Abstract
by Georges Langrod,
International Centre of Scientific Research, Paris.
The author, who is not altogether unknown of our readers, first acknowledges the sorry fact that, to date, there is no such thing as an organised, coherent, science of administration. This is the more important in that it leaves a gap in our social set-up, and indeed a gap of special significance because Administration, as a fact, tends to become all-embracing.
The whole of this thoroughly documented essay is an outcry against sloth, against the comfortable adherence to fixed, « time-proven » practices, for there is no real opposition against the organised study of Administration as a science. The only obstacle seems to be inertia, a lack of methodical thought.
On the other hand, a systematic study of Administration would fill a dangerous gap in our organised knowledge, it would prevent the threatening dispersion of thought and take away from juridical, economic and other « auxiliary » sciences the burden of haphazard administrative phenomena which properly belong to a separate discipline. Positively speaking, such a study will enable co-ordinated thought in matters administrative, by laying down general, universally applicable principles, and so lead to more fruitful exchanges of views and generally acceptable methods.
The author, however, does not let himself be carried away by his subject, and is aware that such an organised science can never take the place of experience. He merely believes that it may and shall throw light on the accumulated experience and will enable administrators to co-ordinate the results of a daily contact with the facts of administration.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.