A CRITIQUE OF FRED W. RIGGS’ ECOLOGY OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
A CRITIQUE OF FRED W. RIGGS’ ECOLOGY OF PUBLIC
ADMINISTRATION
Wen-shien Peng
ABSTRACT
Parsons once said that sociologists all critique Max Weber, but no one can do social research independently and scientifically without referring to Weber’s theories. By the same token, those who study comparative public administration will inevitably find reason to critique Fred W. Riggs’ “fused-prismatic-diffracted model”, but in conducting research, no one is free of Riggs’ influence. From the perspectives of heterogeneity, overlapping, formalism, and social transformation, the model observes particular characteristics in prismatic society. Even though the theory behind it needs refinement, it has exerted tremendous influence on the understanding of public administration and organizational behavior. This article’s general critique of Riggs’ theory is organized as follows: (1) achievements and contributions, and (2) limitations and discussion.
INTRODUCTION
From the very beginning, Riggs made a great effort in searching for an objective and effective model for analyzing public administration in developing regions. With his background in sociological theory, Riggs created the “fused-prismatic-diffracted model.” This model covers a wide range of research. For instance, economic life, social structures, political symbols, and the allocation of power are all part of the analysis of structural function. From the perspectives of heterogeneity, overlapping, formalism, and social transformation, the model observes peculiar characteristics in prismatic society.
Even though the theory behind it needs refinement, it has exerted tremendous influence on the understanding of public administration and organizational behavior. This article’s general critique of Riggs’ theory can be summarized as follows.
ACHIEVEMENTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS
Heady once praised Riggs for his “wide range of knowledge and the depth of his theoretical viewpoints; he is one of the most
ADMINISTRATION
Wen-shien Peng
ABSTRACT
Parsons once said that sociologists all critique Max Weber, but no one can do social research independently and scientifically without referring to Weber’s theories. By the same token, those who study comparative public administration will inevitably find reason to critique Fred W. Riggs’ “fused-prismatic-diffracted model”, but in conducting research, no one is free of Riggs’ influence. From the perspectives of heterogeneity, overlapping, formalism, and social transformation, the model observes particular characteristics in prismatic society. Even though the theory behind it needs refinement, it has exerted tremendous influence on the understanding of public administration and organizational behavior. This article’s general critique of Riggs’ theory is organized as follows: (1) achievements and contributions, and (2) limitations and discussion.
INTRODUCTION
From the very beginning, Riggs made a great effort in searching for an objective and effective model for analyzing public administration in developing regions. With his background in sociological theory, Riggs created the “fused-prismatic-diffracted model.” This model covers a wide range of research. For instance, economic life, social structures, political symbols, and the allocation of power are all part of the analysis of structural function. From the perspectives of heterogeneity, overlapping, formalism, and social transformation, the model observes peculiar characteristics in prismatic society.
Even though the theory behind it needs refinement, it has exerted tremendous influence on the understanding of public administration and organizational behavior. This article’s general critique of Riggs’ theory can be summarized as follows.
ACHIEVEMENTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS
Heady once praised Riggs for his “wide range of knowledge and the depth of his theoretical viewpoints; he is one of the most
References: Braudy, James R. 1965. "Japanese Administrative Behavior and the 'Sala Model '," Philippine Journal of Public Administration, Vol Harrison, David A., M. A. Shaffer and Dora M. Luk. 2005. "Input-Based and TimeBased Models of International Adjustment: Meta-Analytic Evidence and Theoretical Extension," The Academy of Management Journal, Vol Heady, Ferrel. 1979. Public Administration: A Comparative Perspective. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Hitt, M. et al. 2001. Strategic Management: Competitiveness and Globalization, ed., South-Western Publishing. McCurdy, Howard E. 2006. “The Cultural and Ideological Background,” in Rosenbloom, David H Pawson, R., and Tilley N. 1997. Realistic Evaluation, London: Sage Publication. Petrick, Joseph A. 2005. "Public Integrity Capacity, Management Theory, and Organizational Theory," in Bishop, p., C Management, Organization, and Ethics in the Public Sector, Ashgate Publications, 255279. Riggs, Fred W. 1961. The Ecology of Public Administration. New Delhi: Asia Publishing House. Riggs, Fred W. 1962 "Trends in the Comparative Study of Public Administration," International Review of Administrative Science Vol Riggs, Fred W. 1964. Administration in Developing Countries: The Theory of Prismatic Society Riggs, Fred W. 1964. The Ecology of Development. CAG Occasional Papers. Riggs, Fred W. 1979. "The Ecology of Administrative Development," Paper prepared for The International Conference on the Future of Public Administration, 27-31. Riggs, Fred W. 2006. “The Prismatic Model: Conceptualizing Transitional Societies,” in Otenyo, E Shen, Chu-Ta. 1987. "A Study on Riggs ' Ecological Public Administration Model," Journal of Su Chou University, 9-10. Squires, P. and Measor, L. 2005. "Below Decks on the Youth Justice Flagship: The Politics of Evaluation, " in Taylor, D Teece,David J., Gary Pisano, and Amy Shuen. 1997. "Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management," Strategic Management Journal, Vol