The Toronto Transit Commission: A Case Study of the Structural-Functional Approach to Administrative Organizations

Abstract

Political scientists have approached the study of administrative organizations with widely divergent purposes and modes of analysis. The early studies in this field were suffused with a desire to improve administrative institutions. Attention was centred on the “problems” of administrative accountability, red tape and inertia, administrative efficiency, and the public's low estimation of government service. Emphasis in these early studies was placed on the description of formal institutions and arrangements, since these arrangements, rather than informal behavioural patterns, were amenable to reform. This approach still characterizes the great body of literature on “public administration” in all western countries.In the 1930s and 1940s some American political scientists began to focus their analysis on the “leadership” or “political” behaviour of top-level administrators. Rejecting the notion that public administration could be studied or taught apart from the general concerns of political science, this approach viewed administration as simply one phase in the political process. Emphasis was shifted from the internal aspects of administrative organizations to the environmental or “political” problems of these organizations. Emphasis was shifted from reform to value-free, neutral analysis. This “administrative politics” approach developed at the same time as the “behavioural revolution” in American political science and applied many aspects of that revolution to the study of public administration.