Considering tradition and modernity in public administration encourages us to focus on the field's normative dimensions. Tradition teaches us that efficiency has not always been a dominant or default value for organizing public administration. Although efficiency rose to dominance in the 1930s, as with tradition, today it is contested by a plethora of competing public administrative values. Because there is no agreed upon framework for analyzing and organizing these values, this article offers a format for categorizing them and ordering their relationships to one another based on whether they are intrinsic, ancillary, or extrinsic to agency core missions.
AronsonS.1964. Status and Kinship in the Higher Civil Service. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
2.
BaehlerKLiuC., and RosenbloomD.. 2014. “Mission-Extrinsic Public Values as an Extension of Regime Values: Examples from the United States and the People's Republic of China.” Administration & Society46:199–219.
3.
Beck JørgensenT. and BozemanB., 2007. “Public Values: An Inventory.” Administration & Society39:354–381.
4.
Civil Service Reform Act.1978. PL 95–454.
5.
DahlR.1947. “The Science of Public Administration: Three Problems,” Public Administration Review7: 1–11.
6.
DurantB. and RosenbloomD.. 2016. “The Hollowing of American Public Administration.” American Review of Public Administration online version DOI: 10.1177/0275074015627218.
7.
FoerstelH.1999. Freedom of Information and the Right to Know. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
8.
GoreA.1993. From Red Tape to Results: Creating a Government that Works Better & Costs Less. Washington, DC:US Government Printing Office.
9.
Government Performance and Results Act Modernization Act of 2010. 2011. PL 111–352.
10.
HerringE.1936. Public Administration and the Public Interest. New York: McGraw-Hill.
11.
JanowitzM. and WrightD.. 1956. “The Prestige of Public Employment: 1929 and 1954.” Public Administration Review16: 15–21.
12.
KaufmanH.1956. “Emerging Conflicts in the Doctrines of Public Administration.” American Political Science Review50:1057–1073.
13.
LeeM.2015. “Colluding to Create the American Society for Public Administration and the Consequent Collateral Damage.” Public Voices14:2–27.
14.
Lloyd-La Follette Act.1912. 37 Stat. 555.
15.
LockeJ.1994. Two Treatises on Government. New York: Legal Classics Library. (original work published in 1680–1690.)
16.
LongN.1949. “Power and Administration.” Public Administration Review9:257–264.
17.
LynnL. “The Reagan Administration and the Renitent Bureaucracy.” In SalamonL. and LundM., eds. The Reagan Presidency and the Governing of America (pp. 339–370). Washington, DC:Urban Institute.
18.
MariniF.1971. Toward a New Public Administration: The Minnowbrook Perspective. Scranton, PA: Chandler.
19.
PiotrowskiS.RosenbloomD.KangS., and IngramsA.. 2016. “Levels of Value Integration in Federal Agencies’ Missions and Value Statements: Is Open Government a Performance Target of US Federal Agencies?” Presented at the American Political Science Association Conference, Philadelphia, PA (September 2).
20.
President's Committee on Administrative Management.1937. Report. Washington, DC:US Government Printing Office.
21.
RadinB.2006. Challenging the Performance Movement. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
22.
RohrJ.1986. To Run a Constitution. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.
23.
RosenbloomD.1983. “Public Administrative Theory and the Separation of Powers.” Public Administration Review43: 219–227.
24.
RosenbloomD.1993. “Have an Administrative Rx? Don't Forget the Politics!” Public Administration Review53:503–507.
25.
RosenbloomD.2000. Building A Legislative-Centered Public Administration. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press.
26.
RosenbloomD.2013. “Reflections on ‘Public Administration and the Separation of Powers.”’ American Review of Public Administration43:382–397.
27.
RosenbloomD.2014a. Federal Service and the Constitution: The Development of the Public Employment Relationship, 2nd ed.Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
28.
RosenbloomD.2014b. “Attending to Mission-Extrinsic Public Values in Performance-Oriented Public Management: A View from the United States.” In BohneE.GrahamJ., and RaadscheldersJ.. eds., Public Administration and the Modern State (pp. 17–30). Palgrave Macmillan: Hampshire, UK.
29.
RosenbloomD.O'LearyR., and ChaninJ.. 2010. Public Administration and Law, 3rd ed.Boca Raton, FL: Taylor and Francis.
30.
SimonH.1947. Administrative Behavior. New York: Macmillan.
Van der WalZ.2008. Value Solidity. Amsterdam, Netherlands: VU University.
36.
Van RiperP.1958. History of the United States Civil Service. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson and Co.
37.
WaldoD.1984. The Administrative State, 2nd ed.Scranton, PA: Chandler.
38.
WaldoD.2017. “The Administrative State Revisited.” In ShafritzJ. and HydeA., eds., Classics of Public Administration, 8th ed. (149–165). Boston: Cengage.
39.
WhiteL.1932. Further Contributions to the Prestige Value of Public Employment. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
40.
WilsonW.2012. “The Study of Administration. In ShafritzJ. and HydeA., eds., Classics of Public Administration, 7th ed. (pp. 16–28). Boston, Wadsworth/Cengage. (Original work published in 1887).
41.
WoodB. and WatermanR.. 1994. Bureaucratic Dynamics. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
42.
ZalmanovichY.2014. “Don't Reinvent the Wheel: The Search for an Identity for Public Administration.” International Review of Public Administration online: DOI: 10.1177/0020852324533456.
