we tend to operate on the
assumption that it is possible to distinguish two
different aspects of a system. One identifies those
aspects of a system that enable it to operate in a
characteristic way and that thereby distinguish it

fundamentally from other systems. However, the

99

persistence of a given type of system requires more than
the presence of essential variables. They need to oper—
ate above a certain level. If disturbances displace the
system beyond this critical range the system will change
its character.

The second aspect, or nonessential features, of
a system may change without altering the characteristic
mode of operation of the system. Essential variables
then are the indicators of stress.

A distinction between variables essential to
the characteristic mode of operation of a system and
those that are of secondary importance and recognition
that the former operate within normal ranges is help-
ful in endeavoring to describe stress. It can be more
fully defined as a condition that occurs when dis-
turbances, internal or external in origin, threaten to
displace the essential variables of a system beyond their
normal range and toward some critical limit, thereby

preventing it from operating in its characteristic way.

‘ .

The Essential Variables
of a Social System

 

Since the primary focus of this study is not
on the persistence of particular types of systems it

is necessary to establish the essential variables, not

100
of a given type of system, but of any and all sys-
tems.

The patterns of interaction essential to the
existence of a social system have been identified as
activities concerning goal attainment, pattern main-
tenance, adaptation and integration. It is through
the presence of activities that fulfill these basic
functions that a social system can commit the re—
sources and energies of its membership. It is these
that are the essential variables or sets of variables
that characterize social systems.

Accordingly, its behavior related to the capacity
to make decisions for the system related to these major
variables that is a critical concern of leadership.
From this point of view all other variables may be
considered non-essential or incidental.

The operation of essential variables need not be
an all-or-nothing matter. A system may be more or less
able to make decisions, put them into effect and get
them accepted. The behavior involved varies on a range
of effectiveness and within that normal range a system
may be able to persist. Similarly, where leadership
is fully capable of making decisions and of seeking

to implement them, compliance will vary on a continuum.

101
Obviously the ratio of rejection to acceptance must fall
within a limited range well above that of chance; other-
wise a system would collapse forwant of sufficient

authority being attached to its decisions.

Stress and Its Regulation

 

Persistence in a changing world will thus be found
to be in part a function of the presence of stressful
disturbances. These cannot always be avoided and the
consequences of these disturbances on the fortunes of
the system itself (whether it survives and in what
form) will depend upon its capacity and readiness to
cope with such stress.

It is a critical property of social systems
that they are able to respond to the influences act-
ing upon them. They can cope with such disturbances
and seek to regulate them in some way. The members
of a social system do not need to sit back and accept
stress supinely, a concept implied in equilibrium analy-
sis as a theory of social life and characteristic of
much sociological theory over the past half century.

The fact that social systems have techniques
for coping with stress distinguishes them markedly from
other kinds of systems and gives them flexibility. The
kinds of regulative responses that characterize all sys—

tems are:

102

1) preservation of the status quo by insula—
tion from change

2) control of environmental and internal changes
so that they do not become stressful

3) adaptation to change

This last response of social systems-—the capa-
city to transform themselves, their goals, their
practices, and the structures of their internal or—
ganization is significant. To keep vital processes
alive, a system may remodel its structures and processes
to the point that they are unrecognizable.

Of importance is the presence of a capacity to
use a variety of responses in defense of essential
variables. It should be emphasized that the selection
of alternatives from the available responses is not
necessarily given. Not only is there freedom to select
from a range of alternative strategies but in many
systems an opportunity to vary strategies within the
limits permitted by circumstances and to devise new
methods for meeting crises, old and new. In the latter
case they will be adding to their store of responses
through innovation. This process of adaptation then
becomes a constructive and creative task based on goals

and direction.

103
Although it is beyond the scope of this study to
consider the major types of stress to which social
systems are exposed or the way systems typically handle
stress it is of value to define concepts for analyz-

ing the way in which disturbances influence a system.

Stability and Change

 

Whether a system exists in a constantly chang-
ing environment or a stable one, the elements of the
environment continue to exert an effect upon its opera—
tion. The analysis of the effect of a stable environ-
ment on a system poses the same problems as in the
case of rapidly changing ones, even though the rate
of change may have important additional consequences.
The recent concern of social science with problems of
change has at least pointed to the fact that any general
theory of change, to be considered adequate, must be
able to handle change as well as stability. It is
maintained that stability is only a special example of
change since there are no social situations in which
the patterns of interaction are absolutely unchanging.
Stability then, represents a condition in which the
rate of change is slow enough to create no special
problems as a result of change. Similarly, rapid change

is another special case in which the rate is high enough

104
to create special consequences of which it is neces-
sary to take note.

Any attempt to point to a conceptual framework
should be able to cope with both special cases since
the object is to develop categories useful for identify—
ing the major variables involved in the functioning
of a system rather than a special set for special cases.
A System-—Its Environment
and Linkage Variables

It is clear then, that,

l. A great variety of environmental influences
are capable of disturbing the way in which a system
carries out its tasks.

2. These influences are present whether the
environment is relatively stable or fluctuating widely.

How is it possible to systematize our under-
standing of the way in which disturbances or influences
from the environment are transferred to a social system?

Is it possible to generalize a method of handl—
ing the impact of the environment on a system by reduc-
ing the great variety of influences into a few and hence

a manageable number of indicators or variables?

105

Influence Across System Boundaries

Since a system is regarded as a boundary—main-
taining, open-ended system it iSLseful to consider the
disturbances or influences resulting from behavior in
other environmental systems as exchanges or trans-
actions that cross these boundaries. Social systems
are not completely independent of one another and com-
plex interpenetration occurs.

Exchange is a useful term to use when referring

 

to a reciprocal relationship or influence. Transaction

 

is best used to refer to the movement of an effect in
one direction-~across the boundary from one system to
another.

This appears quite obvious and is of little
practical use unless of some assistance in reducing
the variety of interactions to manageable proportions.
With this in mind, it seems reasonable to designate
the effects that are transmitted across the boundary
of a system toward some other system as the outputs
of the first and the inputs of the second. A trans-
action between systems then is a linkage between them
in the form of an input—output relationship. Through
examining these it should be possible to understand
more fully the potential impact of environmental

events on the system.

106

By applying the concept of the points of linkage
between a system and its environment it is possible
to develop a model of the type illustrated in Diagram
2, based on that of Easton.1 This obviously oversimplif-
ies reality but at least clarifies the essential frame-
work and dispenses with incidental relationships——both
important if there is to be an effective inquiry into a
system of behavior.

The diagram of the functioning of a social sys—
tem indicates, as Easton2 points out:

1) That what is happening in the environment
affects the system through the kinds of influences
that flow into it.

2) Through its structure and processes the sys-
tem then acts on these inputs in such a way that they
are converted into outputs.

3) The outputs return to the environment, and
its constituent systems and through it back upon the
system itself.

4) The arrows from the environments indicate a
great variety of transactions between them and the

system.

 

1D. Easton, A Systems Analysis of Political Life
(John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1965), p. 30.

2D. Easton, A Framework for Political Analysis
(Prentice—Hall, 1965), p. 110.

r‘>'-30'-3

     

a/sz‘z'owv-oazm

362

cm ammonm

9.08

So

0533589: .

 

I

 

  

Him wmmtOZUHZQ mOOEF m<mam§

waoacomam
cm
Hopcmm

 

V

 

>:

583036:

vaoommm

Um goo:

omBmpom

mum

mappoan

UmBm:

 

mappo

 

\i,

c‘d '
{I}!!! Ollllolulli till-tilt!

iconzuoow 7036

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

D
.1 f
.. m s
.25 $5nt 5 .m
a w.
E m
m A
r. S
>3» .1 m
d
o» m m
535528: Homoomow >933? w. W
:..-u.:-u--c.c-sclulcvi Hammad MN
> 063538: Uncommm 3. “ rmmoma- . ...
caoocomam o». 9:.ch 5 . map
2305 Swan mm 583020: .
dogma: 028:8..631.) . . _ Umommwonm
. \m .mq ....,... Mm. .. .
iuéasusSoohmmocwow corn his .. moon... 0:85
, C (C t at x. .
ooBmoo moo wanton? . . masoconfl
. .
. 5:63.»-
u 95m 1
I'Iulu’olllallu‘III‘OlloI-U‘Iyo
535336: mmmoomow \\

 

 

Political Life, p. 30.

 

 

 

108

5) The reciprocal nature of these exchanges
between the system and its environment is indicated
by the fact that the demands and support inputs feed-
ing into the system are worked upon and converted into
outputs which flow into environmental systems.

6) The dotted lines in the environmental sys-
tems indicates the dynamics of the relationship be—
tween the system and the environment. By modifying
the environment, system outputs can influence the
effects that move from the environment to the system.
In this way a continuous feedback loop can be identified.

7) The structures and processes through which a
system converts its inputs into outputs are repre—
sented as a wavy line within the system.

8) The dotted lines within the system represent

the dynamics of the process of integration.

Inputs - As Indicators

 

The value of the concept of inputs is that it
can be used to cover the effect ofthe great variety
of events and conditions in the environment that are
relevant to the persistence of a system. Without this
it would be difficult to indicate in any precise way
how behavior in the various sections of society affects

what happens in any specific sub—section of it.

109

There are two inputs—-demands and support--and
through them the extensive range of changes in the
environment may be channeled, reflected, and summarized.
Thus they are indicators of the way in which environ-
mental events and conditions modify and affect the
operations of a system. As indicated in Diagram 2,
page 107, multiple transactions are refined into these
two major inputs, which bridge and link the social sys—
tem with all other intra—and extra-societal systems.

