1. There is a great deal of importance in distinguishing between a person role they fulfill within a bureaucratic organization This makes it possible for scholars to study organizational theory as they can make conjectures about positions and how they work harmoniously or antagonistically regardless of the personality who holds the job. What do you think about this assumption of scholars that it is possible to study a role independent of the person who holds it?

2. The structural approach is one of the dominant approaches for the study of large-scale administration. What role do hierarchy and authority have in this approach? How are Gulick’s classical model and Weber’s bureaucratic model examples of this approach?

3. Systems theory is another dominant theory for the study of organizations. What is this theory’s approach to the study of organizations? What is the difference between a closed system and an open system? What role do system boundaries and system purpose play?

4. How have systems theory and the structural approach been attacked? Are these criticisms valid? Are any of the criticisms so problematic that the approaches should be disregarded? Have these critics missed any weaknesses in the two approaches?

5. Some of the alternatives to systems theory and the structural approach are the humanist, pluralist, and formal approaches. How does the humanist approach humanize organizations? What are some of the criticisms of the humanist approach?

6. How does the pluralist approach see interest groups affecting organizations? How does organizational culture view organizations? What does the formal approach bring to organizational theory? What is the component of formal theory labeled “principal-agent theory”?

7. The third-party approach is unlike the two dominant approaches and the three counterapproaches because it is the one approach that recognizes the impact of third parties on organizations. How does this theory incorporate the impact of third parties when studying organizations?

8. The chapter begins by discussing administration at its most basic level: structure. Just as the cell is the most basic level of analysis in the human body, structure is the analogous most basic unit in the administrational body politic. How does this basic building block of administration strike you? Does it seem strange that at the most basic level of public administration is relationships? Do you think the emphasis on relationships among people in an organization simplifies or unnecessarily complicates the study of public administration? Why?

9. The text discusses an incident on February 1, 2003, when a NASA space shuttle disintegrated upon reentry from orbit killing all seven astronauts on board. The incident revealed that NASA’s organizational culture was not adept at discussing and resolving problems. What do you think of organizational culture as a concept? Do you think it is too “fuzzy” to serve as a measurement for theory or practice or do you think it reveals useful information about organizations? Tie your views into the NASA incident or any other experiences you have with governmental organizations and the peculiar cultures you have encountered there.

10. Which of the models, hierarchical or pluralistic, appeals the most to your conception of government? Though both have useful things to contribute to our understanding, which one do you think should be emphasized in our conceptualizations and why?

11. Do you agree with the underlying assumption of the principal-agent theory that individuals seek their self-interests? Do you further agree that contracts are the way to solve potential organizational problems among principals and agents? Discuss the dilemma built into the theory and the potential strengths and weaknesses of this concept.