Answering the question, “Should public administration adopt pragmatism?” requires some agreement on what pragmatism means and what that adoption might entail. This article argues that such agreement does not currently exist and, without it, calls by administrative theorists for adoption will not receive their intended responses.
EvansK. (2000). Reclaiming John Dewey: Democracy, inquiry, pragmatism, and public management. Administration & Society, 32, 308-328.
2.
FollettM. P. (1918). The new state. Gloucester, MA: Peter Smith.
3.
FollettM. P. (1919). Community is a process. Philosophical Review, 28, 576-588.
4.
FollettM. P. (1924). Creative experience. New York, NY: Longmans, Green.
5.
FryB. R. (1989). Mastering public administration. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.
6.
HarmonM. (2007). Public administration’s final exam: A pragmatist restructuring of the profession and the discipline. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
7.
HolmesO. W. (1919). Abrams v. United States. In MenandL. (Ed.), Pragmatism: A reader (pp. 178-180). New York, NY: Vintage.
8.
KanterR. M. (1995). Preface. In GrahamP. (Ed.), Mary Parker Follett: Prophet of management (pp. xiii-xix). Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
9.
KuhnT. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
McSwiteO. C. (1996). Round #3: On the necessity of admitting the idea of the unconscious into any post-rational model of public administration. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 18, 51-52.
12.
McSwiteO. C. (1997). Legitimacy in public administration: A discourse analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
13.
McSwiteO. C. (1999). On the proper relation of the theory community to the mainstream public administration community. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 21, 4-9.
14.
MenandL. (1997). Pragmatism: A reader. New York, NY: Vintage.
15.
MillerH. T. (2004). Why old pragmatism needs an upgrade. Administration & Society, 36, 243-249.
16.
RescherN. (1999). On situating process philosophy. Process Studies, 28(1/2), 479-483.
17.
ShieldsP. (1998). Pragmatism as philosophy of science: A tool for public administration. In WhiteJ. (Ed.), Research in public administration (Vol. 4, pp. 195-226). Stamford, CT: JAI.
18.
ShieldsP. (2008). Rediscovering the taproot: Is classical pragmatism the route to renew public administration?Public Administration Review, 68, 205-221.
19.
SniderK. F. (1998). Living pragmatism: The case of Mary Parker Follett. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 20, 274-286.
20.
SniderK. F. (2000a). Expertise or experimenting? Pragmatism and American public administration, 1920-1950. Administration & Society, 32, 329-354.
21.
SniderK. F. (2000b). Rethinking public administration’s roots in pragmatism: The case of Charles A. Beard. American Review of Public Administration, 30, 123-145.
22.
SteverJ. A. (1998). Pragmatism. In ShafritzJ. M. (Ed.), International encyclopedia of public policy and administration (pp. 1734-1736). Boulder, CO: Westview.
23.
SteverJ. A. (2000). The parallel universes: Pragmatism and public administration. Administration & Society, 32, 453-457.
24.
StillmanR. J. (1998). Creating the American state: The moral reformers and the modern administrative world they made. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
25.
WaldoD. (1984). The administrative state: A study of the political theory of American public administration (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Holmes and Meier.