It is not tobeaassumed that all the influences
or disturbances that need tokmzconsidered in how a sys—
tem manages to persist occur in the environment of the
system. As has been indicated already, many of these
influences may occur within a system itself. Happen-
ings within a system shape its destinies as a system
of interactions and it is proposed that these are the
inputs of the members of the system. Since inputs
have been used to cover those events occuring outside
the system rather than in it they should logically be
called something else-~possibly withinputs. For con-
venience, however, it is possible to treat, in a unified
way the effects that events and conditions both within
a system and without a system may have upon its persist—
ence as inputs. Within-puts as intrasystem indicators,

are included in the term inputs.

110

From the point of View of analysis the environ-
mental changes are considered to be disturbances on
the existing social system because of the stress they
place upon it, leading to a response and possibly to
transformation. The critical question is not the way
in which disturbances modify the particular form of
the internal structures or processes of the system but--

. to what extent did the disturbances constitute
stress on the pre—existing system?

. how did the stress manifest and communicate
itself?

. how did the system cope with the stress, if
at all?

Demands

Changes in the environment lead to changes in
the volume and variety of demands for which satis-
faction is sought through the system and these latter
changes represent a neglected type of stress that en—
vironmental changes may be interpreted as bringing to
bear upon the system. Since the kinds of commitments
required from the members of the system for the fulfill-
ment of these types of demands are different from those
required under the prior system they can create severe
crises. In this way many changes may be observed through
a single kind of variable——as they influence the volume

and variety of demands.

lll
Su ort

In addition, a social system must obtain suf—
ficient support and its leadership must promote and
sustain this support. From this point environmental
disturbances can be observed through their influence
on the level of support for a system since it too serves
as a focal point of many different kinds of environ-
mental changes important for an understanding of stress
on a system.

Inputs then reflect the changes taking place in
the environment of a social system, communicate these
changes as disturbances to the system, and in turn are
acted upon by the system as a way of coping with stress.
This provides a means for tracing the way in which
stress may be communicated to a system.

Since few systems succumb to stress, from a
stable or a rapidly changing environment, the fact
that they are able to cope with disturbances that
may threaten their existence leads to an inquiry into

the means whereby they have been able to do so.

The Responding System

 

Just as there is a need for concepts to order

the experiences that lead to stress there is also a

112

need for some form of analysis that will assist in an
understanding of the varying modes of response avail-

able to a system.

Response to Demand Stress

 

A system may be exposed to stress from demands
in two ways:

1. Through the inability or unwillingness of
the authorities in a system to meet the demands of
those who count, which would tend to undermine support
for the system. This is a characteristic kind of
stress for a system. In this way output failure would
have important consequences for the input of support.

2. Through an excessive volume and variety of
demands. These may stimulate so much conflict that they
require an excessive amount of time to process. This
kind of stress could be described as input demand
overload. It arises from the simple fact that no
system is able to accept and process through to output
an unlimited number and variety of demands.

Various regulators are at work to prevent this
from happening and there is no unrestricted flow of
demands to the authorities.

As articulated statements of what the authorit-

ies ought to do, demands are messages and to reach their

113
destination they must be able to flow along channels--
word of mouth, mass media, correspondence and so on.
No system has so many channels that it has an infinite
capacity to carry demands. At some point, varying
with the kind of system and its structure, input over-
load of demands would occur. What,then, are the
defences that have been built up to reduce the input
of excessive demands?

There are structural regulators of the volume
and variety of demands, which restrict entrance to
the admission channels of a system. These consist of
interest groups, parties, opinion leaders, the mass
media, etc. and thus the volume and variety of demands
that initially get into a system and begin to move to-
ward the authorities will depend upon the character—
istics of these "gate keepers."

There are numerous other kinds of responses
through which systems have typically sought to regulate
potential demand overload. Processes are available
through which the initial volume of demands that
manage to be voiced are themselves reduced in one way
or another. However, in modern systems more than this
is required and a typical response has been to increase
the channel capacity for bearing demands. Channels for
communicating demands play a vital function in helping

a system cope with potential stress.

114

Response to Support Stress

 

Demands represent only one of the main indices
that can be used to locate and identify the way in
which environmental and internal disturbances may
stress a system. Support for various aspects of a
system represents a Second major index and where such
support seems likely to fall below a minimal level the
system must provide mechanisms to revive the flagging
support or its days will be numbered. Responses to a
decline in support have typically taken three main forms:

a) Structural Regulation. This covers efforts

 

to change the structure and processes that characterize
a particular type of system. This requires a system

to transform its goals and structures as a means of
maintaining some kind of system to achieve goals.

b) Diffuse Support. This does not require the

 

radical measure of self-transformation by abandonment
of the existing regime or its serious modification.

The system may endeavor to impart to its members a

high level of support sothat regardless of what happens
they will continue to be bound to it by strong ties of
loyalty and affection. This is an additional type of
support that is independent of the specific rewards ob-

tained from membership of the systems.

115

No system couki endure for very long if it did
not seek to build up a reservior of support upon which
it could count regardless of the specific frustrations
and problems members may experience at any particular
moment—-this is seen in political systems, for example,
which endeavor to strengthen ties through "indoctrination,"
a form of socialization for support in which ideology
plays an important part.

c) Outputs. When diffuse support may threaten
to fall to a dangerously low point, through outputs,
efforts may be made to stimulate the input of specific
support. This is an input to a system that occurs as
return for the specific benefits and advantages that
members of a system and its relevant publics experience
as part of their membership. It represents or reflects
the satisfaction a member feels when he perceives his
demands as having been met. No system can meet all
the demands of its members and the consequent dis-
content and disaffection are modified by the diffuse
support a member has become used to extending. In
spite of grievances a member remains fundamentally
loyal to the system.

But if the system consistently fails to meet
the minimal demands that members have come to feel

are their due the input of specific support declines

116
and the system would have to rely increasingly on the
general feelings of good will (diffuse support) of its
members.

Thus, consistent frustration of what are con-
sidered to be just wants over extended periods of time,
if not compensated for by an increase in diffuse sup—
port must lead to a lessening in specific support that
would critically weaken the system.

Output, then, represents a central contribution
to the forces that help to sustain the essential var-

iables of a system.

Outputs

What are these outputs? They are now seen as
transactions moving from the system itself to the en—
vironment. In any system events occur that have con—
sequences for the environment. However, it is desir-
able to restrict the term outputs, rather than include
all events that have significance for the environment,
to the specific purpose for which the system exists.
They represent a method of linking up what happens
within a system to the environment and thus enables
us to look at the exchanges between a system and its

environment from a different perspective.

117

What are the processes through which outputs
influence the level of specific support being put into
a system? If outputs are to have any impact on sup—
port they must be able to meet the existing or anticip—
ated demands ofthe members of a system by:

l. Modifying environmental or intrasystem con-
ditions so that the circumstances giving rise toflhe
demands no longer exist.

2. Taking steps to create the impression that
this has happened even though nothing but the image
has changed.

(Coercion of members into continued support,
even though no effort is made to meet demands is also
a possibility.)

Thus, the capacity of a system to respond to
stress can be exercised through its production of out-
puts. It is of significance then to trace the con—
sequence of these outputs as they affect the environ-
ment and the system itself and leadership is faced with
the task of creating the kinds of conditions that nur—

ture or destroy support sentiment.

Feedback

 

How are the authorities in a system to produce
outputs that will regulate the volume and variety of

demands or maximize the input of support?

118

How do they come to learn that some action is
required on their part?

How do they arrive at some judgment about what
the right actions might be?

In short, if a system is able to respond to
stress by regulating it, what is there that allows it
to do so?

Such questions lead to the essence of the sys—
tem, seen as a self—regulating, self—directing set of
behaviors. The capacity of a system to respond to
stress is related to two control processes found within
it-—feedback and the capacity to respond to it. In—
formation about the system and its environment can
be communicated to its authorities and through their
actions the system is able to act so as to attempt to
change or maintain any given condition. Through these
two properties a system is able to make some effort
to regulate stress by modifying or redirecting its

behavior.

The Feedback Loop

 

If a system is able to respond what sort of

information must it seek to obtain?

119

Obviously the authorities in the system would
need to know the conditions prevailing in the environ—
ment as well as in the system itself. In this way
they can act so as to anticipate any circumstances
that might lead to the withdrawal ofciffuse or spec-
ific support. The authorities also need information
about the supportive state of mind of the members and
demands being voiced by significant and influential
members of the system and its relevant environment.

They must obtain information about the effects
which the outputs have already produced. This neces—
sitates a continuous flow of information back to them
so that whatever their goals may be with respect
to support or fulfillment of demands, they are aware
of the extent to which their prior or current outputs
have succeeded in achieving these goals.

It is worth noting that, so far as the output
of support is concerned, he goals of the authorities
cannot be taken for granted. They may, for example,
endeavor to undermine the system rather than strengthen
it. Regardless of the goals of the authorities, how-
ever, if they are to be attained there must be a flow
of adequate information coming back to them. Witiout
feedback behavior could be erratic and random, unrelated

in any causal way to what had occurred previously.

120

Feedback is illustrated in Diagram 2, page 107.
The effects on outputs flow back to the environment and
move through its relevant systems as indicated by the
dotted line. The information about these consequences
then returns from the environment to the system. Since
the authorities are the producers of outputs it is toward
them that the feedback must flow if it is to be effective
in enabling the system to meet stress from the decline
of support.

It is obvious, then, that feedback plays an
important part in the way in which the members of a
system meet stress. Social systems have a special
capacity. In order to preserve some system for making
and implementing binding decisions the authorities are
able to respond by a variety of actions that are limited
only by the inventive and combined intellectual re-
sources of men. Feedback enables these potentials to
be used effectively so that efforts are infused with
purpose and direction.

Feedback is central in human behavior, both in-

dividual and collective.

121

Summary

1 The identification of inputs, outputs, and
feedback and the functions they perform in relating
a system to its environment, aswell as to internal
sources of stress, enables a redefinition of the in-
teractions comprising a social system. The inputs
of a system are the raw materials from which the out—
puts are manufactured. Those in positions of leader—
ship select the goals and objectives of the system and
commit its limited resources to their realization.
The resources may be human or material.

This is a conversion process in which the inputs
of demands and support are acted upon in such a way
that it is possible for the system to persist and to
produce outputs meeting the demands of at least some
of the members, and retaining the support of most.

The persistence of a system can now be redefined.
If stress threatens to destroy a system, its impact
will take the form of interferring in some fundamental
way with the capacity of the system to keep such a
conversion process working.

Stress can also be seen from a different per-
spective. Through the identification of inputs and
outputs as the indicators of more complex combinations
of variables it is possible to pinpoint the stress that
may drive the essential variables of a system beyond

their critical range.

122

It is possible to locate stress by examining
what is happening tothe input of demands and support.

Leadership is interested in knowing some thing
about the typical ways in which, through outputs, a
system manages either to prevent the occurrence of
stressful conditions or to cope with them once they
have come about. The persistence of a system will de-
pend on keeping a conversion process operating.

This presents a dynamic model of a social sys—
tem. As demands and support flow through the system
it is able to get something done. The final product
of this activity takes the form of outputs, and these
may react back upon what the system may subsequently
be called upon to do. This is not a passive process.
A social system is a goal setting, self—transforming
and creatively adaptive something, which consists of
human beings who are capable of anticipating, evaluating
and acting constructively to prevent disturbances in
the systems environment. In the light of goals they
may endeavor to correct any disturbances that are potent-
ially stressful. The demands and support can be molded
to the purposes and desires of members of the system to
the extent that knowledge, resources and inclination

allow. The members of a system are able to regulate,

123

control, direct, modify and innovate with respect to
all aspects and parts of the processes involved. This
is what is meant by coping constructively with stress.

In this study the persuasive arguments that
might be made for the need of general theory are as—
sumed nor is any attempt made to construct such a
theory. What has been done so far is to indicate the
kinds of concepts that might be useful in adoptimga
social systems approach, which emphasizes functional
imperatives, to administrative leadership. This is
not merely another convenient and fashionable way of
looking at leadership. It seems to offer the basis
of an analytical framework around which could be built
a set of interrelated categories and concepts and this
has been attempted. This is the primary justification
for such studies. In the next chapter an endeavor is
made, in the light of what has been found out about
social systems and the processes necessary to persist-
ence, to summarize what Barnard3 and Selznick4 have
detailed as some of the more important tasks of adminis-

trative leadership.

 

3C. I. Barnard, Organization and Managgment

(Harvard University Press, 1948).

4Op. cit.

 

CHAPTER V

THE TASKS OF ADMINISTRATIVE LEADERSHIP

Types of Decisions

 

Decision making is a facile and fashionable
phrase that may well obscure more than it clarifies.
It seems to refer to important and significant events
and yet decisions are with us always, at every level
of experience, in every organization. Even if the
general features of all social choice could be stated
clearly it would still be necessary to distinguish
the more and the less trivial and, if there is any
order in the phenomenon, to identify types of decisions,
linking them to the distinctive problems or situations
out of which they arise. This study is basically
concerned with leadership in large enterprises and
in the possible existence of a special kind of exper-
ience that underlies and actuates leadership decisions.

Two dimensions of individual behavior—-the routine
and habitual processes, aspects and responses char-
acteristics of all human beings to various types of
situations and the specific emotional development and
character structure of each individual, as evidenced
in the growth and change of total personalities,

124

125
seem of significance for this study. Much literature
on administration is concerned with routine processes.
These are not unimportant. However, they tend to
refer to matters of immediate concern for their own
sake-—personnel selection; morale—building techniques;
team organization; communication channels and so on——
that have to do with organizational efficiency. The
emphasis is on orderly process, on smooth functioning.
In addition to the older techniques of manage—
ment, routine functions include those related to the
newer "human relations" approach which emphasizes a
broad understanding of authority and communication as
basic to the social psychology of obedience, perception
and cooperation. However, nothing in this approach leads
to the dynamic adaptation of the total organization
to internal strivings and external pressures.
Just what is meant by dynamic and total?
Fromml distinguishes clearly "static" and "dy—
namic" adaptation.
By static adaptation. . . patterns as leaves
. . . the whole character structure un-
changed. . . . the adoption of a new habit
or pattern . . . have little effect on . . .

personality; it does not arouse new drives
or character traits.

 

1E. Fromm, Escape From Freedom (Rinehart,
1941), p. 15.

 

126

This does not imply rigid inflexibility but
rather routine processes, "everyday" dynamics--ord—
inary, responsive behavior subject to normal tendenc—
ies. Most human responses are of this routine nature
and inevitably in the control of large numbers these
processes have assumed significance. Yet, certain
areas of experience, of critical experience, belong
to a different domain.

In dynamic adaptation, says Fromm:

. . . an individual adapts himself to . . . neces-
sary. . circumstances . . . something happens in
him. This kind of adaptation . . . is a dynamic
factor in character structure, creating something
new, arousing new drives and anxieties. . . mod-
ification of the personality and affects future
forms of response.

Dynamic here involves more than simple activity,
change or growth and suggests certain pressures or
forces different in origin and role from routine ten—
sions.

What is relevant is the reconstruction of need,
the change in position and strategy resulting from
the interaction and counteraction of forces. The
emphasis is on inner need, environmental pressure and
a mediating structure. The personality is an adaptive
equilibrium seeking organization but the process is

not a smooth continuum of adjustment. Stress and

response are of importance.

127

The relevance of this to a study of organiza-
tions seems fairly obvious. Static and dynamic adapta—
tion occurs in organizations as well as personalities.

The daily routine functioning of an organiza-
tion requires the continuous solution of problems.

The existing structure, including the more formal pat-
terns of communication and control and the more in—
formal patterns of human relations developed, is able
to meet such issues as they arise, without internal
crisis. Changes do occur as daily work proceeds but
normally these do not significantly affect the nature
of the enterprise or its leadership. Within broad
limits a large organization runs itself so long as
this is understood to cover routine activity. Such
routine functioning and adaptationis generally re-
garded as a major concern of leadership and everyday
activity is certainly a legitimate and necessary pre-
occupation of management.

In organizations it is necessary also to con—
sider less routine kinds of adaptation. This covers
those aspects of organizational experience in which
adaptations of leadership to the interplay of inter-
nal and external forces result in basic organizational
changes. This is the area of personality or "character"
defining commitments,which affect the organization's

capacity to control its own future behavior.

128
Dynamic adaptation is difficult to analyze—-
it concerns both policy and management--not merely in
the sense that management devices implement, execute,
and help to form policy, but more in the sense that
organizational processes influence the kinds of
policy that can be made, and policy in turn shapes
organizational machinery in ways that cannot be ex—
plained in terms of efficiency. This is an area out—
side the concern of administrative routine—-an area
of critical experience where leadership counts and
managerial expertise is of subordinate importance.
The term "leadership" seems to mean critical

experience rather than routine practice and this is
indicated by Barnard.2

The overvaluation of the apparatus of communic—

ation and administration is opposed to leader—

ship and the development of leaders. It opposes

leadership whose function is to promote approp-

riate adjustment of ends and means to new en-

vironmental conditions, because it opposes change

either of status in general or of established

procedures and habitual routine. This overvalu-

ationeiso discourages the development of leaders

by retarding the progress of the abler men and

by putting an excessive premium on routine

qualities.

It is easy to overemphasize the personal element

in leadership. While personal qualities are important

 

20p. cit., p. 240.

129

too much attention may obscure the essential dis—
tinction between routine and critical decisions and
draw attention away from the role of leadership in
the making of critical decisions. Leadership deals
with current issues not merely as isolated and routine
events but according to their long-term implications
for the role and meaning of the group.

Group leadership, then, is more than—-

. the capacity to mobilize personal support

. the maintenance of equilibrium through the
routine solution of everyday problems

It is the leader's function to-—

. define the ends of group existence

. design an enterprise adapted to these ends

. see that the design becomes a living reality

This is not a routine matter and may require
only a few critical decisions over a long period of
time. It may have little to do with speed and vigor
and tends to be overshadowed by a traits approach which
emphasizes self—confidence, energy, aggressiveness,

intuition and so on.

The Character of an Organization

 

The process of character formation seems to
offer useful leads as to the nature and tasks of

leadership particularly as regards the connection

130
between institutionalization and critical decision
making.

Although psychologists disagree as to what
character or personality is,and as to its formation,
they are agreed on the usefulness of the concept and
as to the fact that:

. It is a historical product, reflecting an
individual's development

. It is an integrated product
. It is functional and emphasis is on the
reconstruction of the self as a way of solv-

ing anxiety laden problems

. It is dynamic and generates new strivings,
new needs and new problems

A comparison of these character attitudes with
the process by which organizations become institutions
is useful.

The character of an enterprise, just like that
of individual, is determined by what it does and this
in turn on the limits of its own resources,how it
fits into the already established community, and how
it comes to be regarded by the general public.

Thus, the formation of an institution is marked
by the making of value commitments, maybe unconsciously
and generally not verbally, and these character—de—
fining choices fix the assumptions of policymakers as

to the nature of the enterprise-—its specific aims,

131
methods and role in the community. These commitments
or values are built into the social structure of the

enterprise.

Policy and Critical Decisions

 

Decisions affecting institutional development
are critical decisions and when made consciously
constitute policy in its traditional sense. Analytic-
ally, there is a need to distinguish between policy
making and policy serving decisions and this has been re-
flected in the separation of policy and administration.
However, there is a continuity of policy and adminis-
tration in that organizational practices can enter
the critical experience of leadership. These practices
and associated attitudes help to shape the key values
(something in the organization taken as an end in it-
self) and especially the distribution of the power to
affect these values.

What are some of these practices?

1. The recruitment of personnel, particularly
when individuals are chosen for commitment to precarious
aims and methods. When the social composition of the
staff significantly affects the interplay of policy and
administration, personnel selection is more than a

routine management practice.

132

2. Personnel training, particularly when im-
plementation of policy depends on the attitudes and
ways of thinking of staff. Then an effort must be
made to translate policy into an organization doctrine
and incUlcate these ideas.

3. The establishment of a system for repre—
senting internal group interest. Freedom to promote
and defend the interests of sub—units must be combined
with effective coordination by top leadership, respons-
ible for the total organization,which involves more
than harmonious action. It consists also of formal
procedures for creating balanced representation and
for adjudicating conflicts. Such conflicts are not
routine and tend to raise issues relevant to the de—
termination of key values and thus ensure that policy
issues come to the fore for scrutiny and action.

Thus, problems of coordination seen as the interplay

of values, power and organizational practice, form

a large part of the critical experience of institutional
leadership.

4. Cooperation with other organizations also
has policy implications. Cooperation endangers con-
trol since commitments in practice rarely coincide
with verbal agreements and cooperation proposals may

reflect a strategy for organizational expansion or

133
protection. Such proposals then must be examined to
see whether they will, in practice, generate undesir-
able consequences for an organization as a whole or
parts of its program.

This means, in effect, considering the con—
sequences for public opinion, personnel selection,
organizational machinery and so on,which means the
power implications of cooperation. This is because
the development and implementatidi of policy require
it rather than for the sake of power itself.

This helps to clarify the distinction between
routine and critical experience and the difference
between static and dynamic adaptation. Routine ex—
perience works out detailed applications for established
policy and when most things about an organization are
routine leadership is often dispensable (for the bare
continuity of organizational existence). Leadership
is important in matters of critical experience where
the problems is to choose key values and create a social
structure that embodies them. When key choices have been
made and related policies firmly established then ef—

ficient administration can play a significant role.

134

Summary

Various organizational practices suggest dynamic
ratherthan static adaptation. The latter cover changes
that do not affect the central or self-defining aims
or methods of the enterprise. However, just such aims
or methods are what may be at stake in selective re—
cruitment, indoctrination of essential attitudes, the
representation of interests and administrative cooper—
ation with external agencies. These processes may be
affected without policy makers being aware so that the
consequences for organization character may be un—

anticipated and uncontrolled.

The Functions of Leadership

 

Policy and administration are interdependent
in the sense that certain areas of organizational
activity are particularly sensitive to policy matters.
Because of this creative leadership is needed to trans—
form a neutral body of men into one that is committed,
Their business is politics.

This is not so much a struggle for power, al—
though a contest of wills may be involved, but the
continuous redefinition of group interest and objectives
and the embodiment of these in policy and in structure.
A political orientation is not so much concerned with
technical efficiency as decisions that are open and

potentially controversial.

135
Leadership, then-—

. sets goals, in the light of possibilities,
necessitaties and limitations

. creates and shapes an organization to coincide
with the value premises of policy

. reconciles internal strivings and environ-
mental presures, noting the way adaptive
behavior brings about changes in organiza-
tional character

. is aware of how the changing social structure
affects the evolution of policy

If leadership is lacking these tasks are inadequately
done, if at all, no matter how efficient the flow of
paper and smooth the channels of command and communica-
tion. The importance of leadership and its relationship
to organizational character can be seen more clearly by
a careful examination of these key tasks of leadership.

1. The definition of institutional role. The
setting of goals is a creative task and entails self-
assessment to discover the true commitments of the or-
ganization, as set by effective internal and external
demands.

2. The infusion of purpose. Building policy into
the organization's social structure is just as import-
ant as making it. This, too, is a creative job requir—
ing shaping the "character" of the organization, sen—
sitizing it to ways of thinking and responding so that
it will elaborate and carry out policy according to its

spirit as well as its letter.

136

3. The defense of institutional integrity.

 

Survival, as such, is notthe main subject; survival
with the persistence of values and distinctive identity
is. This function of leadership is very important and
little understood.

4. The ordering of internal conflict. Informal

 

groups form naturally in large-scale organizations and
struggle amongst competing interests claims time and
attention because changes in the internal balance of
power can influence the direction of an enterprise.

It is necessary to winthe consent of constituent inter—
est groups (to maximize cooperation) and this is achieved
largely by giving them representation. At the same time
it is necessary to maintain a balance of power approp—
riate to the fulfillment of key commitments. This is

the aspect of leadership that has received most atten—

tion to date in studies on administration.

The Definition of Purpose

 

The aims of large organizations are often very
broad and somewhat vague since it is difficult to fore—
see whether more specific goals will be realistic or
wise. Here it is relevant to note that the goal set-
ting under consideration is that at the upper end of
the purpose—process hierarchy applicable to institutions

rather than organizations and taking into account the

137
open-endedness of institutional experience. It is
the adaptive structuring of aims that presents the leader
with one of his most difficult and important tasks.
He must specify and recast the aims of his organization
so as to adapt them, without any serious corruption to
the requirements of institutional survival.

While a clear statement of purpose universally
understood is an important aspect of effective adminis-
tration, as pointed out by Gulick3 it is also true that
some kind of assessment is necessary before the required
clarity can be achieved. This may require a period of
actual experience during which the capabilities of an
organization and the pressures of its environment may
be tested. It is maintained that this sort of self-
assessment is one of the main duties of administrative
leadership.

Thus, in defining the mission of an organization
leaders must take account of the internal state of the
organized group--its striving, competencies and so on
and external expectations that determine what must be

sought or achieved if the institution is to survive.

 

3L. Gulick, Administrative Reflections from World

War II, (University of Alabama Press, 1948).

_—_._--- —. _.__._

 

138

A Danger

 

One danger to the adequate definition of in-
stitutional mission is a concentration onways and
means in which ends are taken for granted. The inter-
relation and close interdependence of means and ends
is important, not the subordination of one tothe
other.

The effective leader continually explores the
specialized activities for which he is responsible to
see whether the aims taken for granted are consistent
with the evolving mission of the enterprise as a whole.
The administrative managers, as technicians, accepts
specific goals as given and then apply their technical
skills.

In summary, then, institutional aims cannot be
accepted as given since they are conditioned by chang—
ing self-definitions, by alterations in the internal
and externalCOmmitments of the enterprise. If the
effect of this process is to be controlled rather than
left to opportunistic adaptation, an awareness of it
is essential. Emphasis on means inhibits this aware-

HESS.

139
Infusion of Purpose
The definition of mission and role is complement—
ary to that of building purpose into the social struc—
ture of an organization which means transforming an un-
committed body of men into a committed agency. In this
way policy is not superficial nor is it distorted with

the expansion and the extension of linescf communication.

Policy and Social Structure

 

It is readily seen that when studying large com-
munities and great issues that policy is dependent on
social conditions. However, the basic principle that
policy needs social support seems to be neglected when
a transition is made from the wider sphere of society
as a whole to smaller entities. This is largely due
to an inadequate understanding of the elements of social
structure. The internal structure of smaller social
groups is often hidden, obscured by unfamiliar forms,
or emphasis on aims.

What then are some of those aspects of social
structure that affect policy decisions? As Selznick4

indicates these include:

 

4Op. cit., pp. 91-100.

 

140

l. Assigned Roles is one of the most obvious

 

ways of connecting policy and social structure. These
roles set out the tasks, powers and expected procedures
of participants in some officially approved pattern
or structure. This is the technical organization but
not necessarily the only source of order within the
group or enterprise, although perhapsthe most important.
It is maintained that leadership declines in imoportance
as the formal structure approaches complete determination
of behavior. However, the formal system is not always
readily observed and understood. The question is what
patterns will be Openly recognized and enforced as part
of official policy. In any complex organization it is
not easy to find out and an assigned role may carry
inherent difficulties that endanger the aims of the policy.
Hence organizational design even when dealing
with the division of labor must be based on an accurate
understanding of the social structure created in the
process of assigning formal roles.

2. Informal Groups. These take many forms but

 

from the point of view of this study are significant

in that they represent sources of energy, self-stimula-
tion and are not wholly amenable to control by official
authority. They may lend life and strength to an en—
terprise or they may subvert it. Leadership is faced

with the task of building purpose into an enterprise which

l4l
encompasses fitting the aims of the organization to the
spontaneous interests of the groups within it and binding
parochial group interests to larger loyalties and as—
pirations.

3. Social Stratification. The system of ranking

 

common in any administrative organization has many uses.
Apart from fixing authority, dividing work effectively
and supplementing formal incentives the ranking system
shapes the general social behavior of the men in the
ranks and so social stratification emerges.

4. Beliefs. The social structure of an organiza-
tion also includes the relevant shared beliefs of the
participants. The existence of set beliefs creates prob—
lems for the leader who desires to move in new directions.

It is often necessary to adapt the technical or-
ganization to this aspect of the social structure in
order to redistribute or isolate resistant elements.

At the same time the existence of such beliefs can be
a constructive source of creative effort.

5. Participation. The members of an enterprise

 

have different kinds and degrees of commitment to it.
The degree of personal investment is closely related
to the importance assigned to an organization and mem-

bership in it.

142
Morale is closely related to the possibility of
increasing participation as a way ofdeveloping personal
commitment to the organization. The division of labor,
however, offers few opportunities for significant par—
ticipation by members.

6. Dependengy. Frequently an individual or

 

unit in an enterprise depends on another-—for informa—
tion skills and work. This suggests the value of un-
derstanding who needs whom.

Thus, the elements of social structure form a
complex set of interdependent relations among persons
and groups, which acts as a filter through which policy
is communicated and represents a system of balanced
forces among potentially conflicting parts. A leader
needs to know how to deal with the various dimensions
of the social structure.

To build policy into the social structures of
an enterprise means that official aims and methods
are spontaneously protected or advanced. The aspirations
of individuals and groups are so stimulated and con—
trolled and ordered as to produce the desired balance
of forces. This is the aim of formal role assignment
but the latter is inadequate by itself to fulfill the
aim, e.g. in order to provide support for a policy it
may be necessary to alter the social structure by bring—

ing in new men or changing old lines of communication

143
and dependency. Alternatively the policy may be re—
jected as unworkable. In any case, a clear understand—
ing of the social structure of an enterprise is required
as an essential basis for making decisions.

Of value would be the discovery of general re—
lations between types of policy orientation and kinds
of special support——clues as it were to the character-
istic troubles that arise in typical situations? Is
this assumption of "typical situations" which impose
more or less uniform limitations upon the policy maker,
or offer characteristic opportunities, a valid one?

This study takes a position that it is"

Historical Perspective

 

A search for general connections between policy
and social structure gains from a study of organiza—
tion history. Katz4 refers to the characteristics of
organizations that may be associated with growth pat-
terns. However, it is necessary to differentiate be—
tween problems posed by the job to be done from those
set for an organization by the stage of growth in which
it finds itself. Certain types of problems seem to
characterize certain phases of an organization's life

history.

 

D. Katz, "Social Psychology and Group Processes,"
C. P. Stone and D. W. Taylor, eds. Annual Review of
Psychology, Vol. III, 1951.

 

 

144
Thus, a sensitivity to historical background will
help the planner adjust organizational structure in
the light of a changing situation which provides new

risks and opportunities.

Summary

We have been,

1) considering some of the natural processes
that condition organizational experience. This has
been evidenced in a concern for the products of adapt-
ive, responsive behavior which include social homo-
geneity and cohesion.

2) examining the area of critical experience
which calls for leadership rather than routine manage-
ment. This has been evidenced in a look at stages of
growth as they bear on the restructuring of role and
needs.

3) finding that development patterns seem to
have a common element in that they reflect changes
in commitment in relation to men and ideas that are
not readily altered. Changes in commitment are the
things that create organizational crises, whose resolu-
tion affects the range of competence of the enterprise
as well as the survival of its distinctive aims and

methods.

145
The Defense of Integrity

Effective policy requires supportive conditions
but most urgently when aims are not well defined
when external direction is not easily imposed or main-
tained, when a changing situation requires constant
adaptation, and when goals or values are open to cor—
ruption. This open—endedness generates the key prob-
lems of institutional leadership. Among these is the
defense of institutional integrity—-the persistence of
an organization's distinctive values, competence and
role.

The integrity of an institution may be threatened,
regardless of its own inner strength, if sufficient
external pressure is applied, as has been seen, but
the main concern at this stage is with inner weaknesses.
From this point of view institutional integrity is most
vulnerable when values are insecure. Values, aims, and
standards are important but those responsible for sus—
taining them will not be equally capable of doing so.

What then are the social conditions that affect
this competence? The ability to sustain integrity is
dependent on a number of general conditions, including

the adequacy with which goals have been defined.

146
Summary

It can be seen that such aspects of organiza-
tion are very significant for administrative leadership
and yet the existence of institutional integrity is
often endangered by internal rivalry of sub—units.

Such rivalry,however, is not simply the result of
personal egotism—-it is closely related to the legitim—
ate effort of leadership to defend the values with which
they have been entrusted.

It is practically important then to identify
conditions that sustain the integrity of an enterprise.
This applies to all organizations and constituent units
that have some policy to protect. It is evident also
that the defense of integrity is not merely a matter of
sheer organizational surviva1——it is rather the policy,
the mission, the special capability--the identity of

the group that is at stake.

CHAPTER VI

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

It is now necessary to draw the threads together
and see whether they make a recognizable pattern.

The main aim of the study has been to explore
the meaning of administrative leadership of large
scale organizations in the light of sociological
theory as to the activities essential to the survival
of the social system. It has been oriented to a syn-
thesis of ideas and an examination of concepts required
for their advancement. The relative primacy of one
analytical element over others has been stressed — the
control of critical decision making.

It is farily obvious that there are no easy
solutions to immediate problems of administrative
leadership but that reflection and self—knowledge may
provide some new approaches. Approaches that seem to
indicate that the narrow view and limited aspirations
of the usual executive are inadequate for effective
institutional development.

147

148

It is agreed that administration is a process
of directing and controlling life in a social organi-
zation and concerned with developing and regulating
the decision making process in the most effective man-
ner possible. However, it seems that decisions that
facilitate or hinder the effective operation of an
enterprise will be concerned more with controlling the
life of, as contrasted with the life in, a social or-
ganization. A small point, maybe, and possible a
view which could be assumed under the term effective,
but one that needs to be emphasized as it directs at—
tention to external orientations and places internal
control and direction in the proper perspective.

The vital process in any organization is the
control of decisions, all sorts of decisions, but
particularly those related to the persistence of an
enterprise-critical decisions as compared to routine
ones.

The tasks of leadership within administrative
performance systems then may be summarized under three
broad dimensions of functions as—-

. the policy-purpose determination function

. the technical—operational function

. the energizing—process function

149

This certainly makes a recognizable pattern
but in broad outline it seems to differ little- if
any, from patterns already developed.

What is new about a systems approach is the
tendency not to isolate phenomena in narrow contexts
but to consider interactions in increasingly larger
and larger areas of relevance.

Its contribution lies not in the originality
of the concepts and ideas since they represent a syn-
thesis of those of others but in the presentation
of some ideas on the process by which disturbances
affect an enterprise and by which response is man-
ifested.

It differs from the conventional emphasis on
internal organizational problems and possibilities
and emphasizes an enterprise as a totality and its
response to problems generated by the necessity to
exist and to persist in a changing environment.

The study constitutes no theory. It does point
to concepts and an analytic framework considered use—
ful as a context within which to consider the tasks
of administrative leadership.

It does seem to be true as stated by so many

writers on the subject that if any "theory" is involved

150
in the study it is that decision making is the heart
of administration and the chief concern of adminis-
trators.
Some of the main ideas developed are now sum-
marized, together with the addition of some further

thoughts on responsible and creative leadership.

Efficiency

 

It is often postulated that the job of the execu-
tive is to blend harmoniously means and ends but there
is a practical tendency in administrative life, as
in all social action, to separate them by stressing one
or the other. The cult of efficiency is one way of
overstressing means to the neglect of ends.

Efficiency as an operating ideal assumes that
goals are determined, resources and appropriate methods
availableamdthattheproblem is one of joining available
means to known ends. This has been distinguished as
routine decision making, something different from
critical decision making, which involves choices that
affect the basic character of an organization. The
latter is the true job of leadership as distinct from

administrative management.

151
Leadership goes beyond efficiency,
1) when it establishes the basic mission of
the organization, and
2) when it creates a social organism capable

of fulfilling that mission.

And Organization

 

The establishment and maintenance of an organi—
zation is often straight-forward——the problem of adapt—
ing known quantities through known techniques to
predetermined ends.

However, there are limits to this sort of or-
ganization engineering when it is necessary to create
a structure uniquelyadapted to the role of a specific
enterprise. This includes adaptation in depth, af—
fecting the nature of the constituent elements them-
selves.

Integrity covers more than efficiency, than
organization, then group cohesion and is the unity that
results from a combination of policy and organization
when a particular orientation becomes so much a part
of group life that it colors and directs a wide variety
of attitudes, decisions, and forms of organization at

many levels.

152

The job of leadership is to guide in the trans-
ition from organization to institution so that the
ultimate result effectively embodies desired aims and
standards.

The study of institutions requires an emphasis
on historical origins and growth stages. It is neces—
sary to see the enterprise as a whole and how it is
transformed as new ways of dealing with a changing
environment evolve. As in the case of personality
study a developmental approach means that effective
diagnosis rests upon identifying special problems as-
sociated with a particular character and growth structure.

The problem is to discover characteristic ways
in which types of institutions respond to types of cir-
cumstances. Moreover, significant classifications may
well differ from the common sense distinctions into
organizations according to functions——economic, milit—
ary, political, educational and so on. More general
characteristics such as ability to make full use of
creative talents may be more helpful in classifying
organizations and in understanding the types of prob-

lems they face and solutions that may be available.

153

Combined With Responsibility

 

As an organization becomes an institution new
problems face the leaders, among which is the need
for institutional responsibility.

From a personal standpoint this is a blend of
commitment, understanding and determination. It means
transcending his speciality, an understanding, not only
of his own weaknesses and potentialities but of these
qualities in the enterprise itself, and a yielding of
the will to know and to act in accordance with the
requirements of institutional survival and fulfillment.

Responsible leadership is responsible in:

l. Accepting the obligation to give direction
instead of merely being interested in organizational
equilibrium and efficiency.

2. In adapting aspirations to the character
of the organization, remembering that what it has
been will affect what it can be and do.

3. In going beyond more organizational sur-
vival by seeing that decisions do not weaken or con-

fuse the distinctive identity of the enterprise.

And Creativity

 

The responsible leader is essentially concerned
with what may be termed conservative functions. To

these must be added a concern for change and reconstruction

154
in the sense of persistence rather than maintenance.
Two important aspects of this creative role are the
institutional embodiment of purpose and strategic and
tactical planning. The latter means analyzing the en-
vironment to determine how best to use the existing
resources and capabilities of the organization. Al—
though what can be done to establish policy internally
depends upon the changing relations between the organiza—
tion and its environment the problem of externally
oriented strategies has not been considered.

The creative leader is interested in institution
building—-in fashioning an organism that embodies
values. This requires sensitivity tothe politics of
internal change and external pressure. It is a mat—
ter of releasing energy as well as avoiding dangers
and here it is well to note that consent for new direct—
ions depends on how secure the participants feel.
Established procedures need to be examined when change
is planned to distinguish those important to a sense
of security from those essential to the aims of the
enterprise. The truly effective leader is both con-
servative and creative looking to the past and to the
future--in the interests of institutional effectiveness.
He is an administrative leader rather than an adminis-
trative manager, a person who can face up to problems

analyze and sort out the factors which matter from

155
those which are unimportant, and reach a decision.

Then he does something.

Some Generalizations

 

Throughout this study it has been necessary
to maintain a level of generality prescribed by the
nature of the endeavor and by secondary analysis of
existing material. What has resulted is one way of
looking at administrative leadership. Such an effort
is necessarily exploratory. Propositions have been
formulated but the ability to specify and elaborate
them is limited by lack of information and experience.

What generalizations can be presented as a
result of this study? Those to be listed seem both
elementary and obvious. Perhaps they are so but the
failure of leadership in many cases seems to indicate
that they have not been fully appreciated. Since pre-
diction and control is the main aims of generaliza—
tions in the field of social science the justification
for this list is a three—fold one:

a) So much is written and done that ignores
social realities.

b) Many programs of specific organizations

fail to take rather obvious precautions.

156

c) A checklist based on logical concepts may
save time for administrators who require immediate
action.

They cover what are considered to be major
points only and would have to be adapted to specific
circumstances before any application to special cases
could be made. They are useful as general guides
worthy of consideration and have been developed as
such.

The effectiveness of leadership tends to be
related directly to:

. the extent to which it understands and de-
fines the purposes of organizational
existence

. the extent to which it recognizes and sets
specific goals in the light of necessities—
defined purposes that must be achieved

. the extent to which it recognizes and sets
specific goals in the light of possibil—
ities—defined purposes that are relevant and
may be achieved

. the success with which it communicates or—
ganizational purposes and direction to its
members

. the success with which it communicates or—
ganizational purposes and direction to those
sections of its environment on which it de—
pends for support

. the degree to which goals aimed at gain,
maintain and coordinate organizational in-

terest, support and effort-both individual
and group

157

. the degree to which goals aimed at gain,
maintain and coordinate interest, support
and effort from the relevant sections of
the environment

. its awareness of the influence of changing
internal structure on the evolution of or-
ganizational policy

. the degree to which it reconciles internal
and external pressures in the long term in-
terest of the enterprise

. the extent to which it can mobilize facilit—
ies and resources toerhieve organizational
objectives

. the flexibility with which organizational
forms and practices change in response to
new situations in the interests of organiza-
tional persistence and fulfillment

. the extent to which it sees the necessity
for the enterprise to be infused with dis-
tinctive values (patterns of meaning) ac—
cepted by its members both as individuals
and members of a group

. the effectiveness with which it communicates
these distinctive values to its members

. its success in maintaining or changing these
patterns of meaning, as necessary, in the
interests of goal attainment and survival

. the extent to which it sees the necessity
for and arranges the integration of the act—
ivities of sub-units, each contributing dif-
ferently to the existence of the enterprise,
into the system as a whole

It is obvious that this is, by no means, a

complete list of generalizations relevant to the topic.

It does contain, however, a number of important con-

siderations, applicable in varying degrees to the

158

problems facing administrative leaders. Neglect to
take such factors into account would seriously hamper
the success of leadership in achieving the objectives
of most enterprises - goal attainment and survival.

If the more important generaliZations were to
be refined and summarized into a few basic propositions
relevant to the tasks facing administrative leader—
ship the result would require the inclusion of the
following.

The effectiveness of leadership tends to be
related directly to:

An understanding that any enterprise consists

of a series of interactions directed towards

specific objectives.

Its ability to develop an organization capable

of achieving the group and individual purposes

and objectives of its members.

The extent to which there is an appreciation

that organizational purposes and goals are

limited by effective internal and external

pressures.

To the degree to which, over a period of time,

it gains, maintains and coordinates continued

interest, support and effort for organizational

goals, both internally and externally.

The information and other influences that re-

turn to it from internal and external sources,

relative to its success in meeting demands.

Amiitsawareness of the necessity for a contin-

uous evaluation of organizational values,

goals and activities in the light of changing
circumstances internal and external.

159

To the degree to which it is able to ensure

that the organization responds adequately to

critical internal and external pressures in

the interests of goal attainment and persistence.

Even though the study has not led to any clearly
identified principles it has provided a framework for
the analysis and description of administrative leader—
ship and indicated a set of factors that must be con—

sidered by leadership in arriving at any valid proposals

regarding administrative organization and processes.

Value of Study

 

No attempt is made at a detailed educational
application since the study covers generalizations
applicable to administrative leadership and relevant
to different types of enterprise. In applying the
ideas outlined to a specific situation leadership
would need to remember that persistence in a chang—
ing environment necessitates goal attainment, pattern
maintenance, integration and adaptation.

The outputs through which goals are attained
depend upon a conversion and coping process which
suggests a pattern of analysis which includes the

following variables:

160
. the nature of the inputs

. the varying conditions under which they will
become stressful

. the conditions in the environment and the
system which generate stressful conditions

. typical ways in which systems have endeavored
to handle stress

. the role of information feedback

. the part outputs play in this process

Specific application would have to take into
account a number of situational variables.

So far as education is concerned applications
have been attempted as for example, in a number of
the contributions to Leu and Rudman'sl work on train-
ing programs for school administrators, by Halpin,
Saunders, Griffiths, the AASA and others (see bib—
liography).

The usefulness of an analytic framework, similar
to that outlined, is illustrated in such studies as
those being carried out under the Pittsburgh Consortium
Inter-University Research Program in Institution Build-
ing. The purpose of this program is to "explore sys-
tematically the process and strategy of establishing

viable innovative organizations in developing countries."

 

10p. cit.

161
This is based on an increasing recognition that,

. . . one of the important problems in the pro—
cess of national development is the establish-
ment and structuring of organizations which
introduce, protect and integrate new physical
and social technologies. A basic assumption
underlying this research program is that new
values, functions and technologies are not in—
troduced in a diffused manner, but in and
through organizations which structure a set of
relationship and action patterns enhancing the
integration of the innovations. A second as—
sumption is that the development of an environ—
ment which supports the innovations in physical
and social technology need not be an evolution—
ary process but is susceptible to human design
and deliberate social action. A third basic
assumption is that the planning, structuring
and guidance of these innovative organizations
is a generic process. This means that a set

of elements and actions can be identified which
serves to analyze institution building as a
generic process, even though the expression

of these elements will differ, depending on

the type of institution and the social environ-
ment. 2

An interesting example of the application of
this conceptual background is contained in Appendix
A which outlines the theoretical background of a
study of the "institutionalization" of the professional

education program at the University of Nigeria.

 

2Original documents on Pittsburgh Consortium
Institution Building Project.

162

Suggestions for Further Study

This study has been concerned with an analytical
scheme resulting from the adoption of a systems ap-
proach to administrative leadership. It has not con—
sidered numerous complexities of significance to lead-
ership such as those involved, for example, in inputs,
persistence, stress, outputs and feedback. Relevant
areas for further study in which little data exists
and even speculation is limited include:

1. The role of professionalism within specific
organizations as contrasted with society at large.
In organizations where creativity is important the
independence of key personnel who initiate ideas is
significant. Internal and external professional as-
sociations can play a crucial part here. Theexist—
ence of such elites raises the further question of the
balance required between personnel whose primary com-
mitment is to a specific organization and those whose
primary sense of responsibility is wider.

2. The matter of externally oriented strategies
involving an analysis of the environment to decide how
best to use the existing resources and capabilities

of the organization asvell as the environment.

3.

163

The concept of outputs raises all sorts of

questions as to the consequences of these outputs as

they affect the environment and the system itself and

create the kinds of conditions that stimulate or

destroy support.

4.

Whose demands have to be satisfied to main—
tain a level of support adequate to persist-
ence?

How frequently do these demands have to be
met?

How many of the demands have to be met?

So far as feedback is concerned, one would

need to know:

The kinds of information that typically re-
turns to the authorities along the loop and
the extent to which it is accurate, false
or distorted.

The degree to which time,the number of channels,
the type and variety of channels (as trans-
mission belts) influence the type of informa—
tion received.

The extent to which accuracy is dependent
upon the perceptions of the authorities and
the way it may be influenced by ideology,
prejudice, indifference or lack of ability
to obtain and interpret information.

The extent to which lack of will, ability
Or resources contributes to inability to
meet stress rather than the absence of ac-
curate information.

164
5. The degree to which a particular adaptation
of a system is a function of more than the capacity
of its members to cope with change. It possibly in—
cludes an understanding of why policies are adopted

by the relevant members in a system.

APPENDIX A

INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

AT THE UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA

APPENDIX A

INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

AT THE UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA

The study of the "institutionalization" of the
professional education program at the University of
Nigeria is defined as an attempt —

1) To determine the status of the "institution—
alization" of the professional education program as
measured against broad defining characteristics of
"institutionalization;" that is, this status five
years after the founding of the University.

2) To examine the way in which the status was
achieved.

The criteria of institutionalization are listed
as:

. survival

. normative spread

. usage

. influence

. respect

. morale

. autonomy

. support

166

167

The explanatory variables are postulated as:

. leadership

. resources

. internal structure and organization

. doctrine

. program

. linkages

It is based on the assumptions that —

1. It is possible to analyze and describe the
process of institutionalization, wherebyamqorganiza-
tion becomes accepted in its environment, in terms of
requirements and processes so that results can be used
to guide social action.

2. There are essential ingredients in the
process which are universal, although their expression
would differ according to the type of organization in
mind and the local environment.

3. Something can be done to ensure that changes
considered desirable are introduced into an educational
system so that they will become readily accepted and

used.

168

Institutionalization

 

How do organizations which aim at introducing
new values, functions and skills become accepted?
This involves the identification of forces
and elements within the organization and its environ—
ment which affect this purpose.

. The relationship among these forces and
elements

. Their implications in terms of choices of

 

action
Institutionalization — Key Elements
1. Leaders — those responsible for setting

aims, developing programs and directing objectives.

2. Doctrine - the specific values, objectives

 

and methods used to achieve aims.

3. The organization - This is the actual

 

vehicle of change in and through which leadership
hopes to effect change. It cannot be studied in
isolation.

4. The environment - An essential aspect since

 

the organization works within the environment and
there are many interdependencies with other organiza—
tions. More importantly, the aim of the organization
is to have what it offers in the way of skills, at—
titudes, etc. accepted by other organizations and

individuals in society.

169

Institutionalization — Success

 

An organization has been successful in introduc—
ing new functions and processes when these are accepted
not only within the organization but also by other
organizations in the social system and when its ser-
vices are valued in the environment.

It is difficult to indicate a point of time
in the process when this happens but there are trends
and certain indications. These are:

1. Survival. The fact that the organization

 

exists. A relevant query is whether it has had to
sacrifice its distinctive elements in order to survive.

2. Value. This is the extent to which the
organization is regarded as valuable. Relevant quer-
ies include the extent to which it is independent and
its influence on the environment.

3. Acceptance. This is the extent to which

 

the organization's values and skills have been accepted

by other organizations and within society.

Institutionalization — Analytical Concepts

 

How can the concept of institutionalization be
analyzed?

1. The structure of the organization as a

 

system. There are many inter—related variables
which determine the effectiveness of the organiza-

tion in achieving its objectives.

170

2. The environment in which the organization

 

exists and with which it interacts.

3. The linkages between the organization and

 

the environment. These are the organizations points
of contact with the environment. This is an exchange
relationship since:

. The organization obtains from the environ-
ment its authority, support and resources.

. The environment uses the output of the or—
ganization.

. The objectives of the organization is to
transfer values, skills, norms to the en-
vironment.

4. The transactions or actual relationships

 

developed between the organization and the environment.
The kinds and purposes of these relationships are
significant.

Intra—organizational variables are those ele-

 

ments necessary to explain the behavior of an organiza-
tion. They can be conveniently summarized under the
following headings.

Leadership is the degree to which the indivii-

 

uals in the organization, who decide policy and plan
programs, are accepted and stay in their positions
long enough to exert an influence. Their status and

technical competence within their particular field

171
and their ability to adminfier the organization to
achieve goals is important also.

Doctrine is the extent to which objectives,
and means for attaining them, are stated, understood
and accepted by the individuals in the organization.
Their relationship to existing patterns and expecta-
tions and the preferences and priorities of society
are also relevant.

Program consists of the activities undertaken
by the organization toachieve its aims. Obviously
these must be consistent with aims, useful in that
they contribute to the needs of society, realistic
in possibilities and stable enough to avoid the con—
fusion of fluctuating priorities.

Resources are the human and physical require—

 

ments necessary to work the organization. Two factors

of significance are the source of resources and the
extent to which they are available.

Internal structure. This is the structure

 

and process established within an organization so that it

will function effectively. Here it is necessary for
individual needs to be balanced with organizational

expectations so that individual efficiency will lead

172
to organizational effectiveness in achieving accepted
goals. Internal communication, motivation and morale,
and ability to adapt to changed circumstances are

significant aspects of internal structure.

Inter-Organization Variables (Linkages)

 

Linkage variables are those elements in the

 

interaction which exist between an organization and
other parts of society.

Enabling linkages are connections with organiza-

 

tions and groups controlling authority and the resources
necessary for the organization's existence and func-
tioning.

Functional linkages are connections with or-

 

ganizations which carry out work or perform services
which are either complementary or competitive.

Normative linkages are connections with or-

 

ganizations whose values are relevant to the objectives
and program of the organization.

Diffused linkages are connections with the pub-

 

lic and public Opinion as expressed in news media and
other means of expressing individual and group opinion

not reflected in formal organizations.

173
Transactions are the actual process by which
goods, services,power and influence are exchanged
with the other points of contact in the environment
with which an organization has connections. These
are aimed at gaining sufficient resources to operate
and support to overcome resistence, structure the

environment and transfer norms and values.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

A.A.S.A. Leadership for American Education. American
Association of School Administrators, Yearbook,
1952.

 

A.A.S.A. Professional Administrators For America's
Schools. American Association of School Adminis-
trators, Yearbook, 1960.

 

Almond, G. A. and Coleman, J. S. The Politics of the
Developing Areas. Princeton University Press,
1960.

 

 

Anderson, F. and Davies, D. Patterns of Educational
Leadership. Prentice-Hall, 1956.

 

 

Appel, P. H. "A Study of Selected Administrative
Principles as They May be Applied in Certain
School Districts in the State of Michigan,"
Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State
University, 1962.

Argyris, C. Executive Leadership. Harper, 1953.

 

Bailey, R. B. A Theory of Creative Human Relations.
"Implications for Educational Administration,"
Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State
University, 1961.

 

Bakke, E. W. Organization and the Individual. Yale
Labor and Management Center, 1962.

 

Barber, B. "Structural-Functional Analysis: Some
Problems and Misunderstandings," American
Sociological Review, Vol. 21, 1956.

 

 

Bavelas, A. "Leadership, Man and Function," Adminis—
tration Science Quarterly, No. 4, 1960, p. 491-498.

Barnard, C. I. Organization and Management. Harvard
University Press, 1948.

 

Barnard, C. I. The Functions of the Executive. Harvard
University Press, 1960.

 

175

176

Bennis, W. G. "Leadership Theory and Administrative
Behavior," Administrative Science Quarterly, No.
4, 1959, pp. 259—301.

 

Bird, G. Social Psychology. Appleton-Century-Crofts,
Inc., 1940.

 

Black, M. (ed) The Social Theories of Talcott Parsons.
A Critical Examination. Prentice-Hall, 1961.

 

 

Blau, P. M. and Scott, W. R. Formal Organizations.
Chandler Publishing Co., 1962.

 

Blau, P. M. Bureaucracy In Modern Society. Random
House, 1956.

 

Buckley, W. "Structural-Functional Analysis in Modern
Sociology," Modern Sociological Theory in Con-
tinuity and Change, Ed. H. Becker and A. Boskoff,
Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1957.

 

 

Campbell, R. F. and Gregg, R. T. Administrative Be-
havior in Education. New York: Harper, 1957.

 

 

Campbell, R. F. "Situational Factors In Educational
Administration," Administrative Behavior in
Education, R. F. Campbell and R. T. Gregg (eds)
New York: Harper and Brothers, 1957.

 

 

Coladarci, A. P. and Getzels, J. W. The Use of Theory
in Educational Administration. Stanford Univer—
sity Press, 1955.

 

 

CPEA Center, Albany. A Developing Concept of the
Superintendency of Education, Resource Manual 1.
Albany; New York: Cooperative Development of
Public School Administration, State Education
Department, 1955.

 

 

CPEA Center, Nashville. Better Teaching in School
Administration. George Peabody College, 1955.

 

 

Davis, K. "The Myth of Functional Analysis as a
Special Method in Sociology and Anthropology,"
American Sociological Review, Vol. 24, 1959.

 

Drill, W. R. "Decision-Making," Behavioral Science
and Educational Administration. NSSE Sixty—
Third Yearbook, 1964.

 

 

D. Easton. A Systems Analysis of Political Life.
John Wiley & Sons, 1965.

 

177

Easton, D. "An Approach to the Analysis of Political
Systems," World Politics, NO. 9, l957,pp. 383-400.

 

Easton, D. A Framework for Political Analysis. Prentice—
Hall, 1965.

 

Etzioni, A. A Comparative Analysis of Complex Organiza—
tions. On Power; Involvement and Their Correlates.
Free Press of Glencoe, 1961.

 

 

Forbes, J. L. "A Theory of Administrative Leadership
for Contemporary Education," Ph.D. dissertation,
Michigan State University, Unpublished, 1958.

Fromm, J. Escape From Freedom, Rinehart, 1941.

 

Getzels, J. W. "Administration As A Social Process,"
Administrative Theory in Education, A. W. Halpin
(ed). Chicago: Midwest Administration Center,
1958.

 

Gouldner, A. W. (ed) Studies in Leadersfip. Harper
and Brothers, 1950.

 

Griffiths, D. E. Administrative Theory. Appleton-
Century—Crofts, Inc., 1959.

 

Griffiths, D.E. "Toward a Theory of Administrative Be-
havior," Campbell and Gregg (eds) Administrative
Behavior in Education, Harper, 1957.

 

 

Gulick, L. Administrative Reflections From World War
II, University of Alabama Press, 1948.

 

Gulick, L. and Urwick, L. Papers on The Science of Ad-
ministration. New York: Institute of Public
Administration, 1937.

 

 

Halpin, A. W. Administrative Theory in Education.
Midwest Administration Center, 1958.

 

Halpin, A. W. "A Paradigm for Research on Administrator
Behavior in Education," Administrative Behavior
in Education. R. F. Campbell and R. T. Gregg
(eds) Harper, 1957.

 

 

Halpin, A. W. The Leader Behavior of School Superintend—
ents. SCDS Series, Ohio State University, 1956.

 

178

Hearn, G. TheorygBuilding in Social Work. University
of Toronto Press, 1958.

Hempel, C. G. "The Logic of Functional Analysis,"
L. Gross (ed) Symposium on Sociological Theory
Row, Peterson, 1959.

Hemphill, J. K. (et a1) Administrative Performance and
Personality. Teachers College Bureau of Pub-
lications, 1962. Also summarized in "Personal
Variables and Administrative Styles," NSSE Sixty-
Third Yearbook, 1964, pp. 178-198.

 

Holt, R. T. "A Proposed Structural-Functional Frame—
work for Political Science," The American Academy
of Political and Social Sciences, Feb., 1965.

Homans, G. C. The Human Grogp. Harcourt, Brace &
Co., 1950.

Hopper, R. L. and Bills, R. E. "What's a Good Adminis—
trator Made Of?" The School Executive, Vol.
74, March, 1955, pp. 93-95.

Hunter, F. Community Power Structure. A Study of
Decision Makers. Doubleday and Company, 1963.

 

Jenkins, W. O. "A Review of Leadership Studies With
Particular Reference to Military Problems,"
Psychological Bulletin, 1947, Vol. 44, p. 54—77.

Katz, D. "Social Psychology and Group Processes," C.P.
Stone and D. W. Taylor (eds) Annual Review of
Psychology, Vol. III, 1951.

Kraft, L. E. "Perceptions Held on Factors Which May or
May Not Affect the Quality of an Educational
Program," Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation
Michigan State University, 1962.

Kuhn, A. The Study of Society: A Unified Approach.
Irwin and Dorsey, 1963.

Law, B. "ViscounE‘Montgomery. The Path to Leadership.
London: Collins, 1961.

Lerner. "Communications Systems and Social Systems,"
Behavioral Science, Vol. 2, October, 1957, pp. 266—275.

179

Leu, Donald J. and Rudman, H. C. Preparation Programs
for School Administrators. East Lansing: Michigan
State University, 1963.

 

Lewin, K. Resolving Social Conflicts, G. W. Lewin (ed)
Harper, 1948.

 

Lewin, K. Field Theory In Social Science, D. Cartwright
(ed) Harper, 1951.

 

Likert, R. New Patterns of Management. McGraw-Hill, 1961.

 

Lipham, J. M. "Organizational Character of Education,"
Review of Educational Research; AERA, Vol. 34,
No. 4, 1964.

 

Lipham, J. M. "Leadership and Administration," Ba-
havioral Science and Educational Administration.
Sixty-Third Yearbook, NSSE, 1964.

Litchfield, E. H. "Notes on a General Theory of Adminis-
tration," Administrative Science Quarterly,
Vol. 1, No. 1, June, 1956.

 

Litterer, J. A. Organizations: Structure and Behavior.
John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1963.

 

Malinowski, B. A Scientific Theory of Culture. New York:
Oxford University Press, 1960.

 

Malinowski, B. The Dynamics of Culture Change. Yale
University Press, 1945.

 

Merton, R. K. Social Theory and Social Structure.
Free Press of Glencoe, 1957.

 

Merton, R. K. Reader In Bureaucracy. Glencoe: The Free
Press, 1952.

 

Martindale, D. The Nature and Types of Sociological
Theory. Houghton Mifflin, 1960.

 

 

Martindale, D. "Limits of and Alternatives to Function-
alism in Sociology," Monograph 5, American
Academy of Political and Social Science, Feb.,
1965.

Merton, R. K. (et a1) Reader in Bureaucracy. Free Press,
1952.

 

180

Metcalf, H. C. and Urwick, L. Dynamic Administration.
The Collected Papers of Mary Parker Follett.
Harper and Brothers, 1940.

 

 

Miles, M. B. (ed) Innovation in Education. New York:
Bureau of Publications, Teachers College,
Columbia University, 1964.

 

Mills, C. W. The Sociological Imagination. Ohio Univer-
sity Press, 1958.

 

Mort, P. R. and Ross, D. H. Principles of School Ad-
ministration. New York: McGraw—Hill, 1957.

 

 

N.S.S.E. Behavioral Science and Educational Adminis-
tration. Sixty-Third Yearbook, N.S.S.E., 1964.

 

Northrup, F.S.C. The ngic of the Sciences and the
Humanities. New York: Macmillan, 1947.

 

 

Parsons, T. "Suggestions for a Sociological Approach
to the Theory of Organizations," Administration
Science Quarterly 1, 1956, pp. 63-85, 225-239.

 

Parsons, T. "Structure and Process in Modern Societies.
Free Press of Glencoe, 1960.

 

Parsons, T. The Social System. Glencoe, Illinois:
The Free Press, 1951.

 

Parsons, T. (et a1) Theories of Society, Foundations of
Modern Sociological Theory, 2 Vols., Free Press
of Glencoe, 1961.

 

 

Parsons, T. Bales, R. F. and Shils, E. A. Working Papers
in the Theory of Action and Family Socialistiation
and Interaction Process. Glencoe: Free Press,
1955.

 

 

 

Polsby, N. W. Community Power and Political Theory.
Yale University Press, 1963.

 

Radcliffe-Brown, A. R. Structure and Function in Primitive
Society. London: Cohen and West, 1952.

 

Redfield, R. Tepoztlan: A Mexican Village. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1930.

 

181

Rex, J. Key Problems of Sociological Theory. Routledge
and Kegan Paul, 1961.

 

Rogers, E. M. Diffusion of Innovations. Free Press of
Glencoe, 1962.

 

Saunders, R. L. (et al) A Theorygof Educational Leader-
ship. Merrill Books, Inc., 1966.

 

Sears, J. B. The Nature of the Administrative Process.
McGraw-Hill, 1950.

 

Selznick, P. "A Theory of Organizational Commitments,"
R. K. Merton (et a1) Reader in Bureaucracy.
Free Press, 1952, pp. 149-202.

 

Selznick, P. "Dilemmas of Leadership and Doctrine in
Democratic Planning," Studies in Leadership_
A. W. Gouldner (ed) Harper and Brothers, 1950.

 

 

Selznick, P- "Foundations of the Theory of Organization,"
American Sociological Review, Vol. 12, Feb., 1948,
pp. 25-35.

Selznick, P. Leadershfinin Administration, Row, Peterson
and Co.,"1957.

 

Simon, H. A. Administrative Behavior. Macmillan, 1950.

 

Simon, H. A. "Decision Making and Administrative Or-
ganization," R. K. Merton (et a1) Reader in
Bureaucracy. Free Press, 1952, pp. 185-194.

 

 

Simon, H. A. "Some Strategic Considerations in the
Construction of Social Science Models," P. F.
Lazarsfield, Mathematical Thinking in the Social
Sciences. Glencoe: Free Press, 1954.

 

 

Stogdill, R. "Personal Factors Associated with Leader—
sfip," A Study of the Literature," Journal of
Psychology, 1948, Vol. 25, pp. 35-76.

 

 

Tannenbaum, R. and Schmidt, W. "How to Choose a Leader—
ship Pattern," Organizatons: Structure and
Behavior. Litterer, J. A. (ed) John Wiley
and Sons, Inc., 1963.

 

 

182
Tead, O. The Art of Administration. McGraw-Hill, 1951.

Urwick, L. Leadership in the Twentieth Century. Pitman
and Sons, 1957.

Urwick, C. The Elements of Administration. Harper and
Brothers, 1943.

Whitaker, I. "The Nature and Value of Functionalism in
Sociology," Monograph 5, The American Academy
of Political and Social Science, Feb., 1965.